Similarities Between Turkish and Urdu

[lastofthepatriots]

Lol you can't be serious. Or if you are, your old men are probably as studly as you.

Lost count of the number of younger guys I have taught a violent lesson in humility to. You'd just be way down on that list. Not worth special mention besides your nationality.

Coming back to the topic, Pakistanis and Indians speak abroad very easily. I have.

Our cricketers speak on the field just as well.

It's a lot closer than many related European languages of different small countries adjoining each others. Latin. Germanic. Anglophone. Francophone.

Looking at our numbers, it easily the biggest language group in the world.

Cheers, Doc

P.S. Backaches? Dude, you are way too young for that. Stop spending hours here and hit the gym. Or run. Or bike. Have you grown a paunch? Sounds like it.

I've seen your picture with your fat cheeks. You look like the city kids we used to bully by slapping them.

Of course, I respect you as a senior citizen and would never raise my hand to you gramps. Viagra works wonders, but unfortunately doesn't help with testosterone and back aches.

 

[padamchen]

No? What did you say below Doc?
Contradiction? Muslim rule was one "political ebb and flow".

Ps. What does this mashed up term 'Indic" mean? Is this something like I might contrive up 'Pakistanic"?

Would have been true for Persian satrapy or Czar Russian sattellite state empire.

Muslim rule in India was different. In that they physically stayed and merged into the land.

I put Muslim rule above British racially in that sense.

The British looted and debased us as humans.

Cheers, Doc

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Agreed. But all that is testimony to the British Empire. It created a common zone which cultivated the things you touched on. The Russians did the same to Central Asia. What this did was create divergences and cleavages in what used to be Persian dominant zone. One of the reasons I support the 'iron curtain' along the Radcliffe line but phasing out of the Durand Line is to undo the legacy of British Raj imposed divisions. if Pakistan animosity continues with India for another century which I hope it does and things settle out on our western border under CPEC we could again revisit our history with shared brotherhood [today under the guise of Islam] with countries to west of us - Iran, Afghanistan, Central Asia and of course Turkey.

Now that would be great.

Ps. The history of Indus region has been defined by being contact zone between the west and east. For long periods we were the eastern extentions of the western based empires, other other times of eastern based empires and other times as the fracture zone between the two. After leaving the British Raj which tied us to east I hope our destiny is moving to west again. Long live Pak/India rivalry!

Oh great! Now we have the guy that can't even speak Urdu agreeing with the slum dogs. Salute to you too baba.

 

[padamchen]

I've seen your picture with your fat cheeks. You look like the city kids we used to bully by slapping them.

Of course, I respect you as a senior citizen and would never raise my hand to you gramps. Viagra works wonders, but unfortunately doesn't help with testosterone and back aches.

Those fat cheeks and midsection are history dude.

Anyways, let's get back on topic.

Under that chubbiness was always a killing machine.

97+ to 80.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Indus Pakistan]

FACT: Linguistic commonality is often very much about the historical political "ebb and flows". A Jamaican Groid, a South African Bushman, a Maori New Zealander, a Trinidadian Rapper, a Welsh hill farmer, a Irishman a Hawaian native all speak English as first language all because of the "political ebb and flows" of the once mighty British Empire.

@padamchen

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Those fat cheeks and midsection are history dude.

Anyways, let's get back on topic.

Under that chubbiness was always a killing machine.

97+ to 80.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Sugarcane]

Linguistic commonality is never about political ebb and flows.

Your argument would be true for things like our military and administrative and bureaucratic structures.

English as the language of the educated elite.

Cricket.

Our awe of and deference to white skin.

Our attitudes of self derision towards our own ancestral heritage.

These are legacies of colonial rule.

Hindi and Urdu are legacies of Muslim rule. Urdu developed as a garrison link tongue between the foreign Muslim elite and the Indic foot soldiers.

Cheers, Doc

It's true that Urdu is legacy of Muslim rule but it was imposed by British in region what today is Pakistan to replace Persian.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

guy that can't even speak Urdu

There is a differance between not speaking Urdu and being poor speaker of Urdu. I am in the later category.

It's true that Urdu is legacy of Muslim rule but it was imposed by British in region what today is Pakistan to replace Persian.

I think it was 'imposed' something like 1870s to replace Persian as that was seen as representative of the old order and British were keen on removing the past legacy and installing their own new regime. This is where Urdu/Hindi fitted in.

The British looted and debased us as humans.

Cobblers. You have been listening to that Tharoor gump too much. No British. Sunshine you would not have had your India and you would still be trying to coin the term 'Indic'. Don't forget India carries the 'Made in Britain' tag.

 

[Roybot]

Urdu is basically Hindi, with Sanskrit words substituted with Persian ones.

If you are denying it, you are lying to yourself. The syntax, the grammar is exactly the same.

 

[war&peace]

Similarities are one thing.

But in terms of closeness it would have to be Hindi.

Pakistanis, Indians, and Bangladeshis can converse with each other (Sri Lankans cannot).

Add to the above Afghans who've lived in India or Pakistan.

Can Turks converse with Pakistanis?

Can Afghans?

Can Iranis?

THAT should be the litmus test.

Not BS feel good pan Islamic videos.

Cheers, Doc

It is due to the differences in grammar but if one is smart, it does not take long before you can understand a lot of Turkish words and be able to communicate

Linguistic commonality is never about political ebb and flows.

Your argument would be true for things like our military and administrative and bureaucratic structures.

English as the language of the educated elite.

Cricket.

Our awe of and deference to white skin.

Our attitudes of self derision towards our own ancestral heritage.

These are legacies of colonial rule.

Hindi and Urdu are legacies of Muslim rule. Urdu developed as a garrison link tongue between the foreign Muslim elite and the Indic foot soldiers.

Cheers, Doc

Hindi and Urdu existed much before the Britishers brought their turd to the subcontinent. So I agree with you on this and history is self-evident.

 

[valkyr_96]

@Hakikat ve Hikmet @django @Indus Pakistan
See 100% match.. I must say both participants are smart but at the same time it shows how closely related both languages are.
Urdu and Turkish have a lot more common word than they discussed for example "sabun"

sabun as in soap is arabic and is almost the same in spanish as in jabon (habon)

 

[padamchen]

There is a differance between not speaking Urdu and being poor speaker of Urdu. I am in the later category.

I think it was 'imposed' something like 1870s to replace Persian as that was seen as representative of the old order and British were keen on removing the past legacy and installing their own new regime. This is where Urdu/Hindi fitted in.

Cobblers. You have been listening to that Tharoor gump too much. No British. Sunshine you would not have had your India and you would still be trying to coin the term 'Indic'. Don't forget India carries the 'Made in Britain' tag.

And you have been living too long among and as them to lose objectivity.

Old Parsis loved the Brits and the queen too.

Means nothing except plain commerce.

The fact is that the Brit colonialists were no strangers to world cultures and races.

They were equally involved in Iran as they were in India. As controllers and drivers of the Great Game.

It is very clear that they saw the Persian peoples and the Indic peoples very differently .

Racially.

You and your people benefitted from it.

My people did too.

So we became a "noble people" and the Hindoos became a "beastly people" ... get it?

There was no Hindu and Muslim. It was simply how they saw people of the subcontinent. For the overall majority.

But that does not change the FACTS.

India is not just you and me.

It's @lastofthepatriots and @Kabira and @Roybot and @Shankranthi too.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Indus Pakistan]

And you have been living too long among and as them to lose objectivity.

Old Parsis loved the Brits and the queen too.

Means nothing except plain commerce.

The fact is that the Brit colonialists were no strangers to world cultures and races.

They were equally involved in Iran as they were in India. As controllers and drivers of the Great Game.

It is very clear that they saw the Persian peoples and the Indic peoples very differently .

Racially.

You and your people benefitted from it.

My people did too.

So we became a "noble people" and the Hindoos became a "beastly people" ... get it?

There was no Hindu and Muslim. It was simply how they saw people of the subcontinent. For the overall majority.

But that does not change the FACTS.

India is not just you and me.

It's @lastofthepatriots and @Kabira and @Roybot and @Shankranthi too.

Cheers, Doc

Your post is so spread out that I struggle to make it out. My points -

• There is no such thing as 'Indics'. This is a concept which the British first mapped out as their colony as then the post 1947 republic has reified so as to create the concept of nationhood. Otherwise it has no meaning anymore then "Africanic, Asiatic, Balkanic, Americanic or Pakistanic". I mean please tell me what ties a Malayam or Dravidians with Assamese with Sindhi's with Kashmiri's?
• The sub-continent was dirt poor and famine stricken before the British arrived. In fact that was one of the reasons why they managed to take over so easily. Tharoor is just milching the British imperial guilt like Blacks do of the slave trade.

 

[padamchen]

Your post is so spread out that I struggle to make it out. My points -

• There is no such thing as 'Indics'. This is a concept which the British first mapped out as their colony as then the post 1947 republic has reified so as to create the concept of nationhood. Otherwise it has no meaning anymore then "Africanic, Asiatic, Balkanic, Americanic or Pakistanic". I mean please tell me what ties a Malayam or Dravidians with Assamese with Sindhi's with Kashmiri's?
• The sub-continent was dirt poor and famine stricken before the British arrived. In fact that was one of the reasons why they managed to take over so easily. Tharoor is just milching the British imperial guilt like Blacks do of the slave trade.

Culture.

Over thousands of years.

Strung together by the evolution of one way of life.

The merging of native and Aryanic (Vedic) Gods and deities, and the growth of a common theology.

That is the Indian link.

Don't deny it. It's simply historical fact and evident to this day.

The oldest living unchanged civilization on earth.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The oldest living unchanged civilization on earth.

lol/ Your bandying out statements as fact.