Inappropriate Language...

[coffee_cup]

What is substantive is that you cannot reproduce the word correctly because of the script that you use, not the grammar, not the language, the script. Saying that you once spoke something else, and then spoke something different, and finally came to where you are doesn't address this point, so it is evasive; it evades the issue and directs our attention somewhere else.

You are mixing apples with organges.

No matter how I spell it in "Roman Urdu" script (Ghandhara or Gandhara"), in "Urdu Nastaʿlīq" both phonetically and in written script it remains the same term "گندھارا" adopted and agreed upon by our linguistic scholars.

Whereas in case of Bharti and Bhartiya, the difference is huge. Here you are asking me to change my langue both in writen (Roman or Nasta'liq script) and spoken way.

It is sad that when you find no more arguments, you start classifying mine. ...

Alright sir, it was me who started the classification of arguments - "evassive" and "substantive" and continuing to do so ...

 

[Joe Shearer]

You don't watch TV?? What about those Pogo and Spingbob Squarepants stuff??

Yep it was on uniform civil code and the Muslim and Hindu personal laws. He explained brilliantly about the Muslim laws and how they differ in different states of India say Punjab, UP or Goa. I was quite astonished to know that some small sections of Muslims in India are still governed by the centuries old Hindu laws.

He did make a lot of sense on Muslim personal laws then those Ulema or personal law board guys.

He is beyond brilliant. Chap like that should have been a judge or a minister. Meos near Delhi and some converted Rajputs are still governed by Hindu law. Also some Kutchhi Memons. Did he mention these, or was it too short?

You are mixing apples with organges.

No matter how I spell it in "Roman Urdu" script (Ghandhara or Gandhara"), in "Urdu Nastaʿlīq" both phonetically and in written script it remains the same term "گندھارا" adopted and agreed upon by our linguistic scholars.

Whereas in case of Bharti and Bhartiya, the difference is huge. Here you are asking me to change my langue both in writen (Roman or Nasta'liq script) and spoken way.

I was - and am - making a serious point: even an insult, when I use one, is not a mindless piece of brutality. This was far from that; this was a serious comment.

The test is whether from Roman Urdu to Nasta'liq and in reverse, the spelling stays the same. It doesn't. In the case of Nagari, it does.

Regarding Bharti and Bhartiya (correctly, translating from Nagari, BharAtiya), I am not asking you to change anything. I am asking you to refrain from a certain usage in a particular context. A passport officer scrutinising my passport and asking me if I'm Bharti would not be intending offence. Would you like me to cull passages from your compatriots' posts and show you the difference?

Alright sir, it was me who started the classification of arguments - "evassive" and "substantive" and continuing to do so ...

That was a low blow. You know very well what I meant.

 

[coffee_cup]

The test is whether from Roman Urdu to Nasta'liq and in reverse, the spelling stays the same. It doesn't. In the case of Nagari, it does.

You mean phonetically written (translated) from one language to other, right?

In this case "Bharti" stays same in Nasta'liq and Roman scripts. Just like in Nagari (BharAtiya). So your test applied with same criteria to both Nasta'liq and Nagari (for translation to Roman) will produce same results.

I am ready to research in Internet about Nagari and find several examples where the phonetically equivalent spelling of one word from Nagari to Roman will have several variations (just in case you want to bring "Gandhara" again). So lets leave it there.

Regarding Bharti and Bhartiya (correctly, translating from Nagari, BharAtiya), I am not asking you to change anything. I am asking you to refrain from a certain usage in a particular context. A passport officer scrutinising my passport and asking me if I'm Bharti would not be intending offence. Would you like me to cull passages from your compatriots' posts and show you the difference?

The context matters in almost every case and not limited to "Bharti".

"Is he your father?" could be a normal innocent query or an insult if used in a particular context.

So here I agree with you that we should be careful about using words purely to insult others. But it applies to almost every term.

Just for record: My usage of "Bharti friends" or "Bharti PM" or "Bharti Team" (which I anyway rarely use) is never used in context of an insult.

That was a low blow. You know very well what I meant.

No I dont. I can't read your mind, just like you can't read mine. So, for the bold part, lets stop guessing what were mine or your intentions.

 

[Grevion]

He is beyond brilliant. Chap like that should have been a judge or a minister. Meos near Delhi and some converted Rajputs are still governed by Hindu law. Also some Kutchhi Memons. Did he mention these, or was it too short?

He did mentioned it. What's more important is that not everyone knows we already have uniform laws in the sale of goods act, Indian contract acts, transfer of property act, etc. It's only the personal matters that are kept out of the common laws and are optional to be governed under the personal laws.

 

[coffee_cup]

He did mentioned it. What's more important is that not everyone knows is that we already have uniform laws in the sale of goods act, Indian contract acts, transfer of property act, etc. It's only the personal matters that are kept out of the common laws and are optional to be governed under the personal laws.

Just curious, how is all this related to this thread?

 

[Grevion]

Just curious, how is all this related to this thread?

It's not related. Sorry for the offtopic discussion.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Just curious, how is all this related to this thread?

You are right, it isn't. Apologies. Someone we knew in common (actually my VC till three months ago, a brilliant man, still on lien from AMU, where he had been the registrar). This stops here.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

@WAJsal @Oscar

there is a TTA who often uses the word Ganga
for ex: These Gangas & Ganga Land with an obvious Racist
connotations

please take note

 

[SQ8]

To make our point with regards to the usage of the word.
See timeframe 27:25 usage of the word "Bharti". Cant blame members when this has been the pronunciation heard since 1959.

 

[WAJsal]

Any reason for Hanuman jokes? getting a lot of complains. What's the point in insulting religious figures?

 

[saiyan0321]

Any reason for Hanuman jokes? getting a lot of complains. What's the point in insulting religious figures?

You know. Parrikar the Indian defence minister said that Indian army were like hanuman who were reminded of their strength in the Hindu belief that hanuman had forgotten that he was a deity and when he was told to jump and he jumped the sea he realized who he was and what he could do.

This shocked @Joe Shearer

After that it became a joke amongst Pakistani posters as a tease to Indian army by calling it " hanuman army" as a taunt.


It is indeed amazing how taunts and intent define slurs. Your army is being called hanuman army which means that its being equated as a god army but it becomes offensive when its a taunt. The same way **** means pak saf. We use the word in our daily lives but if it's used to denote Pakistanis it becomes a slur not due to the meaning but due to the intent.

Anyhow that's the complaints I am guessing you are getting from Indians.

 

[Windjammer]

Any reason for Hanuman jokes? getting a lot of complains. What's the point in insulting religious figures?

Indians tend to bring it on themselves.

Indian Troops Acted Like Hanumanarrikar

https://article.wn.com/view/2016/10/01/Indian_Troops_Acted_Like_HanumanParrikar/

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I find it silly when Indians are complaining that Pakistanis are abusing them or Dharma (Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists etc).
Can't decide how to feel - pathetic or sorry.

 

[WAJsal]

Indians tend to bring it on themselves.

Indian Troops Acted Like Hanumanarrikar

https://article.wn.com/view/2016/10/01/Indian_Troops_Acted_Like_HanumanParrikar/

Shouldn't take a joker seriously, he is known to make such idiotic comments. It is best not to get religious at all.

After that it became a joke amongst Pakistani posters as a tease to Indian army by calling it " hanuman army" as a taunt.

I know who said it, shouldn't be made fun of at all. Don't have a problem in making a mention to show stupidity. But let's not mock Hindu members on PDF. Same can be said about Islam.

 

[saiyan0321]

Shouldn't take a joker seriously, he is known to make such idiotic comments. It is best not to get religious at all.

I know who said it, shouldn't be made fun of at all. Don't have a problem in making a mention to show stupidity. But let's not mock Hindu members on PDF. Same can be said about Islam.

I agree. I have never stated it and don't condone it. Even in the worst of our situation our religion forbids us to make fun of other religions. We cannot taunt nor tease others for their faith and belief. We cannot make fun of it.