3 ms·

That would make Hindi and Urdu dialects of each other. I'm not saying this is necessarily right or wrong; it's a landmine I don't want to touch :)

naruvimama 6y ago
It is true Urdu is just a colonial imposition, it is synthetically derived from Hindi by insisting that the script be Persian. Tarek Fatah makes a point about why Urdu isn't a distinct language from Hindi.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Yiddish is written in both hebrew letters and latin letters, but is one language. Language speakers don't care too much about the script when evolving their language; they use what they have.
  - iguy 6y ago
    I think Hindi/Urdu is quite a bit like Serbian/Croatian. The preferred script followed the religious divide, but (if I understand right) both sort-of standardised quite similar dialects out of a range of possibilities. And then later they were politically divided, and there were some efforts to move the official vocabulary away from each other's. IIRC Sanskrit has also been written in dozens of scripts, there's a perfect one-to-one transliteration into most (maybe all) the north-indian scripts, although they have extra characters for their own sounds.
    - bodhiandpysics1 6y ago
      Since all indian scripts besides the Urdu Nastaliq were originally developed to write sanskrit, the transliteration is indeed perfect!
abdullahkhalids 6y ago
Why is it a landmine? I am an Urdu speaker, and totally fine with realizing that Urdu is the Persianised standard register of the Hindustani language, and Hindi is the standardised and Sanskritised register of the Hindustani language.
- bodhiandpysics1 6y ago
  There is some issue with priority... modern Shudh Hindi (the standard literary dialect) only dates from the 19th century when it was essentially invented by a number of Hindu intellectuals mostly in Benares. Urdu is older, along with the lovely Hindi dialect Braj Bhasha (both dating from the mid 16th century onward). The earliest Hindavi writing is Kabir, from the the 13th century. Also, Panjabi is a complex relation, since it's also the same language, filtered through the gilded pen of Guru Nanak.
yumraj 6y ago
Urdu is definitely a dialect of Hindi. Speakers of Hindi, and of Urdu, can understand most of what is said and can have a conversation for most part. They may not understand 100% of the other language, especially when words that are closer to their Sanskrit or Persian origin are used and have not become part of the colloquial other.
valarauko 6y ago
It's more appropriate to think of Hindi (Rajbhashya/Khariboli) & Urdu as different registers of the same language. For example, a lawyer & a rapper might both compose their works in English, while adopting a register & jargon geared towards their respective audiences. Their works might very well be largely incomprehensible to each others target audiences.

naruvimama 6y ago

It is true Urdu is just a colonial imposition, it is synthetically derived from Hindi by insisting that the script be Persian. Tarek Fatah makes a point about why Urdu isn't a distinct language from Hindi.

srtjstjsj 6y ago
Yiddish is written in both hebrew letters and latin letters, but is one language. Language speakers don't care too much about the script when evolving their language; they use what they have.
- iguy 6y ago
  I think Hindi/Urdu is quite a bit like Serbian/Croatian. The preferred script followed the religious divide, but (if I understand right) both sort-of standardised quite similar dialects out of a range of possibilities. And then later they were politically divided, and there were some efforts to move the official vocabulary away from each other's. IIRC Sanskrit has also been written in dozens of scripts, there's a perfect one-to-one transliteration into most (maybe all) the north-indian scripts, although they have extra characters for their own sounds.
  - bodhiandpysics1 6y ago
    Since all indian scripts besides the Urdu Nastaliq were originally developed to write sanskrit, the transliteration is indeed perfect!

abdullahkhalids 6y ago

Why is it a landmine? I am an Urdu speaker, and totally fine with realizing that Urdu is the Persianised standard register of the Hindustani language, and Hindi is the standardised and Sanskritised register of the Hindustani language.

bodhiandpysics1 6y ago
There is some issue with priority... modern Shudh Hindi (the standard literary dialect) only dates from the 19th century when it was essentially invented by a number of Hindu intellectuals mostly in Benares. Urdu is older, along with the lovely Hindi dialect Braj Bhasha (both dating from the mid 16th century onward). The earliest Hindavi writing is Kabir, from the the 13th century. Also, Panjabi is a complex relation, since it's also the same language, filtered through the gilded pen of Guru Nanak.

yumraj 6y ago

Urdu is definitely a dialect of Hindi. Speakers of Hindi, and of Urdu, can understand most of what is said and can have a conversation for most part. They may not understand 100% of the other language, especially when words that are closer to their Sanskrit or Persian origin are used and have not become part of the colloquial other.

valarauko 6y ago

It's more appropriate to think of Hindi (Rajbhashya/Khariboli) & Urdu as different registers of the same language. For example, a lawyer & a rapper might both compose their works in English, while adopting a register & jargon geared towards their respective audiences. Their works might very well be largely incomprehensible to each others target audiences.