3 ms·

Well, India does not have to imagine that, since its common practice. A language is the identity of the people. I am not sure that India is ready to inorganical

Well, India does not have to imagine that, since its common practice. A language is the identity of the people. I am not sure that India is ready to inorganically archive or extinguish the identities of its various sub-cultures. India is already proving that it can mix growth with diversity(albeit at a slower pace), but a section of the middle class think's this approach is too slow. I personally do not agree with the one language nation theory. It reeks of sectarianism. Edit: I consciously ignored Tower of Babel due it being a misplaced argument.

winter_blue 13y ago
China is a good counterexample to this. China had a huge number of "dialects" -- mutually un-intelligible dialects (and being mutually unintelligible is generally what distinguishes a language from a dialect). The Chinese government has sort-of successfully driven Mandarin as the lingua franca of the nation, and I can't imagine the Chinese having been anything but better off for it. Perhaps, there was some loss of cultural/linguistic heritage in the case of China, but that's why I said India should "archive" before extinguish. Languages evolve all the time. If everyone were to hang on to the languages and identities that were present and predominant at the end of the twentieth century, I don't think we'd get anywhere closer to a more global society. As a nation, there's much more of a reason to have a common language.
- realrocker 13y ago
  If you know anything about China's history, it cost them tens of millions of lives to surgically implement uniformity. Not just in language but in every thread of society. Now give me an example of a country as diverse and massive as India whose lingual diversity was a hindrance to growth. I will just go ahead and respond. There is none. India is unique and there is no evidence it's current model won't work. Languages evolve all the time> Incorrect. Languages evolve over centuries due to several geopolitical reasons like: land topography, availability of food, neighboring tribes. Each language and it's multiple dialects are an imprint of the struggle their speakers went through over hundreds or thousands of years. In case of India, the frequency is so high since it has been a melting pot of the world for a very large period of time. >Global society Contrary to what you believe it's not synonymous with a central society. The ultimate goal of the human race is a moving target. Adopting a common language so that we can do better trade, better science and produce more is fallacious since we don't know that's we are supposed to do. Maybe we need to slow down so that we don't kill ourselves off by becoming too powerful and cocky. I don't know. Neither do you.
- saraid216 13y ago
  I don't know about you, but I'm not really a fan of China's political ideologies.

winter_blue 13y ago

China is a good counterexample to this. China had a huge number of "dialects" -- mutually un-intelligible dialects (and being mutually unintelligible is generally what distinguishes a language from a dialect). The Chinese government has sort-of successfully driven Mandarin as the lingua franca of the nation, and I can't imagine the Chinese having been anything but better off for it. Perhaps, there was some loss of cultural/linguistic heritage in the case of China, but that's why I said India should "archive" before extinguish. Languages evolve all the time. If everyone were to hang on to the languages and identities that were present and predominant at the end of the twentieth century, I don't think we'd get anywhere closer to a more global society. As a nation, there's much more of a reason to have a common language.

realrocker 13y ago
If you know anything about China's history, it cost them tens of millions of lives to surgically implement uniformity. Not just in language but in every thread of society. Now give me an example of a country as diverse and massive as India whose lingual diversity was a hindrance to growth. I will just go ahead and respond. There is none. India is unique and there is no evidence it's current model won't work. Languages evolve all the time> Incorrect. Languages evolve over centuries due to several geopolitical reasons like: land topography, availability of food, neighboring tribes. Each language and it's multiple dialects are an imprint of the struggle their speakers went through over hundreds or thousands of years. In case of India, the frequency is so high since it has been a melting pot of the world for a very large period of time. >Global society Contrary to what you believe it's not synonymous with a central society. The ultimate goal of the human race is a moving target. Adopting a common language so that we can do better trade, better science and produce more is fallacious since we don't know that's we are supposed to do. Maybe we need to slow down so that we don't kill ourselves off by becoming too powerful and cocky. I don't know. Neither do you.
saraid216 13y ago
I don't know about you, but I'm not really a fan of China's political ideologies.