how much of Urdu is Sanskrit based and persian based?

[Joe Shearer]

Again dude...Does your freedom become any lesser freedom because of that fact that urdu originated in central india..?We are just stating the fact..While you guys are hiding facts about things in your culture relating to modern india because of the insecure feeling that it somehow "make you indian"..
Heres your post:



No indian said that it'll make you indian..Even the fact that urdu originated in central India..You are still Pakistani.

What is the point of the discussion? Does it further the enquiry "How much of Urdu is Sanskrit based and (how) and (how much) Persian based?"

 

[INDIC]

chaey in urdu is Tea.
Chaey in Russian is tea.

Almost all world language have similar words based on original Chinese word where Tea originated.

 

[INDIC]

I learned it for 3 years but I have mostly forgotten it. I love it though. We must promote sanskritized hindi because it is our culture and not imported from other cultures.

Yes, more Sanskritized Hindi help us to have contact and learn other Indian languages very easily.

 

[Safriz]

Again dude...Does your freedom become any lesser freedom because of that fact that urdu originated in central india..?We are just stating the fact..While you guys are hiding facts about things in your culture relating to modern india because of the insecure feeling that it somehow "make you indian"..
Heres your post:



No indian said that it'll make you indian..Even the fact that urdu originated in central India..You are still Pakistani.

Languages evolve and change.. Sanskirt too may have roots elsewhere.
There is no point in being eternally nostalgic...
See we lost Bangladesh and none if us ever opens threads about Bangladesh because we moved on.
Indians on the other hand cant stop trying to relate us to them....

 

[INDIC]

Quick answer - balls.

Its called Kanduka.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes, more Sanskritized Hindi help us to have contact and learn other Indian languages very easily.

A truly stupid idea. It is designed to drive a wedge between north India and the peninsula on the one hand, and the north-east on the other. India is not just the Ganges Valley. That is the usual problem of Ganges-centric thinking that both Pakistanis and non-Gangetic Indians complain about.

 

[INDIC]

A truly stupid idea. It is designed to drive a wedge between north India and the peninsula on the one hand, and the north-east on the other. India is not just the Ganges Valley. That is the usual problem of Ganges-centric thinking that both Pakistanis and non-Gangetic Indians complain about.

South Indians find Sanskritized Hindi more easy to learn compared to the Persianized form. I live in South so I know.

 

[Kambojaric]

Prakrit, not Sanskrit.

But dont the Prakrit languages emerge from or at least are heavily influence by Sanskrit?

 

[Kambojaric]

Regarding the origins of the Sanskrit language, I think many points prove it to have North Pakistani/Central Asian origins. Take for example the reappearence of the drink "Soma" in it again and again.

Soma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Rig Vedic]

So, if the Aryan speaking composers of the Rg Veda knew of the Saraswati which flourished around 2500 BC, they must have been in the vicinity around 2500 BC themselves. And what would that prove? That they initiated and grew that civilisation? How does that follow? At best, it might mean that the clearly agricultural and rural Aryan speakers were marginal operators in the fringe lands of the IVC for a couple of centuries more than we might have thought otherwise. It still proves nothing. Contemporary existence, particularly in the thickly wooded parts of the Punjab which are featured prominently in the Rg Veda as their own, need not have inferred a cause and effect relationship. The Germans existed next to the Roman Empire for centuries, and neither bothered much with the other.

As per Rig Veda itself, there were many Vedic kingdoms and tribes along the banks of the Saraswati, which is referred to as ámbitame nádītame dévitame sárasvati, "best mother, best river, best goddess". But this would mean that the "Harappan" settlements along the Saraswati banks, dating from around 2500 BC, are in fact Vedic.

This is what is causing "eminent" historians so much consternation, being so deeply invested in a contradictory theory. It is just one more nail in the coffin.

 

[Rig Vedic]

South Indians find Sanskritized Hindi more easy to learn compared to the Persianized form. I live in South so I know.

This is so obvious and elementary, one wonders how the eminent Joe can use it to spin a conspiracy theory of his own.

 

[LaBong]

Indian songs are pure urdu songs- except some bazaro item songs which can be classified as hindi-

Urdu is a shaista zuban- hindi is abay- tere to- tere ma k- band baja di- fato- kuch tofani kertay hein bla and vulgar gangster sh!t-

Bollywood songs are sung in the language which north Indians speak. Not sure why Pakistanis don't understand this simple fact.

 

[Safriz]

where is Bhojpuri spoken?

 

[Bang Galore]

My own reconstruction is based on the evident differences between various Indo-Aryan speaking tribes and their use of the language. It is recorded clearly that certain northern tribes, considered well within the bounds of kinship and affinity, slowly veered off into 'mlechha' status, and their language takes on greater and greater distance from the mainstream. I believe that the differences between verses and the language of the verses is due to the different versions of the language already spread out and distinguishable.

Interesting point. Is it the argument that the tribes who "veered" off into "mlechha" status remained where they were, i.e. in their original locations(I'm assuming you mean Iran) or moved eastwards(to Iran)? From what I know of your views, I would assume that you believe the former (i.e they were in Iran). The Avesta is interesting for its geographical references , mentioning only some areas of eastern Iran(western Iran is unknown)& areas of Afghanistan & Indo-Aryan areas going all the way to the Punjab(Hapta Hindu). Add to that, the dating of the presence of Iranian people, a problem quickly becomes apparent. The earliest mention of the Iranians (in Iran) that can be dated is the 9th century BCE (by Assyrian sources). It would be very difficult to suggest on the evidence available that the Iranians were contemporaneous (in Iran)with the people of the Rg veda who are dated, at the latest to 1500 BCE but if the Sarasvati was taken into account, even earlier. In that case the tribes who veered off outside the known Indo-aryan homeland may have been a later event which would make the accepted AIT somewhat questionable

 

[LaBong]

Well all i tried to say was that Urdu when spoken in traditional way is a very polite and beautiful sounding language-
but when an indian speaks Hindi- it sounds like ganged raped- broken all bones version of Urdu-

and i will listen to Haribansh poems-

So Pakistanis will teach Indians how to speak an Indian language. Strange. The fact is in whatever way North Indians speak Hindustani, that becomes the standardize version of the language; not the way Pakistani Punjabis or Sindhis speak it.