Effects of Language on culture and vice versa

[ludhianvi]

Well I can give you the reason. Language is very closely related to a culture. If you want to wipe out a culture's identity, then you start infiltrating the language. People fear this and dont adopt another language. Lands are divided based on the language spoken.

That is a strange, and dare I say, a complete hollow argument from a Punjabi. As a Punjabi, which I take it you are, let me ask you what is the 3 Golden words for you? If I am not mistaken it would be Sat Shri Akaal. Now lets explore those 3 golden words: Sat - Truth, has origin in Sanskrit. Other popular meaning being hundred(sau). Shri - A mark of respect. Akaal - A + Kaal basically meaning timeless. How many words of the three are rooted in English??? All the three words have a deep rooting in Hindi. Lets take those words further - Jo Bole So nihaal OR Wahe guri ji ka khaalsa wahe guru ji ki fateh. Again look at the words and see how much influence Hindi, or in the least Indian language, has on the golden words for a Punjabi.

Once again you're mixing up a Punjabi with a Sikh. Being a Punjabi is not a necessary condition to be Sikh nor is being a Sikh a necessary condition to be a Punjabi. The terminology shouldnt be mixed up. A Punjabi can be a Muslim (like so many in Pakistan, Hindu, Sikh, Christian, etc. And I dont see the relation of the underlined stuff to my earlier post or what you're trying to point out. You're pulling out the quote out of context and relating to religion?? And where did the comparison of English and Hindi come into this? Here's the full quote that I had presented earlier. Seems like you didnt read or ignored the second part of it.

Well I can give you the reason. Language is very closely related to a culture. If you want to wipe out a culture's identity, then you start infiltrating the language. People fear this and dont adopt another language. Lands are divided based on the language spoken. As for myself, I love learning languages be it English, French , Hindi, Urdu, Japanese, Spanish, Chinese,or Punjabi, or Gujrati, or Marathi, or Tamil. I've tried my hand at all of them

As for the first part of the quote, it was a general reason, not necessarily my reason. Just look at the Indian map and how its divided. Its divided on linguistic basis. This was more evident when in 1966 Haryana split from Punjab on the basis of the language spoken by the people. Most of the comments in the thread are based on the OP, and you've either mixed them up or havent fully read them in the full context.

So Hindi is going to kill Punjabi?? And how exactly does English help Punjabi? I find it a retarded comment that people beleive a language deeply rooted in Indian traditions will kill a fellow Indian language while a foreign language shall help it survive!! What is it if not intellactual bankruptcy?

Dont know where English vs Hindi entered the discussion here.

Lets look at this beautiful song by Hadiqa Kiyani. [noparse]kYFjg-canyM[/noparse] Hindi is going to kill this Punjabi song with flute, dholak and words Baaji ishq ke di jit loongi Sonya main rab ko dua mangke boohe baariyan while English shall keep it alive?? Which world do you folks live in?

Again, I dont know what you're trying to imply or conclude here? Agree on the beautiful singer and song though :D

[f.b.m]

1. Do not want to speak or learn hindi at all. Even if they happened to know few words they still pretend not to know anything. Hate bollywood movies big time. 2. Do not hate hindi and try to learn as much as they can (by watching bolly movies or interacting with hindi speaking people, etc) 3. Dont really care and would learn Hindi if it was actually useful to them in any way

Fixed. @Lurker: Yes, those "eroding our culture" types dont make sense but having lived in Tamil Nadu, I can safely say that not many from TN speak hindi because they simply dont need it. My hindi has only rarely come to use in real life situations and that is to speak to a few friends overseas and watch TV/movies. (the latter can pretty much be ignored because I dont watch that many bollywood films) Apart from that, its just for school and to understand a few parlamentary speeches.

[Lurker]

Once again you're mixing up a Punjabi with a Sikh. Being a Punjabi is not a necessary condition to be Sikh nor is being a Sikh a necessary condition to be a Punjabi. The terminology shouldnt be mixed up. A Punjabi can be a Muslim (like so many in Pakistan, Hindu, Sikh, Christian, etc.

You are now clutching to straws here. A Christain Punjabi?? How many are there ?? The issue here is clearly about Indian side of Punjab so not sure whats your relevance with Pakistan. As for Hindu and Sikhs of Punjab who exactly are more fanatical about Punjabi as a language? Lets not bloviate and keep it real here, shall we?

And I dont see the relation of the underlined stuff to my earlier post or what you're trying to point out. You're pulling out the quote out of context and relating to religion?? And where did the comparison of English and Hindi come into this?

Out of context?? I have given you the words most sacred to Sikhs. Sikhs comprise of about 60-65% of the population(every 2 out of 3) so how is it out of context to show words that mean a lot to Punjabis?? Are you telling me "Hindus" of Punjab dont use Sat Shri Akaal?? And what exactly are the roots of those words?? As for the comparison between English and Hindi I was very clear on this. If your argument is - language wipes out culture - how exactly are you comfortable with English?? How does it work that English does NOT wipe out Punjabi but Hindi does??

As for the first part of the quote, it was a general reason, not necessarily my reason. Just look at the Indian map and how its divided. Its divided on linguistic basis. This was more evident when in 1966 Haryana split from Punjab on the basis of the language spoken by the people.

So why was the country divided on linguistic basis?? Do you know some history on this or just because it happened you assume it is correct? I would like to hear what you know about this whole division on linguistic lines.

Dont know where English vs Hindi entered the discussion here.

Have already explained it. You mentioned Hindi as wiping out English. What exactly is your opinion on impact of English on Punjabi culture?

Again, I dont know what you're trying to imply or conclude here? Agree on the beautiful singer and song though :D

I personally beleive you are basically not putting any solid argument other than some rants here and there. I would have loved to see a Punjabi compare Hindi with it and rattle Baba Farid, Bulle Shah and do a literary discussion. Instead what you are essentially doing is throwing a fit here - culture would be wiped out - yada yada. So yes I would be interested if you put forth any merit to your arguments. As for the song, yes it is very melodious one. xxx

[Lurker]

@Lurker: Yes, those "eroding our culture" types dont make sense but having lived in Tamil Nadu, I can safely say that not many from TN speak hindi because they simply dont need it. My hindi has only rarely come to use in real life situations and that is to speak to a few friends overseas and watch TV/movies. (the latter can pretty much be ignored because I dont watch that many bollywood films) Apart from that, its just for school and to understand a few parlamentary speeches.

Fair enough. Now my question to you fbm would be what is so different about TN than the rest of the country? And no its not a sarcaustic comment, I would really like to know. There is also the strange situation of Muslims in India. Regardless of where they live, Assam to Kerela, they almost always understand Urdu(which is not much different from Hindi) as well as the local dialect very well. Add English on top and you have a set of people who know 3 languages. In fact this is one key reason why Hyderabad even though it is buried in Andhra has a very vibrant Hindi speaking populace. xxx

[CC1981]

So the advantage is when a National leaves Indian shores and NOT inside. To me this is a weird kind of logic that a nation(India)'s economic success is tied in to the amount of brain drain that it does!!!

Extremely narrow sighted if not ignorant. Proficiency in English has led to the proliferation of the outsourcing to India- the zillions of call centers, IT firms, medical tourism etc. are direct result of how deeply English, a global language, is embedded in India. Our rival nations like China or Brazil doesnt see anywhere near the same amount of high tech jobs and medical stuff moving there and that is directly a result of our better fluency in English(as a nation).

Where does regionalism come into play? I have given you proper numbers, 17 out of 25 states. Now if the remaing 8 have issues of sorts, shouldnt democracy take its course? Or is democracy regionalistic too?

Democracy is an individual rights aspect- NOT a collective rights scenario. Democracy applied to collective rights leads to fascism of the majority - ie, where minorities are completely sidelined and the majority gets their way every single time - this leads to the path where India becomes a hindu nation, with hindi-only and we lose all semblance of civilization. Furthermore, i doubt your 17 states scenario- if we are to go by fluency in hindi and set the benchmark as being able to read hindi newspapers and carry a convo in Hindi, then it is essentially Haryana, Uttaranchal, UP, Bihar, jharkhand, Madhya pradesh,Rajasthan and Punjab that have over 50% proficiency in Hindi. Besides, on the basis of the WHOLE 27 states, English has greater reach than Hindi- the NE states, Bengal, South, etc. are far more proficient in English than Hindi.

And your sense of compromise is going for a minority language??? What school of logic did you go to mate?

The school of logic that puts credence to the diversity of a language base. If you have 25 students, out of which 15 are experts in Sanskrit but 10 cant speak a word, while all 25 are high-school level literate in French, your group's competency in French is superior than in Sanskrit and the overall group dynamics benifits more from adoption of French than Sanskrit. English and Hindi have similar parallels - by sheer head count,hindi has the most speakers in India but in terms of reach of the language, English has greater reach.

The issue is with the typical Indian mentality of jumping on a foreign bandwagon(in this case English) and howling tears when it comes to things Indian.

Language is a carrier of culture as well as means of communication. As i said, India enjoys some categoric advantages over other non-English speaking nations simply because English is the lingua franca of the globe and the most heavily spoken and understood language in the world. However, English's attractiveness is also its neutrality/low influence on a cultural basis - English adds to the cultural diversity of India, not subtract from it - all the culture that is comming in through the medium of English is adding to the pot since the culture it carries is not masking the indian culture - English will never be an adequate medium for all things Indian and the various works of art, culture, music etc. that are indegenous to India will survive independent of English because it cannot be transcribed into English. However, Hindi poses the threat of cultural imperialism, since it is an Indic language and aggressively pushing it will see several regional cultures turned into hindi - the ram-leelas and geet-govindas in the 1001 dialects and languages of India can be easily transcribed into Hindi and result in the fading of the local languages- simply because Hindi does such an efficient job of replacing other Indic language ( most Indic languages would do that to each other if presented opportunity, due to the similarities between them) that it might lead to the phasing out of many local languages. This poses the threat of cultural minimalism, because fact is, when a native language loses speakers, the bulk of its oral traditions and any literature/music that isnt absolute chart-buster status fades from the collective conciousness. Hindi's survival isnt threatened if it is not the national language- as you said, they are the largest native minority in India- but imposition of hindi definitely threatens the regional as well as the global language's presence in india.

Thats an insane argument in the first place. Thats like saying Chinese adopted Indian culture and became famous!! of course Chinese adopted Buddhism, Indian school of thoughts and so on. Heck their language, Mandarin is an apbransh (Hindi word meaning adopted) borrows the term Mantri which in turn means Minister..as in Mandarin spoken by Ministers. Please feel free to read this entire text in Amartya Sen's book Argumentative Indian. Point being if two countries are close, Greek and Rome were not too far, there would be obvious influence. Now help me understand how close India and England are.

No, that is not an insane comment - you clearly lack the grounding in history and you are (ignorantly) convinced by the invincibility of your argument that you are prepared to overlook a genuine FACT in history (which contradicts your idea), a FACT in history that EVERY SINGLE WESTERN HISTORIAN IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH. First off, your example of India and China is irrelevant to this discussion - China imported religion and some aspects of philosophy into its culture indirectly from India (through transmissions through central Asia). However, Rome went far deeper - Rome not only imported religion and philosophy, its level of trasmission was far deeper - to a point where pre-classical Greek roman(etruscan) philosophy was completely overshadowed by Greek modernism, their religion completely overshadowed by the Greek ( China still kept its own philosophical schools like Confucianism). Furthermore, Rome imported fashion, architecture and the essential lifestyles of the Greeks. Whether you like it or not, FACT remains that the Roman Empire, though run by the Italics and administered by them, was culturally and sociterially a mirror image of Greece and flourished despite adopting a foreign culture completely - that in itself is an argument AGAINST your idea that India cannot prosper if it adopts a foreign language. Lastly, fact remains that a nation/region that has good fluency in a global language tends to attract foreign populations to it as well as increasing its potential for cultural intercourse. Adoption of hindi at the expense of English will categorically damage India on a world scale and that is not something desirable.

And while you are it do give me an example where other countries have effectively built civilizations based on things Indian.

I raise you big portions of South-East Asia : Cambodia, Thailand, Bali etc- where their civilization's basis is on Indic culture and roots.

[f.b.m]

Fair enough. Now my question to you fbm would be what is so different about TN than the rest of the country? And no its not a sarcaustic comment, I would really like to know.

Very few people speak hindi as their mother tounge. And bollywood culture doesnt infiltrate as much. They have their own (horribly bad) movies and music. Much more compared to say Punjab or even Karnataka.

[triam]

Fair enough. Now my question to you fbm would be what is so different about TN than the rest of the country? And no its not a sarcaustic comment, I would really like to know. xxx

I was born and brought up in TN, although my mother tongue is Telugu, I identify myself as a Tamil. This is not an easy question to answer at all, there are varying levels of grievances on both sides, I first hand know about the ones that a lot of hardcores Tamils feel, these may be true or not which is a different discussion, but I will try to list out the ones I remember now Politically : The feeling of most Tamilians was that Rajaji was screwed over by the Congress when electing the first PM for India, mainly because Rajaji was a 'Madrasi'. Even today, none of the national parties in India have a decent base in Tamilnadu, one of the main reasons for that being, most Tamilians do not identify themselves with any national party leaders or the national party's slogans. Racially : This is almost proved to be a non - fact, the aryan - dravidian divide. But in the minds of people it still exists. North Indians are fairer, while Southies and mainly Tamilians are darker. Have you ever wondered why all the Tamilian filmi super stars are dark as coal, the reason being thats what a native identifies with. Culturally : Carnatic Vs Hindustani. Rice Vs Wheat. Idly Vs Chappati. I can keep going, but the fact is that it is the difference between sun and moon. Some versions of Ramyana in TN have Ravan as the protagonist (The ultimate Dravidian hero standing upto the Aryan Bully). I think that gives a fair picture of how much the Aryan Dravidian thing really plays into. A lot of tamilians see fairly or unfairly, that Dravidians get a rough deal in everything in India. Religiously : There are TamBrahms who make up less than 5% of Tamilnadu and the rest, most of Tamilnadu are religious but are not as jingoistic about religion, this is a fact given that most of the esteemed Tamil leaders like Periyar, Anna, Karunanidhi were/are avowed atheists, any other part of India these leaders will not get anywhere. Values: For most Tamils, education is of the foremost importance, they feel that wealth, looks etc are all materialistic and not of any worth and see most North Indians who dress up etc as vain. The corolloary is true too where North Indians see Madrasis dressed up shabbily and smirk at them. Literature : Tamils take a lot of pride in their literature, Ramayan and Mahabarat are not even considered important where as Silappatikaram, Manimegalai, jeevaka Chintamani, Valayaapathi and Kundalakesi. Almost every high school student in Tamilnadu can quote pages from Silappatikaram by rote, I can still do it even after 15 years removed from high school. We can continue this discussion, since im running short of time here

[CC1981]

North Indians are fairer, while Southies and mainly Tamilians are darker.

Indeed...and the reason is obvious- TN averages the highest insolation in the nation outside of the Thar desert ( insolation in India increases progressively southwards), meaning TNs see more sunshine than anywhere else in India except Rajasthan. But unlike Rajasthan, TN sunshine isnt a sure way of getting heat-strokes if one is walking around bare-chested, simply because the temperatures as a mean are lower. Not to mention, the banjara people of Rajasthan are also mostly dark as coal and they they spend the most time (amongst Rajasthani) outdoors.

The feeling of most Tamilians was that Rajaji was screwed over by the Congress when electing the first PM for India, mainly because Rajaji was a 'Madrasi'. Even today, none of the national parties in India have a decent base in Tamilnadu, one of the main reasons for that being, most Tamilians do not identify themselves with any national party leaders or the national party's slogans.

Politically, Bengalis too feel the same: the common gripe amongst Bengalis is that bengalis have gotten the short end of the stick in Indian politics and finances: it was bengalis who almost single-handedly launched the process of independence movement ( if you don't believe me, see how many bengali names pop up in the 1880s-1920s period for major politicians/intellectuals in Independence movement), it was the Bengalis who lit the spark for 1857 revolution, it was Bengalis who first began modernizing- administratively and culturally and to this day, the contribution of bengalis in Indian sciences, administration and culture for the last 150-200 years rivals the rest of the nation's collectively : It was a Bengali ( Raja Ram Mohan Roy) who singlehandedly started the woman's rights movements, anti-sati movement and women's education movement in India, it was bengalis like Sukumar Roy who introduced to us comics and singlehandedly ressurected Panchatantra tales. The list is endless but most bengalis see the 'hindi-stanis' shafting us in the 1920s- onward period, where Gandhi went to great lenghts to shut out bengali intellectuals and freedom-fighters and his puppet (nehru) kept up the practice. So i undersand where you are comming from.

Carnatic Vs Hindustani. Rice Vs Wheat. Idly Vs Chappati. I can keep going, but the fact is that it is the difference between sun and moon. Some versions of Ramyana in TN have Ravan as the protagonist (The ultimate Dravidian hero standing upto the Aryan Bully).

Actually, cuisine-wise, there is simlarities between Bongs and Tamils - we are rice heavy too and like Tamils, we are big time into fish as well. Just like the Ravana protagonist, some versions of Bengali mahabharata has Sudakshina as one of the major heroes and definitely the most illustrious Kaurava warrior after Karna and Bhisma- he was considered equal of Drona himself in dhanurvidya- ofcourse, Sudakshina being a Kamboj is overlooked in the hindi-stani versions of Mahabharata and many bengalis chafe at this glaring omission, where Sudakshina's duel with Arjuna is seen as only a shade below Arjuna's duel with Karna.

There are TamBrahms who make up less than 5% of Tamilnadu and the rest, most of Tamilnadu are religious but are not as jingoistic about religion, this is a fact given that most of the esteemed Tamil leaders like Periyar, Anna, Karunanidhi were/are avowed atheists, any other part of India these leaders will not get anywhere.

Anywhere, except Bengal perhaps- our leaders have been non-practicing/avowed atheists as well ( Jyoti Basu for eg) zand this is one thing i've noticed Tamils in bengal identifying with each other : their common disdain for the hindi-stani and bangladeshi obsession with religion.

For most Tamils, education is of the foremost importance, they feel that wealth, looks etc are all materialistic and not of any worth and see most North Indians who dress up etc as vain. The corolloary is true too where North Indians see Madrasis dressed up shabbily and smirk at them.

Indeed, this is another field where i think Bengalis and Tamils have a lot in common: while i'd say Bengalis are a bit more fashion-concious than Tamils, we too put education as first and foremost.

Tamils take a lot of pride in their literature, Ramayan and Mahabarat are not even considered important where as Silappatikaram, Manimegalai, jeevaka Chintamani, Valayaapathi and Kundalakesi. Almost every high school student in Tamilnadu can quote pages from Silappatikaram by rote, I can still do it even after 15 years removed from high school.

Same in bengal : Ramayan, Mahabharat, etc. come far behind the works of Rabindranath Tagore, Charyapada, Bonkim Chandra, Sarat Chandra, etc.'s work. You seem to get my waryness towards aggressively pushing Hindi and hindi culture through India just for the sake of copying monolithic united nations like China or the US. I am all for hindi and english being the national language of India and for most Indians to have basic competency in hindi and english- but i'd rather we all had fluency in english before hindi- as i said earlier, fluency of English helps our culture on a global basis and English won't erase our culture like hindi would- and has done with places like Madhya Pradesh.

[Lurker]

Proficiency in English has led to the proliferation of the outsourcing to India- the zillions of call centers, IT firms, medical tourism etc. are direct result of how deeply English, a global language, is embedded in India. Our rival nations like China or Brazil doesnt see anywhere near the same amount of high tech jobs and medical stuff moving there and that is directly a result of our better fluency in English(as a nation).

That is such a hollow argument that I am not even sure where to start. For starters I find it completely hilarious that you suggest Indians should learn English as it is a "global" language but I have not yet seen you argue in favour of a "global" language within India!! So let me see how it works now. A global language will help an Indian when he goes out of India, but a uniform language inside the nation is not going to help the economy?? If that is not hypocracy what is? Lets explore the impact of English now, shall we? How exactly has English became a part of India? Well because we were colonies to the master English and they brought English because they found our languages completely indept. As a Bengali I am sure you have heard of how deficient McCaulay thought Indian languages were and had completely removed every little piece of literature from Calcutta library. Thats some historical perspective just so we are sure. After Independence English was lapped up by Indian "elite" who wanted to come across as being better than the others. Way before Liberalisation happened parents in Middle class and above would ask their kids to talk in English. In my college days I have seen excellent students hailing from villages run down by "convent" educated girls as illiterate because the former could not speak English. Point being lets stop bull sheeting about how English has helped India in certain areas. How about we start first with how English has basically pushed Indian languages backwards, gave a false pretensive mentality amongst Indians and so on. And please do answer my question as to why you want a "Global" language outside India but when it comes to India as a country you want everyone to speak their own languages?

Democracy is an individual rights aspect- NOT a collective rights scenario. Democracy applied to collective rights leads to fascism of the majority - ie, where minorities are completely sidelined and the majority gets their way every single time - this leads to the path where India becomes a hindu nation, with hindi-only and we lose all semblance of civilization.

Thats BS. And you are smart enough to realize the difference between BS and solid argument. If tomorrow Hindus(overwhelming majority) want to make India a Hindu country, so it shall become. There is no two ways about it. It is NOT the minority population that stops this to happen. It is the folks WITHIN the majority. Why do you think till date Thackeray has not been able to win a seat in Bihar?? Point being dont use wrong arguments just to further a point.

Furthermore, i doubt your 17 states scenario- if we are to go by fluency in hindi and set the benchmark as being able to read hindi newspapers and carry a convo in Hindi, then it is essentially Haryana, Uttaranchal, UP, Bihar, jharkhand, Madhya pradesh,Rajasthan and Punjab that have over 50% proficiency in Hindi.

Even the states that you have included makes up for about 450 million people!! And this does not include Maharastra(what language is spoken there?) or Gujrat for that matter? Have you ever met a Hyderabadi who did NOT know Hindi? Or a Bangalori for that matter?? I am not even including second tier states like Bengali, Orissa etc etc..most of which have a working sense of Hindi.

Besides, on the basis of the WHOLE 27 states, English has greater reach than Hindi- the NE states, Bengal, South, etc. are far more proficient in English than Hindi.

Greater reach, how?? Feel free to show me how English as a language has even half the speakers as Hindi does. I will accept any half-decent research on this. What I am NOT going to accept is 2% of population speaking English in every state makes it well reached.

The school of logic that puts credence to the diversity of a language base. If you have 25 students, out of which 15 are experts in Sanskrit but 10 cant speak a word, while all 25 are high-school level literate in French, your group's competency in French is superior than in Sanskrit and the overall group dynamics benifits more from adoption of French than Sanskrit.

Again, what school of logic did you go to?? You do realize that MORE students in India go to a Govt school and NOT the private/convent school. In my personal experience, till Xth I was in convent, when I went to do XII(incidentally at Patna) my college had about 300 students of which about 250 of them were from these Govt schools. The situation would be exactly the same in any state.

English and Hindi have similar parallels - by sheer head count,hindi has the most speakers in India but in terms of reach of the language, English has greater reach.

Phir wahi! Greater reach? How?? Just because you say so. I can get down at Adra in Bengal and speak to a vendor in Hindi. I can get down at 36 Pargana and talk to a coolie in Hindi. Try doing that in English! Try the same in Assam etc etc. I would say there are only a few states where the number of people who speak English is more than those who speak Hindi. And I am quite open if you could prove me wrong with some numbers. xxxx

[Lurker]

We can continue this discussion' date=' since im running short of time here[/quote'] Please do when you have some time. I would be really interested in knowing more on this subject.

[Predator_05]

Hindi is the most widely used indigenous language in the Republic of India - every kid should be required to have some rudimentary knowledge of it. There shouldn't be any compromise on this. Hindi and English have to be the two main languages for every kid. The mother tongue doesn't need to be taught, as most people use it at home anyway and the kid will pick it up naturally in regular day-to-day discourse. If a kid is going to spend his entire life in India, Hindi is absolutely essential. Culture/tradition shouldn't even come into it - the fact is that by learning hindi, you further empower yourself by having the ability to converse with people all over the country. That's a priceless skill. And it's not like you erode your own regional culture/tradition by learning another language...

[CC1981]

For starters I find it completely hilarious that you suggest Indians should learn English as it is a "global" language but I have not yet seen you argue in favour of a "global" language within India!!

Err...what ?? Are you missing the point that i *am* arguing in favour of a global language- English- within India ???

A global language will help an Indian when he goes out of India, but a uniform language inside the nation is not going to help the economy??

All the outsourcing jobs that are comming to India in high tech, medical and stuff, where the workers directly interface with their **ENGLISH SPEAKING FOREIGN CLIENTALE** is not helping our economy ?? arrey ! are you completely ignoring the *FACT* that our outsourcing industry is doing so well because of the fact that a Microsoft dude and a TISCO dude can sit down and talk straight off the bat in detail very very well through the entire length and breadth of the company and what its rammifications are ??

Well because we were colonies to the master English and they brought English because they found our languages completely indept. As a Bengali I am sure you have heard of how deficient McCaulay thought Indian languages were and had completely removed every little piece of literature from Calcutta library. Thats some historical perspective just so we are sure.

Ofcourse...but that is irrelevant. Irrelevant how it came or where it comes from- what is relevant is the value of it or the positives of it.

Point being lets stop bull sheeting about how English has helped India in certain areas

Anyone who thinks that proficiency in english - regardless of immigration is of great advantage and economic factor in the era of globalization truely doesnt belong in this entire debate.

How about we start first with how English has basically pushed Indian languages backwards, gave a false pretensive mentality amongst Indians and so on.

I dispute that categorically. If you are referring to the idea of english terminologies entering our lexicon, that is a non-sequitur argument, because that is precisely how every single language on this planet- or atleast, of the same language tree- has developed.

And please do answer my question as to why you want a "Global" language outside India but when it comes to India as a country you want everyone to speak their own languages?

I do want everyone to speak their own languages !! I do want them to also interface with each other with a language that is absolutely bereft of politicizing it and if anything, presents a global advantage(English). What you seem to not get, is that hindi is no more 'my language' than English is: it is not my mother-tongue, never has been in bengal and hopefully, never will be. Our languages developed at the same time-frames, hindi has just as much claims to sanskrit or any 'indian-ness' as Bengali or Tamil or Marathi and a host of other languages. I have no problems with learning hindi but to say that India should focus on universal communication in hindi is boderline cultural imperialism from the hindi-stani belt.

[CC1981]

If tomorrow Hindus(overwhelming majority) want to make India a Hindu country, so it shall become. There is no two ways about it. It is NOT the minority population that stops this to happen. It is the folks WITHIN the majority. Why do you think till date Thackeray has not been able to win a seat in Bihar??

It is NOT a wrong argument- the fundametal logic on which the 'majority within' stops the imperialism of the most, IS by adhering to the concept that direct democracy (ie, simple majority opinion) has limited appeal or utility in social dynamics. THAT is what stops the 'ones within majority' to push the imperialistic agenda, that is the logical conclusion of it all. What you are advocating, is initiating the slippery-slope phenomenon.

Even the states that you have included makes up for about 450 million people!! And this does not include Maharastra(what language is spoken there?) or Gujrat for that matter? Have you ever met a Hyderabadi who did NOT know Hindi? Or a Bangalori for that matter?? I am not even including second tier states like Bengali, Orissa etc etc..most of which have a working sense of Hindi.

Irrelevant. You don't seem to understand or know the world history of multi-cultural dynamics...a 40% group amongst many CANNOT establish its hegemony without acting in the hegemonistic way. That is a simple truth you refuse to accept. As per Maharashtra or gujrat or whatever- they mostly speak their own languages...and like i said, how many of them CAN converse in hindi is irrelevant : the phenomenon is observed with other languages too, particularly bengali (where lots of orya and assamese people are fluent in it) as well as Tamil and what you are talking about then boils down to simple number games, with the end argument being ' we are more, so we should get our way'. That isnt democracy, that is despotism of the majority.

[CC1981]

Hindi and English have to be the two main languages for every kid. The mother tongue doesn't need to be taught, as most people use it at home anyway and the kid will pick it up naturally in regular day-to-day discourse.

Extremely wrong !! without teaching the mother tongue, the language is going to die effectively in a few generations : learning a language scholastically preserves the language's continuum and leads to more literature in the language- your 'home-taught' kids 3 generations removed from teaching the language are neither going to talk very well to each other (gramatically and syntactically), neither are they going to create any work of art in it.

. If a kid is going to spend his entire life in India, Hindi is absolutely essential. Culture/tradition shouldn't even come into it - the fact is that by learning hindi, you further empower yourself by having the ability to converse with people all over the country. That's a priceless skill.

I agree with your sentiment but i don't see hindi as a necessity for this- as i said, i'd prefer English to it as not only will it lead to better interconnectivity with the world in general, it will also not pose the threat of cultural hegemony.

You don't erode your own regional culture/tradition by learning another language...

You do when two languages are very similar, with similar traditions and cultural connectivity and only one is pushed at the expense of other. Look at what happened in the 'mandarin-ization' of China or 'Russian-isation' of Russia. Simple fact is, to give an example, hindi and marathi have similar cultural backgrounds, vast amounts of shared main tales, etc. and linguistically very close so that translating one's work into another isnt culturally altering. If English is made the 'lingua franca' of the EU, the result would be identical, but languages far off removed don't pose this threat, when the issue is with the individual cultural preservation and unity of the whole in the same sentence.

[triam]

Please do when you have some time. I would be really interested in knowing more on this subject.

This article gives a good precursor of how strong the feeling is in TamilNadu, even today the same reactions will be garnered in TN, for the same circumstances. http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/index.php?issueid=33&id=2692&option=com_content&task=view

[triam]

I think the status quo with regards to language is the best option we have, and through globalization English will become the defacto mode of communication. The more important and more painful argument is Uniform Civil code.