Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

India: Love for Urdu ?

Expand Messages
  • Munir Pervaiz (Saami)
    Love for Urdu Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 31, 2010

      Love for Urdu

      Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010
      On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the beleaguered Urdu language. Considering that Gopinath Munde, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, also joined the chorus of voices that demanded a better deal for Urdu newspapers and the language, it can be assumed that the House had witnessed a rare moment of confluence between the views of the treasury and Opposition benches.

      The BJP is not known to be a particular supporter of Urdu; in fact, till recently it was an out and out 'Hindi' party claiming a status for it higher than the regional languages, and looked down upon the English language as a symbol of slavery and what not. But members of the other parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the ruling Congress, have long been projecting themselves as supporters of Urdu, especially when elections are round the corner.

      How phony is that profession of love for Urdu should be clear from the fact that the status of Urdu in the country has been steadily declining. None of the political parties, who have been in power, and like to trumpet support to Urdu did anything to promote the language. Otherwise Urdu would have been a thriving language today and not one that is gasping for breath.

      The Congress and the Samajwadi Party need to be singled out for their failure to do anything substantive for Urdu. Most of the leaders of these parties who shed tears over Urdu are unable to speak the language properly. They struggle with the right pronunciation of many common Urdu words, not realising the importance of intonation in speaking the language. The fight for Urdu is conducted in Hindi!

      Something that must have stupefied the Urdu speakers and lovers is that over the years no serious effort was ever made by any party to wipe out the misleading belief that Urdu is the language of one community. Till the time of Independence, Urdu enjoyed a position of pre-eminence in northern India. It was taught in schools and learnt by all pupils, irrespective of their religious affiliations. It had what may be called marketability, that is to say knowledge of Urdu helped not hindered job prospects. Its added attraction was that it was a language of great poetry and literature.

      After August 1947 lot of things changed almost overnight. A sort of subterranean effort was mounted not just by the Sangh Parivar but certain 'secular' forces too to associate Urdu with forces that worked for the division of British India in 1947. It became a language of 'traitors', the people who backed the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.

      In free India, a frantic move started to knock out the Persian and Arabic words and phrases used in everyday speech by the 'Hindustani' (a mixture of Hindi and Urdu) speakers and replace them by words which sounded more Sanskrit than Hindi. Schools abruptly stopped teaching Urdu.
      By attaching the stigma of 'traitor' to the language it was made sure that the demand for learning Urdu would drop drastically. The minority Muslim community watched helplessly as Urdu was given a communal colour. From an exulted position Urdu was out of the mainstream.

      It set in motion a sense of demoralisation among the Urdu speakers and lovers some of whom started to advocate the idea that it should be written in the Devnagari script so that it can be easily learnt by the Hindi speakers. The overwhelming sense among the Urdu speakers and lovers was against it. About two decades after Independence, the generation that had learnt Urdu in schools had aged and made way for a new generation that had begun schooling with Hindi, not Urdu. Urdu was on way to oblivion, thought many.

      It could well have because by late 1960s and early 1970s Hindi had become a big issue in national politics and Urdu drew little attention in political discourse. Jana Sangh (the predecessor of the Bharatiya Janata Party) became a fervent champion of Hindi when the Dravidian parties of the South rose against it by launching a series of agitations against 'Hindi imperialism'. The pro-Hindi stand of the Jana Sangh came to the fore again when it asked the Hindus of Punjab to declare Hindi as their mother tongue. By and large the Hindu in what is today Punjab did not accept that.
      Urdu did not figure in the language agitations but a realisation dawned on politicians, particularly of the ruling Congress party, that it provided the key to the heart of the minority vote. A number of government-sponsored or backed organisations and institutions came up to promote the Urdu language.

      It probably lulled many into believing that Urdu was being revived. Many prominent figures in the world of Urdu literature came to occupy prominent positions in these organisations and institutions amidst suspicion that the government would use them for winning over the minority votes.

      The introduction of 'three language' formula (mother tongue plus Hindi and English) was expected to boost the teaching of Urdu in schools in north India but it did not. By then Urdu had completely lost its 'marketability' and the demand for learning it was nearly zero. Also, the states where Urdu could have been promoted under the 'three language' formula did nothing to have the infrastructure in place. There were neither enough trained teachers in Urdu nor textbooks in Urdu.

      Whether or not the government or the ruling party was able to get any advantage by opening Urdu academies and boards is, however, not a vital issue. From the point of view of the Urdu language the more important thing would have been opening Urdu schools and taking steps to spread its teaching on a wide scale. That was not done.

      While it still remained politically correct to speak for Urdu, the politicians, who advocated the language, could no longer expect to fool the speakers and lovers of the language. The politicians understood that quickly and their next move was to vigorously campaign for reservations for the minorities in government jobs as a means to get their votes. The question of Urdu language was relegated to the background, as a result.
      Today, the teaching of Urdu is largely confined to Madrasas and a few Urdu-medium schools where the pupils are almost invariably from the minority community. It is a pity that Urdu remains identified with a religion.
      M Rama Rao, Syndicate Features
      http://www.centralchronicle.com/printnews.asp?articleID=44319

      --------------------------------------------
      For Pak Flood Relief, visit : http://voiceoftoronto.com/wp/category/floodinpak/

      Support View Point: Visit : http://www.viewpointonline.net/
      • Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
      Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights


    • Osman Sher
                          URDU AS SEEN BY THE PEOPLE   In Undivided India   The Hindu Mahasabha, at the Ajmer session of 1933, resolved: ‘Urdu
      Message 2 of 5 , Sep 1, 2010

                            URDU AS SEEN BY THE PEOPLE

         

        In Undivided India

         

        The Hindu Mahasabha, at the Ajmer session of 1933, resolved: ‘Urdu is a foreign language which is a living monument to our slavery. It must be eradicated from the page of existence. Urdu is the language of the Malechas (impure, the Muslims) which has done great harm to our national ends by attaining popularity in India .’

         

        At the 1938 session of the All-India Muslim League, Jinnah said: " They (the Congress provincial Governments after the elections of 1937) are pursuing a policy of making Hindi compulsory language, which must necessarily, if not completely, destroy--at any rate, virtually undermine--the spread of the development of Urdu; and what is worse still, is that Hindi with its Hindu Sanskrit literature and philosophy and ideals will and must necessarily be forced upon Muslim children and students."

         

        In Pakistan

         

        Pakistan contains two types of people. One of them is ‘Urdu-Speaking’

                        
                                Osman Sher

        --- On Wed, 9/1/10, Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...> wrote:

        From: Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...>
        Subject: [Writers Forum] India: Love for Urdu ?
        To: "Writers_Forum" <writers_forum@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 8:12 AM

         

        Love for Urdu

        Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010
        On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the beleaguered Urdu language. Considering that Gopinath Munde, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, also joined the chorus of voices that demanded a better deal for Urdu newspapers and the language, it can be assumed that the House had witnessed a rare moment of confluence between the views of the treasury and Opposition benches.

        The BJP is not known to be a particular supporter of Urdu; in fact, till recently it was an out and out 'Hindi' party claiming a status for it higher than the regional languages, and looked down upon the English language as a symbol of slavery and what not. But members of the other parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the ruling Congress, have long been projecting themselves as supporters of Urdu, especially when elections are round the corner.

        How phony is that profession of love for Urdu should be clear from the fact that the status of Urdu in the country has been steadily declining. None of the political parties, who have been in power, and like to trumpet support to Urdu did anything to promote the language. Otherwise Urdu would have been a thriving language today and not one that is gasping for breath.

        The Congress and the Samajwadi Party need to be singled out for their failure to do anything substantive for Urdu. Most of the leaders of these parties who shed tears over Urdu are unable to speak the language properly. They struggle with the right pronunciation of many common Urdu words, not realising the importance of intonation in speaking the language. The fight for Urdu is conducted in Hindi!

        Something that must have stupefied the Urdu speakers and lovers is that over the years no serious effort was ever made by any party to wipe out the misleading belief that Urdu is the language of one community. Till the time of Independence, Urdu enjoyed a position of pre-eminence in northern India. It was taught in schools and learnt by all pupils, irrespective of their religious affiliations. It had what may be called marketability, that is to say knowledge of Urdu helped not hindered job prospects. Its added attraction was that it was a language of great poetry and literature.

        After August 1947 lot of things changed almost overnight. A sort of subterranean effort was mounted not just by the Sangh Parivar but certain 'secular' forces too to associate Urdu with forces that worked for the division of British India in 1947. It became a language of 'traitors', the people who backed the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.

        In free India, a frantic move started to knock out the Persian and Arabic words and phrases used in everyday speech by the 'Hindustani' (a mixture of Hindi and Urdu) speakers and replace them by words which sounded more Sanskrit than Hindi. Schools abruptly stopped teaching Urdu.
        By attaching the stigma of 'traitor' to the language it was made sure that the demand for learning Urdu would drop drastically. The minority Muslim community watched helplessly as Urdu was given a communal colour. From an exulted position Urdu was out of the mainstream.

        It set in motion a sense of demoralisation among the Urdu speakers and lovers some of whom started to advocate the idea that it should be written in the Devnagari script so that it can be easily learnt by the Hindi speakers. The overwhelming sense among the Urdu speakers and lovers was against it. About two decades after Independence, the generation that had learnt Urdu in schools had aged and made way for a new generation that had begun schooling with Hindi, not Urdu. Urdu was on way to oblivion, thought many.

        It could well have because by late 1960s and early 1970s Hindi had become a big issue in national politics and Urdu drew little attention in political discourse. Jana Sangh (the predecessor of the Bharatiya Janata Party) became a fervent champion of Hindi when the Dravidian parties of the South rose against it by launching a series of agitations against 'Hindi imperialism'. The pro-Hindi stand of the Jana Sangh came to the fore again when it asked the Hindus of Punjab to declare Hindi as their mother tongue. By and large the Hindu in what is today Punjab did not accept that.
        Urdu did not figure in the language agitations but a realisation dawned on politicians, particularly of the ruling Congress party, that it provided the key to the heart of the minority vote. A number of government-sponsored or backed organisations and institutions came up to promote the Urdu language.

        It probably lulled many into believing that Urdu was being revived. Many prominent figures in the world of Urdu literature came to occupy prominent positions in these organisations and institutions amidst suspicion that the government would use them for winning over the minority votes.

        The introduction of 'three language' formula (mother tongue plus Hindi and English) was expected to boost the teaching of Urdu in schools in north India but it did not. By then Urdu had completely lost its 'marketability' and the demand for learning it was nearly zero. Also, the states where Urdu could have been promoted under the 'three language' formula did nothing to have the infrastructure in place. There were neither enough trained teachers in Urdu nor textbooks in Urdu.

        Whether or not the government or the ruling party was able to get any advantage by opening Urdu academies and boards is, however, not a vital issue. From the point of view of the Urdu language the more important thing would have been opening Urdu schools and taking steps to spread its teaching on a wide scale. That was not done.

        While it still remained politically correct to speak for Urdu, the politicians, who advocated the language, could no longer expect to fool the speakers and lovers of the language. The politicians understood that quickly and their next move was to vigorously campaign for reservations for the minorities in government jobs as a means to get their votes. The question of Urdu language was relegated to the background, as a result.
        Today, the teaching of Urdu is largely confined to Madrasas and a few Urdu-medium schools where the pupils are almost invariably from the minority community. It is a pity that Urdu remains identified with a religion.
        M Rama Rao, Syndicate Features
        http://www.centralchronicle.com/printnews.asp?articleID=44319

        --------------------------------------------
        For Pak Flood Relief, visit : http://voiceoftoronto.com/wp/category/floodinpak/

        Support View Point: Visit : http://www.viewpointonline.net/
        • Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
        Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights



      • Zafar Iqbal
        Love for Urdu or Love for VOTE? Zafar Iqbal ... Love for Urdu or Love for VOTE? Zafar Iqbal --- On Wed, 9/1/10, Munir Pervaiz (Saami)
        Message 3 of 5 , Sep 2, 2010
          Love for Urdu or Love for VOTE?
           
          Zafar Iqbal

          --- On Wed, 9/1/10, Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...> wrote:

          From: Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...>
          Subject: [Writers Forum] India: Love for Urdu ?
          To: "Writers_Forum" <writers_forum@yahoogroups.com>
          Date: Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 8:12 AM

           

          Love for Urdu

          Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010
          On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the beleaguered Urdu language. Considering that Gopinath Munde, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, also joined the chorus of voices that demanded a better deal for Urdu newspapers and the language, it can be assumed that the House had witnessed a rare moment of confluence between the views of the treasury and Opposition benches.

          The BJP is not known to be a particular supporter of Urdu; in fact, till recently it was an out and out 'Hindi' party claiming a status for it higher than the regional languages, and looked down upon the English language as a symbol of slavery and what not. But members of the other parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the ruling Congress, have long been projecting themselves as supporters of Urdu, especially when elections are round the corner.

          How phony is that profession of love for Urdu should be clear from the fact that the status of Urdu in the country has been steadily declining. None of the political parties, who have been in power, and like to trumpet support to Urdu did anything to promote the language. Otherwise Urdu would have been a thriving language today and not one that is gasping for breath.

          The Congress and the Samajwadi Party need to be singled out for their failure to do anything substantive for Urdu. Most of the leaders of these parties who shed tears over Urdu are unable to speak the language properly. They struggle with the right pronunciation of many common Urdu words, not realising the importance of intonation in speaking the language. The fight for Urdu is conducted in Hindi!

          Something that must have stupefied the Urdu speakers and lovers is that over the years no serious effort was ever made by any party to wipe out the misleading belief that Urdu is the language of one community. Till the time of Independence, Urdu enjoyed a position of pre-eminence in northern India. It was taught in schools and learnt by all pupils, irrespective of their religious affiliations. It had what may be called marketability, that is to say knowledge of Urdu helped not hindered job prospects. Its added attraction was that it was a language of great poetry and literature.

          After August 1947 lot of things changed almost overnight. A sort of subterranean effort was mounted not just by the Sangh Parivar but certain 'secular' forces too to associate Urdu with forces that worked for the division of British India in 1947. It became a language of 'traitors', the people who backed the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.

          In free India, a frantic move started to knock out the Persian and Arabic words and phrases used in everyday speech by the 'Hindustani' (a mixture of Hindi and Urdu) speakers and replace them by words which sounded more Sanskrit than Hindi. Schools abruptly stopped teaching Urdu.
          By attaching the stigma of 'traitor' to the language it was made sure that the demand for learning Urdu would drop drastically. The minority Muslim community watched helplessly as Urdu was given a communal colour. From an exulted position Urdu was out of the mainstream.

          It set in motion a sense of demoralisation among the Urdu speakers and lovers some of whom started to advocate the idea that it should be written in the Devnagari script so that it can be easily learnt by the Hindi speakers. The overwhelming sense among the Urdu speakers and lovers was against it. About two decades after Independence, the generation that had learnt Urdu in schools had aged and made way for a new generation that had begun schooling with Hindi, not Urdu. Urdu was on way to oblivion, thought many.

          It could well have because by late 1960s and early 1970s Hindi had become a big issue in national politics and Urdu drew little attention in political discourse. Jana Sangh (the predecessor of the Bharatiya Janata Party) became a fervent champion of Hindi when the Dravidian parties of the South rose against it by launching a series of agitations against 'Hindi imperialism'. The pro-Hindi stand of the Jana Sangh came to the fore again when it asked the Hindus of Punjab to declare Hindi as their mother tongue. By and large the Hindu in what is today Punjab did not accept that.
          Urdu did not figure in the language agitations but a realisation dawned on politicians, particularly of the ruling Congress party, that it provided the key to the heart of the minority vote. A number of government-sponsored or backed organisations and institutions came up to promote the Urdu language.

          It probably lulled many into believing that Urdu was being revived. Many prominent figures in the world of Urdu literature came to occupy prominent positions in these organisations and institutions amidst suspicion that the government would use them for winning over the minority votes.

          The introduction of 'three language' formula (mother tongue plus Hindi and English) was expected to boost the teaching of Urdu in schools in north India but it did not. By then Urdu had completely lost its 'marketability' and the demand for learning it was nearly zero. Also, the states where Urdu could have been promoted under the 'three language' formula did nothing to have the infrastructure in place. There were neither enough trained teachers in Urdu nor textbooks in Urdu.

          Whether or not the government or the ruling party was able to get any advantage by opening Urdu academies and boards is, however, not a vital issue. From the point of view of the Urdu language the more important thing would have been opening Urdu schools and taking steps to spread its teaching on a wide scale. That was not done.

          While it still remained politically correct to speak for Urdu, the politicians, who advocated the language, could no longer expect to fool the speakers and lovers of the language. The politicians understood that quickly and their next move was to vigorously campaign for reservations for the minorities in government jobs as a means to get their votes. The question of Urdu language was relegated to the background, as a result.
          Today, the teaching of Urdu is largely confined to Madrasas and a few Urdu-medium schools where the pupils are almost invariably from the minority community. It is a pity that Urdu remains identified with a religion.
          M Rama Rao, Syndicate Features
          http://www.centralchronicle.com/printnews.asp?articleID=44319
           

        • 7243
          Sher sahib, Ap nay ye ka ghazab kar di ye. In kay allawa sub impure hain. Abbas
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 2, 2010
            Sher sahib,

            Ap nay ye ka ghazab kar di ye. In kay allawa sub impure hain.

            Abbas



            --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Osman Sher <osman_sher@...> wrote:
            >
            >                     URDU AS SEEN BY THE PEOPLE
            >  
            > In Undivided India
            >  
            > The Hindu Mahasabha, at the Ajmer session of 1933, resolved: ‘Urdu is a foreign language which is a living monument to our slavery. It must be eradicated from the page of existence. Urdu is the language of the Malechas (impure, the Muslims) which has done great harm to our national ends by attaining popularity in India.’
            >  
            > At the 1938 session of the All-India Muslim League, Jinnah said: " They (the Congress provincial Governments after the elections of 1937) are pursuing a policy of making Hindi compulsory language, which must necessarily, if not completely, destroy--at any rate, virtually undermine--the spread of the development of Urdu; and what is worse still, is that Hindi with its Hindu Sanskrit literature and philosophy and ideals will and must necessarily be forced upon Muslim children and students."
            >  
            > In Pakistan
            >  
            > Pakistan contains two types of people. One of them is ‘Urdu-Speaking’
            >                 
            >                         Osman Sher
            >
            > --- On Wed, 9/1/10, Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > From: Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...>
            > Subject: [Writers Forum] India: Love for Urdu ?
            > To: "Writers_Forum" <writers_forum@yahoogroups.com>
            > Date: Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 8:12 AM
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Love for Urdu
            >
            > Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010
            >
            > On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the beleaguered Urdu language. Considering that Gopinath Munde, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, also joined the chorus of voices that demanded a better deal for Urdu newspapers and the language, it can be assumed that the House had witnessed a rare moment of confluence between the views of the treasury and Opposition benches.
            >
            > The BJP is not known to be a particular supporter of Urdu; in fact, till recently it was an out and out 'Hindi' party claiming a status for it higher than the regional languages, and looked down upon the English language as a symbol of slavery and what not. But members of the other parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the ruling Congress, have long been projecting themselves as supporters of Urdu, especially when elections are round the corner.
            >
            > How phony is that profession of love for Urdu should be clear from the fact that the status of Urdu in the country has been steadily declining. None of the political parties, who have been in power, and like to trumpet support to Urdu did anything to promote the language. Otherwise Urdu would have been a thriving language today and not one that is gasping for breath.
            >
            > The Congress and the Samajwadi Party need to be singled out for their failure to do anything substantive for Urdu. Most of the leaders of these parties who shed tears over Urdu are unable to speak the language properly. They struggle with the right pronunciation of many common Urdu words, not realising the importance of intonation in speaking the language. The fight for Urdu is conducted in Hindi!
            >
            > Something that must have stupefied the Urdu speakers and lovers is that over the years no serious effort was ever made by any party to wipe out the misleading belief that Urdu is the language of one community. Till the time of Independence, Urdu enjoyed a position of pre-eminence in northern India. It was taught in schools and learnt by all pupils, irrespective of their religious affiliations. It had what may be called marketability, that is to say knowledge of Urdu helped not hindered job prospects. Its added attraction was that it was a language of great poetry and literature.
            >
            > After August 1947 lot of things changed almost overnight. A sort of subterranean effort was mounted not just by the Sangh Parivar but certain 'secular' forces too to associate Urdu with forces that worked for the division of British India in 1947. It became a language of 'traitors', the people who backed the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.
            >
            > In free India, a frantic move started to knock out the Persian and Arabic words and phrases used in everyday speech by the 'Hindustani' (a mixture of Hindi and Urdu) speakers and replace them by words which sounded more Sanskrit than Hindi. Schools abruptly stopped teaching Urdu.
            > By attaching the stigma of 'traitor' to the language it was made sure that the demand for learning Urdu would drop drastically. The minority Muslim community watched helplessly as Urdu was given a communal colour. From an exulted position Urdu was out of the mainstream.
            >
            > It set in motion a sense of demoralisation among the Urdu speakers and lovers some of whom started to advocate the idea that it should be written in the Devnagari script so that it can be easily learnt by the Hindi speakers. The overwhelming sense among the Urdu speakers and lovers was against it. About two decades after Independence, the generation that had learnt Urdu in schools had aged and made way for a new generation that had begun schooling with Hindi, not Urdu. Urdu was on way to oblivion, thought many.
            >
            > It could well have because by late 1960s and early 1970s Hindi had become a big issue in national politics and Urdu drew little attention in political discourse. Jana Sangh (the predecessor of the Bharatiya Janata Party) became a fervent champion of Hindi when the Dravidian parties of the South rose against it by launching a series of agitations against 'Hindi imperialism'. The pro-Hindi stand of the Jana Sangh came to the fore again when it asked the Hindus of Punjab to declare Hindi as their mother tongue. By and large the Hindu in what is today Punjab did not accept that.
            > Urdu did not figure in the language agitations but a realisation dawned on politicians, particularly of the ruling Congress party, that it provided the key to the heart of the minority vote. A number of government-sponsored or backed organisations and institutions came up to promote the Urdu language.
            >
            > It probably lulled many into believing that Urdu was being revived. Many prominent figures in the world of Urdu literature came to occupy prominent positions in these organisations and institutions amidst suspicion that the government would use them for winning over the minority votes.
            >
            > The introduction of 'three language' formula (mother tongue plus Hindi and English) was expected to boost the teaching of Urdu in schools in north India but it did not. By then Urdu had completely lost its 'marketability' and the demand for learning it was nearly zero. Also, the states where Urdu could have been promoted under the 'three language' formula did nothing to have the infrastructure in place. There were neither enough trained teachers in Urdu nor textbooks in Urdu.
            >
            > Whether or not the government or the ruling party was able to get any advantage by opening Urdu academies and boards is, however, not a vital issue. From the point of view of the Urdu language the more important thing would have been opening Urdu schools and taking steps to spread its teaching on a wide scale. That was not done.
            >
            > While it still remained politically correct to speak for Urdu, the politicians, who advocated the language, could no longer expect to fool the speakers and lovers of the language. The politicians understood that quickly and their next move was to vigorously campaign for reservations for the minorities in government jobs as a means to get their votes. The question of Urdu language was relegated to the background, as a result.
            > Today, the teaching of Urdu is largely confined to Madrasas and a few Urdu-medium schools where the pupils are almost invariably from the minority community. It is a pity that Urdu remains identified with a religion.
            > M Rama Rao, Syndicate Features
            >
            >
            > http://www.centralchronicle.com/printnews.asp?articleID=44319
            >
            > --------------------------------------------
            > For Pak Flood Relief, visit : http://voiceoftoronto.com/wp/category/floodinpak/
            >
            > Support View Point: Visit : http://www.viewpointonline.net/
            >
            >
            > Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
            >
          • Nasar Malik
            .......... and so said M. K. Gandhi Urdu I have not regarded as a DISTINCT LANGUAGE, because it has adopted the Hindi grammar and its vocabulary is mainly
            Message 5 of 5 , Sep 2, 2010
              .......... and so said M. K. Gandhi 
               "Urdu I have not  regarded as a DISTINCT LANGUAGE, because it has adopted the Hindi grammar and its vocabulary is mainly Persian and Arabic".
               
              Regards,
              Nasar Malik
              Copenhagen.
              www.urduhamasr.dk
               
               
               

              To: Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com
              From: abbas7243@...
              Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:04:05 +0000
              Subject: Re: [Writers Forum] India: Love for Urdu ?

               
              Sher sahib,

              Ap nay ye ka ghazab kar di ye. In kay allawa sub impure hain.

              Abbas

              --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Osman Sher <osman_sher@...> wrote:
              >
              >                     URDU AS SEEN BY THE PEOPLE
              >  
              > In Undivided India
              >  
              > The Hindu Mahasabha, at the Ajmer session of 1933, resolved: ‘Urdu is a foreign language which is a living monument to our slavery. It must be eradicated from the page of existence. Urdu is the language of the Malechas (impure, the Muslims) which has done great harm to our national ends by attaining popularity in India.’
              >  
              > At the 1938 session of the All-India Muslim League, Jinnah said: " They (the Congress provincial Governments after the elections of 1937) are pursuing a policy of making Hindi compulsory language, which must necessarily, if not completely, destroy--at any rate, virtually undermine--the spread of the development of Urdu; and what is worse still, is that Hindi with its Hindu Sanskrit literature and philosophy and ideals will and must necessarily be forced upon Muslim children and students."
              >  
              > In Pakistan
              >  
              > Pakistan contains two types of people. One of them is ‘Urdu-Speaking’
              >                 
              >                         Osman Sher
              >
              > --- On Wed, 9/1/10, Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > From: Munir Pervaiz (Saami) <munirsaami@...>
              > Subject: [Writers Forum] India: Love for Urdu ?
              > To: "Writers_Forum" <writers_forum@yahoogroups.com>
              > Date: Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 8:12 AM
              >
              >
              >  
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Love for Urdu
              >
              > Category »  Editorial Posted On Wednesday, August 11, 2010
              >
              > On August 5, the Zero Hour in the Lok Sabha saw a sudden burst of support to the beleaguered Urdu language. Considering that Gopinath Munde, a senior member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, also joined the chorus of voices that demanded a better deal for Urdu newspapers and the language, it can be assumed that the House had witnessed a rare moment of confluence between the views of the treasury and Opposition benches.
              >
              > The BJP is not known to be a particular supporter of Urdu; in fact, till recently it was an out and out 'Hindi' party claiming a status for it higher than the regional languages, and looked down upon the English language as a symbol of slavery and what not. But members of the other parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the ruling Congress, have long been projecting themselves as supporters of Urdu, especially when elections are round the corner.
              >
              > How phony is that profession of love for Urdu should be clear from the fact that the status of Urdu in the country has been steadily declining. None of the political parties, who have been in power, and like to trumpet support to Urdu did anything to promote the language. Otherwise Urdu would have been a thriving language today and not one that is gasping for breath.
              >
              > The Congress and the Samajwadi Party need to be singled out for their failure to do anything substantive for Urdu. Most of the leaders of these parties who shed tears over Urdu are unable to speak the language properly. They struggle with the right pronunciation of many common Urdu words, not realising the importance of intonation in speaking the language. The fight for Urdu is conducted in Hindi!
              >
              > Something that must have stupefied the Urdu speakers and lovers is that over the years no serious effort was ever made by any party to wipe out the misleading belief that Urdu is the language of one community. Till the time of Independence, Urdu enjoyed a position of pre-eminence in northern India. It was taught in schools and learnt by all pupils, irrespective of their religious affiliations. It had what may be called marketability, that is to say knowledge of Urdu helped not hindered job prospects. Its added attraction was that it was a language of great poetry and literature.
              >
              > After August 1947 lot of things changed almost overnight. A sort of subterranean effort was mounted not just by the Sangh Parivar but certain 'secular' forces too to associate Urdu with forces that worked for the division of British India in 1947. It became a language of 'traitors', the people who backed the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.
              >
              > In free India, a frantic move started to knock out the Persian and Arabic words and phrases used in everyday speech by the 'Hindustani' (a mixture of Hindi and Urdu) speakers and replace them by words which sounded more Sanskrit than Hindi. Schools abruptly stopped teaching Urdu.
              > By attaching the stigma of 'traitor' to the language it was made sure that the demand for learning Urdu would drop drastically. The minority Muslim community watched helplessly as Urdu was given a communal colour. From an exulted position Urdu was out of the mainstream.
              >
              > It set in motion a sense of demoralisation among the Urdu speakers and lovers some of whom started to advocate the idea that it should be written in the Devnagari script so that it can be easily learnt by the Hindi speakers. The overwhelming sense among the Urdu speakers and lovers was against it. About two decades after Independence, the generation that had learnt Urdu in schools had aged and made way for a new generation that had begun schooling with Hindi, not Urdu. Urdu was on way to oblivion, thought many.
              >
              > It could well have because by late 1960s and early 1970s Hindi had become a big issue in national politics and Urdu drew little attention in political discourse. Jana Sangh (the predecessor of the Bharatiya Janata Party) became a fervent champion of Hindi when the Dravidian parties of the South rose against it by launching a series of agitations against 'Hindi imperialism'. The pro-Hindi stand of the Jana Sangh came to the fore again when it asked the Hindus of Punjab to declare Hindi as their mother tongue. By and large the Hindu in what is today Punjab did not accept that.
              > Urdu did not figure in the language agitations but a realisation dawned on politicians, particularly of the ruling Congress party, that it provided the key to the heart of the minority vote. A number of government-sponsored or backed organisations and institutions came up to promote the Urdu language.
              >
              > It probably lulled many into believing that Urdu was being revived. Many prominent figures in the world of Urdu literature came to occupy prominent positions in these organisations and institutions amidst suspicion that the government would use them for winning over the minority votes.
              >
              > The introduction of 'three language' formula (mother tongue plus Hindi and English) was expected to boost the teaching of Urdu in schools in north India but it did not. By then Urdu had completely lost its 'marketability' and the demand for learning it was nearly zero. Also, the states where Urdu could have been promoted under the 'three language' formula did nothing to have the infrastructure in place. There were neither enough trained teachers in Urdu nor textbooks in Urdu.
              >
              > Whether or not the government or the ruling party was able to get any advantage by opening Urdu academies and boards is, however, not a vital issue. From the point of view of the Urdu language the more important thing would have been opening Urdu schools and taking steps to spread its teaching on a wide scale. That was not done.
              >
              > While it still remained politically correct to speak for Urdu, the politicians, who advocated the language, could no longer expect to fool the speakers and lovers of the language. The politicians understood that quickly and their next move was to vigorously campaign for reservations for the minorities in government jobs as a means to get their votes. The question of Urdu language was relegated to the background, as a result.
              > Today, the teaching of Urdu is largely confined to Madrasas and a few Urdu-medium schools where the pupils are almost invariably from the minority community. It is a pity that Urdu remains identified with a religion.
              > M Rama Rao, Syndicate Features
              >
              >
              > http://www.centralchronicle.com/printnews.asp?articleID=44319
              >
              > --------------------------------------------
              > For Pak Flood Relief, visit : http://voiceoftoronto.com/wp/category/floodinpak/
              >
              > Support View Point: Visit : http://www.viewpointonline.net/
              >
              >
              > Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
              >


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.