Sanskritization, de-Sanskritization and Colonial Rule

Re: # 72, rahul_capri,

We are communicating on different wavelengths. This is my last attempt to get to you.

What I am trying to make you understand is Urdu/Hindi poetry was/is safe in the hands of Muktibodhs, Raghuvir Sahais, Rahi Masoom Razas, Asad Zaidis, Devtales, Rajesh Joshis and many others plus some others who write this language in Saudi script. OK! How dare you think after 60 years of independence genuine Urdu/Hindi poets could be counted on fingers?

Samar

It should have been: ``He seems to know Urdu/Hindi language and literature MUCH better than I do.``

khamy1

You, cheat! :)

If someone picked any passage from, say, kamayani of Jaishankar Prasad, 90% of Hindi speakers couldn`t make head or tail of what on earth the poet was trying to say. So that proves little.

For a language that has been influenced by so many great cultural forces, over so long a period of time, we can only talk about a wide range, a continuum of expressions, vocabularies, and ideas. These stretch, naturally, from Arabian/Persian to indigenous and Sanskrit-based. The situation is almost identical to that in Hindustani classical music. Internally very very diverse, but not five different things.

Unless we argue that Urdu is basically and irreplaceably a Muslim language meant merely to express Islamic religious idiom (an argument made effectively by many), the Arabic/Persian component had to wither away after India became free. How could it be otherwise? But as a non-religious language of every day existence, of common secular discourse, it will bloom, taking on a more and more indigenous form. Poetry too will come, but in a new form: Indian urdu poetry will be very different from Arabic/Persian poetry of the past. An Indian might feel more at home writing about his girlfriend gayatri living in the gaon of gola gunj than about the ghilmans :). And he would draw more words and sensibilities from his connections to awadhi and brajbhasha than from Arabic and Persian languages and cultures.

Still, rahul may yet be right. He seems to know Urdu/Hindi language and literature better than I do.

By the way I could figure out most of Sri malihabadi, although not all. Had we been up against something like kamayani, I would have been in worse trouble :(

Re: # 69, khamy1,

As I know `Persian` I can very well `translate` this ghazal for you. But I am not going to do that for free. Moreover, you have asked me to `explain`, which is not my forte, so excuse me.

#68 by Kaalchakra,

Well said Kaal saheb. They are all mixing up language with script, may be due to religious reasons. I have no problem with different scripts, even naming these language(s) differently don`t concern me. But insisting on these being different languages is harming majority of Urdu speakers and writers.

But I agree to disagree till the matter is not decided by the people.

Samar

Re: # 71
[As I know `Persian` I can very well `translate` this ghazal for you. ]

...thank you for being honest...may i then assume that if you did not know persian, you could not understand/explain this piece of poetry by shri josh?...are you going to tell us now that persian and hindi are the same language written differently? if that is your contention then your earlier comment about urdu script being saudi script which is really no script makes you an idiot, which you probably are...however, your being an idiot is based on my initial assumption, which may or may not be correct...so there....;)

Re: # 79, khamy1,

Yaar, as Kaal has addressed you in his first post you are a real `cheat`. First you wanted me to `explain` Josh Saheb`s poetry and now you want to extract from me all the knowledge about the intricacies of languages. It is beyond your capacity to pay for all this, my dear!

Yes, I do realize my mistake about the SAUDI script though. It has skipped my mind and still not coming. Could you tell me it`s correct name, please. Off course, if you could afford it free of charge.

Samar

Re: # 82

naskh, nastaliq or shikasta, take your pick...

Re: # 83, khamy1,

Thank you for giving the name(s) of the script in which some write Urdu/Hindi in India. I knew Nastaliq for Arabic. Other two are good names too. A query: Why this script is called Shikasta? Is it because it is scribbled like torn apart letters?

Khamy Saheb, I am sorry for being sarcastic to you in my previous posts. My contention throughout the debate is that change in script does not change the language because grammar and other aspects remain unchanged. In 19th century some Hindoo revisionists started writing Urdu in Devnagari script and started substituting Sanskrit words for Persian/Arabic. Then they called it Hindi. Did language change? Muslims, in reaction to this, reciprocated with using more Persian/Arabic words. Did the language change? This process went on and even intensified throughout the freedom struggle and some years after partition too. What happened is that the people of India were completely illiterate during all those years and at the time of independence literacy was only 17% or so. So what these Hindoo/Muslim revisionists were doing could not affect the language as such and the masses carried on with whatever language they were using (i.e. Urdu/Hindi). I think you will appreciate that language is what people speak and what our poets and writers of that time did was to shy away from the people`s language by unknowingly or deliberately substituting words from alien languages such as Sanskrit and Persian. Around 60, at least in India this changed and Urdu/Hindi writers and poets started turning more and more to people for their vocabulary which got reflected in the poetry of various poets writing in Nastaliq and Devnagari. As the situation stands, majority is in favour of Devnagari so it will be used extensively and will ultimately become the only script for Urdu/Hindi. This we are already witnessing. At any book fair you will find large editions of all the major poets of (so called) Urdu and these are sold in lacs.

This is my little explanation on what I think on this matter. I don`t dare claim this explanation is complete or faultless. There are many other aspects which must be taken into account but the place and my knowledge do not permit me to explore more. I`m not against any script and those who want to write in Nastaliq must write in it but Urdu/Hindi will be better served if they write in the language of the people and that is what many of them have started to do.

At least after reading the above explanation you won`t regard me idiot enough to think Persian and Hindi as the same language(s). Also, you will, perhaps happily condone me without having to `explain` you ` Josh Saheb`s ghazal.

Regards,

Samar

Re: # 87,

A little correction :

`...At any book fair you will find large editions of all the major poets of (so called) Urdu IN DEVNAGARI SCRIPT and these are sold in lacs.

[Ditto! I said both are the same language(s) written in two different scripts.

Samar[- samer1982 #63.

...if you think they are the same language written differently then do me a favor and explain to us the meaning of this rare ghazal by a hindi poet shri josh malihabadi.


RizwaN ne sar-e-arsh ye di jaa ke duhaii
ay Khaliq-e-Israar-e-azal ramz-e-sarishti

jannat ki fizayeN haiN mukaddar kai din se
amada-e-ighlaam haiN hooroN se baheshti

ghilmanoN ke sifroN se lahoo behta hai paiham
kambakht ghisaRte haiN hareeri maiN voh khisti

kya kya maiN nasabnamay bataoon ke Khudawand
inn maiN koi rizvi, koi naqvi, koi chishti



Thanks in advance…;)

Re: # 60
samar, The reason why I earlier said..``agree to disagree``, because we were talking through each other. You showed no sign that you wanted to talk about poetry in #55. Though poetry, as I said, stretches language and the poetry of today defines the language of tomorrow I would even say that it is bigger than language..anyhow..this is a digression.
The poetry that you have quoted..is it by Dushyant Kumar? and yes, I agree Shaharyar is a genuine poet.I like Bashir Badr as well.But 4-5 big names to show for 60 years post independence(There are many others, not so popular)? are not these exceptions pointing towards the obvious that Urdu is slowly withering away in the land of its birth..?
I gave you an example of how compound words are formed using ``e`` and ``o``.Ghalibs poetry is full of it.Its not something new that has come up in Urdu .I guess this construct has come from arabic persian,which is only natural because Urdu has borrowed many words from these languages .Pick up anything written by Faiz. Someone brought up in Hindi can understand it,but never write like that. The converse is also true.Someone brought up in Urdu can not write something like ``Ram Ki Shaktipooja`` for instance.
Sometimes I feel that this ``One language two scripts`` notion is more ideological than technical.So it is very difficult to unlearn. anyway....

Re: # 64, rahul_capri,

First of all I will tell you that I too read a lot of poetry. I really love poetry. In #55 I discussed Urdu/Hindi and the language divide caused, as many have agreed, by Hindoo/Muslim revivalism during 19th and 20th century and by officialdom and politics after partition. This encouraged even poets like Jayshankar Prasad, Pant, Nirala and others to write Sanskritized Hindi and many Urdu poets wrote Urdu loaded with Persian. After 47 this started to change gradually and many modern Hindi poets used peoples language, so to say. You can call it Urdu, you can call it Hindi. The poem I have quoted is by Muktibodh, a Maharashtrian by birth, writing poetry in Hindi/Devnagri script and you can see for yourself the language he has written in, Urdu or Hindi. That is why I don`t agree with you that Urdu is whithering away in India. I is safe in the hands of the people and many Hindi/Urdu poets who write in easy, accessible to all language. Apart from Muktibodh, Samsher, Dushyant, Raghuvir Sahay, Dhumil (and Nida, Badr and many others) have used this language. Now, at least you should not deny the benefit of common script, though I am not against different scripts at all. As for the Faiz and Josh or Prasad and Pant are concerned both are equally difficult to understand only due to their Sanscritized or Persianized Hindi/Urdu. You have to consult dictionaries to understand both.

#65, Also, combination of words is not at all a problem. Laparwah (or La-parwah), Nalayak, Beqasoor, Lawaris, Nabaligh are most common words of Hindi language and any substitutes for Sanscritized words for these have been resisted by common people and these words are still in vogue in Hindi. So overall, Urdu/Hindi language is safe in the hands of common people and what you are worried about is Saudi script, which in my opinion, will die of its natural death in India. I think we should bother ourselves for our language and not for a foreign script.

Samar

#61 its very clear to me from content or subject matter (besides conjugation of adjectives) ...urdu poetry is about saki, maikhana, yearning etc couched in devition to god (lest the mullah gets upset). it tends to have most oblique references and celebrated sad ethos. hindi stuff is more direct, folksy, light-hearted and 50% of it being about khrishna and his gopis.

Re: # 62
jang, yes thats correct,Hindi and Urdu poetry both in tone and subject matter have been different.Going into its reasons is another can of worms, though.

samar/rahul:

I am not sure what you guys mean when you say that Hindi and Urdu have different grammars. If both of them are successors to the same language, hindvi or whatever, than when did the grammar of the two diverge?

I can readily see if grammar includes phonetics. Yes, Urdu has sounds like Ph (phool) and Gh (ghazal) which cannot be reproduced in devnagri without some trickery, but if you mean more than that, I would appreciate some concrete examples.

Re: # 61
dost, i already gave one example --mughal-e-azam..How two words are combined to make a compound word..another type is hosh-o-hawas.In Hindi you have sandhi and samas.
Further in Urdu, you make antonyms by adding ``Na`` or ``Be`` or ``La`` .. Na-aashna , La-parwah , Be-Nazeer
In Hindi..you add ``a```` ..asambaddh , adharm ...
Can you say naadharm?or Besambaddh?
Someone who knows both these languages better can perhaps give more examples.