Why Hindi-Urdu is One Language and Arabic is Several

[Vinod2070]

Do you yourself know where you stand?

The other day he claimed there is no word in Hindi for the "Sh" sound (&#2358 in Hindi!

He obviously doesn't know Hindi. We know it is not taught anywhere in Pakistan.

Its funny when we get to hear about our language from people who have no frickin clue.

 

[ashok321]

The other day he claimed there is no word in Hindi for the "Sh" sound (&#2358 in Hindi!

He obviously doesn't know Hindi. We know it is not taught anywhere in Pakistan.

Its funny when we get to hear about our language from people who have no frickin clue.

YES!

He lives in a Green land, while you in a saffron....
He eats Nihari, while you prefer Palak Paneer...
But we are breathing the same air manufactured by Allah....Or was it a Bible GOD or Yehova

 

[Hutchroy]

So what if you didn't use any Persian/Arabic words in a sentence? If you talk a few sentences spontaneously, you shall see the Persian/Arabic words coming out. This is the exact same sentence in Urdu as well, so I don't see your point. One can write a few English sentences without any Latin derived words as well, doesn't mean that English hasn't been derived from Latin. I think we were talking about Hindi & Urdu here, & their roots. You have clearly diverted the thread.

English HAS NOT BEEN DEIVED FROM LATIN.

It is derived from India-Aryan-Germanic etc. but most definitely not Latin.

I am not an authority so please check with a Search Engine.

 

[shree835]

I am totally disagree with the people who says Hindi and Urdu matches...I will say only some words...The Hindi language that is used in movie is not correct Hindi...That is simplified and compromised Hindi...Please be aware of this part.

Thanks,
-Shree

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

I am totally disagree with the people who says Hindi and Urdu matches...I will say only some words...The Hindi language that is used in movie is not correct Hindi...That is simplified and compromised Hindi...Please be aware of this part.

Thanks,
-Shree

what you mean by that ?
i think what is used in movies is correct and what people use to speak is spoken hindi which is different in place to place.

 

[ashok321]

I am totally disagree with the people who says Hindi and Urdu matches

But the Encyclopedia AGREES!
Unless you are a walking Encyclopedia, your input on Hindi-Urdu is just a balderdash....

 

[53fd]

The other day he claimed there is no word in Hindi for the "Sh" sound (&#2358 in Hindi!

He obviously doesn't know Hindi. We know it is not taught anywhere in Pakistan.

Its funny when we get to hear about our language from people who have no frickin clue.

A lot of Indians say they speak Hindi but not Urdu. Let’s assume for a second that the common everyday words they use, words such as khaas, zabaan, dimagh, baaqi, phir, pareshaan are common hindi words, & not Urdu. We know they are Arabic & Farsi derived words, & not Sanskrit derived. Hence, the Hindi speaker should be pronouncing these words the way an Arabic or Farsi speaker would. But they can’t, because many sounds in these words are not present in Hindi, but they are in Urdu.

For example: instead of saying zabaan, most hindi speakers say J-abaan; they can’t pronounce the KH sound in khaas properly; they can’t pronounce the GH sound in dimagh properly; they can’t pronounce the hard Q sound in baaqi properly; they can’t pronounce the PH in phir properly, replacing the PH with “F”, they can’t pronounce the SH sound in pareshaan properly, replacing it with “S”. So, that just proves that even these common words are not in Hindi, but they are in Urdu. It just shows Hindi is an artificial language.

I agree that even though no one used to call the language ‘Urdu’ till a recently (a couple hundred years ago), that does not mean ‘Urdu’ is more recent than Hindi. Urdu used to be called ‘Rekhta’ by Amir Khusro, which is now recognized as 1 of the 4 recognized forms of Urdu. The term ‘Urdu’ was coined much later. In fact, as my previous examples in this post have shown, Hindi is an artificial language but Urdu is not. Urdu is a complete, developed language. Hindi does not have the alphabets that Farsi, Arabic and Urdu have; so when they are using Arabic-Farsi derived words, Hindi speakers cannot these words properly.

Even the Nastaliq script is much older than the Devanagari script. The PM of India Manmohan Singh, born before partition of 1947 (born in 1932), reads his speeches in Nastaliq because that's what he was educated in, he's not fluent in Devanagari at all. If you read the "shaira-mushaira" from renowned poets before 1947, all of it is written in Nastaliq. Before partition of India in 1947, all the media publications, newspapers etc was dominated by Nastaliq. Any Indians out there, show me literary work written in Devanagari script FOR HINDI (NOT SANSKRIT) before 1947.

---------- Post added at 03:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:24 AM ----------

English HAS NOT BEEN DEIVED FROM LATIN.

It is derived from India-Aryan-Germanic etc. but most definitely not Latin.

I am not an authority so please check with a Search Engine.

English has been derived from Latin. If you don't even know this, then I doubt your knowledge on Latin & English.

 

[53fd]

You are contradicting yourself, what you had said earlier was:



First you say that I am speaking Urdu, then you say that I am speaking Shudh Hindi, which was artificially created in 1947!

You were mainly speaking Urdu with a few loan words you used from Sanskrit derived dialects. How hard is that for you to understand? Shabd is one of them. Dhanevaad and Namaskar are some other ones.

 

[53fd]

Its a khichdi language, mixing some foreign words in an existing North Indian language.

Now what does a pure khichdi even mean! You can have a pure daal or pure rice, but not pure khichdi. A khichdi is just a mixture.

So you can have pure Hindi (Shudh Hindi with no Tadbhav foreign words) and pure Persian or Arabic. Not a pure mixture of all three.

There is no such thing as pure Hindi. In fact, there is no such thing as Hindi at all, especially if you look at the Hindi today, which is basically Urdu. Urdu might be a khichri language, as are languages such as Uzbeki, Kurdish & many others. However, there is no such thing as Hindi. There aren't any literary works done in Hindi from centuries ago that are comprehensible to the average Hindi speaker today. Shudh Hindi is an artificial creation by the Indian government in 1947, no one in the Indian subcontinent talked like that prior to 1947.

 

[desioptimist]

There is no such thing as pure Hindi. In fact, there is no such thing as Hindi at all, especially if you look at the Hindi today, which is basically Urdu. Urdu might be a khichri language, as are languages such as Uzbeki, Kurdish & many others. However, there is no such thing as Hindi. There aren't any literary works done in Hindi from centuries ago that are comprehensible to the average Hindi speaker today. Shudh Hindi is an artificial creation by the Indian government in 1947, no one in the Indian subcontinent talked like that prior to 1947.

Hindi is spoken differently in different regions. The amount of usage of persian/arabic words in hindi is different in different areas.
May be hindi you are talking about(govt construct) is the one that is taught in school. That is not how it is spoken in India.
Having said that, the number of persian/arabic words in spoken hindi is much less than that in urdu. If hindi derived from urdu, it wont have so few arabic/persian words.

A few posts before somebody posted a video saying a few sentence in urdu. That was difficult for me to understand, although I kind of understood the central point. The main difficulty was the words which are not available in hindi(possibly persian or arabic words).
If hindi was derived from urdu, I would not have that difficulty in understanding it.
BTW, I am not a native speaker of hindi language, I learnt it.(mostly from tv, not school)

 

[Vinod2070]

A lot of Indians say they speak Hindi but not Urdu. Let’s assume for a second that the common everyday words they use, words such as khaas, zabaan, dimagh, baaqi, phir, pareshaan are common hindi words, & not Urdu. We know they are Arabic & Farsi derived words, & not Sanskrit derived. Hence, the Hindi speaker should be pronouncing these words the way an Arabic or Farsi speaker would. But they can’t, because many sounds in these words are not present in Hindi, but they are in Urdu.

For example: instead of saying zabaan, most hindi speakers say J-abaan; they can’t pronounce the KH sound in khaas properly; they can’t pronounce the GH sound in dimagh properly; they can’t pronounce the hard Q sound in baaqi properly; they can’t pronounce the PH in phir properly, replacing the PH with “F”, they can’t pronounce the SH sound in pareshaan properly, replacing it with “S”. So, that just proves that even these common words are not in Hindi, but they are in Urdu. It just shows Hindi is an artificial language.

I agree that there are some foreign words in the Hindi language. That doesn't make it a foreign language. Same way, we use many English words in the language as well that have been adapted.

And I totally reject your contention that we need to speak those foreign words the way an Arabic or Farasi would. Why should we?

These words have been adapted. They are a small part of the language, not its essence. The language remains Indian for all practical purposes, a few adapted foreign words don't change that.

I have said this many times. The spoken language of the masses is Hindustani. Hindi is the same language that rejects the foreign words. You guys should get over this Hindi/Urdu business. None of them is a Pakistani language anyway.

What is so difficult to understand in this?

Why would you presume to tell us how we should speak our own language?

We give a damn to the sounds that are not present in our language. Just get it. We are not speaking any foreign language, it is our own language which had some foreign words mixed which we have adapted for our use in the way we want.

I agree that even though no one used to call the language ‘Urdu’ till a recently (a couple hundred years ago), that does not mean ‘Urdu’ is more recent than Hindi. Urdu used to be called ‘Rekhta’ by Amir Khusro, which is now recognized as 1 of the 4 recognized forms of Urdu. The term ‘Urdu’ was coined much later. In fact, as my previous examples in this post have shown, Hindi is an artificial language but Urdu is not. Urdu is a complete, developed language. Hindi does not have the alphabets that Farsi, Arabic and Urdu have; so when they are using Arabic-Farsi derived words, Hindi speakers cannot these words properly.

Even the Nastaliq script is much older than the Devanagari script. The PM of India Manmohan Singh, born before partition of 1947 (born in 1932), reads his speeches in Nastaliq because that's what he was educated in, he's not fluent in Devanagari at all. If you read the "shaira-mushaira" from renowned poets before 1947, all of it is written in Nastaliq. Before partition of India in 1947, all the media publications, newspapers etc was dominated by Nastaliq. Any Indians out there, show me literary work written in Devanagari script FOR HINDI (NOT SANSKRIT) before 1947.

Devanagari script traces its history to the 12th century.

Urdu didn't come from outside India. No Turk/Arab/Persian would understand it but in many areas of India, you would see people understand it who don't use any imported words. It is a local language with some imported words. Not a foreign language. Just the script is imported.

 

[Vinod2070]

There is no such thing as pure Hindi. In fact, there is no such thing as Hindi at all, especially if you look at the Hindi today, which is basically Urdu. Urdu might be a khichri language, as are languages such as Uzbeki, Kurdish & many others. However, there is no such thing as Hindi. There aren't any literary works done in Hindi from centuries ago that are comprehensible to the average Hindi speaker today. Shudh Hindi is an artificial creation by the Indian government in 1947, no one in the Indian subcontinent talked like that prior to 1947.

Hindi is the language of the majority of India and you are telling me there is no Hindi!

You have a complex about Urdu which for some reason you think is a Pakistan/Muslim language.

When the basic premise is false, everything you derive from it will be false too.

Shudh Hindi is basically nothing but getting rid of foreign words from our language. Nothing wrong in it.

 

[Rig Vedic]

You were mainly speaking Urdu with a few loan words you used from Sanskrit derived dialects. How hard is that for you to understand? Shabd is one of them. Dhanevaad and Namaskar are some other ones.

My dear fellow, you are wrong in your understanding of the concept of loan words. Do you know that almost 100% of the verbs in Urdu are from Sanskrit. Which means that it is almost impossible to speak in Urdu without using Sanskrit words. On the other hand one can speak for hours in modern Hindi without using any foreign words.

Khadi Boli, which is a pre-Islamic language, has two descendants. One of them, Urdu, has borrowed a large number of foreign words. The other, modern Hindi, retains much more of the original vocabulary. It's as simple as that.

 

[53fd]

My dear fellow, you are wrong in your understanding of the concept of loan words. Do you know that almost 100% of the verbs in Urdu are from Sanskrit. Which means that it is almost impossible to speak in Urdu without using Sanskrit words. On the other hand one can speak for hours in modern Hindi without using any foreign words.

Khadi Boli, which is a pre-Islamic language, has two descendants. One of them, Urdu, has borrowed a large number of foreign words. The other, modern Hindi, retains much more of the original vocabulary. It's as simple as that.

If you read my previous posts, you'll see that Sanskrit has a huge chunk in Urdu. I said Khari Boli has a huge part in Urdu. But Urdu's history has been verified by various poets, writers etc over centuries. Hindi's history (as we know Hindi today, with its fair share of Arabic & Persian words) has not been verified independent of Urdu. I hope you understand what i'm saying.

 

[53fd]

Hindi is the language of the majority of India and you are telling me there is no Hindi!

You have a complex about Urdu which for some reason you think is a Pakistan/Muslim language.

When the basic premise is false, everything you derive from it will be false too.

Shudh Hindi is basically nothing but getting rid of foreign words from our language. Nothing wrong in it.

Urdu is the language of the Indian subcontinent, not Pakistan or India. It was started in North Delhi, & developed in Lucknow, Lahore & many other cities. The birthplace of Guru Nanak is Nankina Sahib in present day Pakistan, does that mean Sikhism is a Pakistani religion? No, it doesn't. Just like that, Urdu is not an Indian or Pakistani language either.