Re: Shashi Tharoor: Celebrating India's linguistic diversity

by goodcitizn Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:23 am

panini press wrote:
panini press wrote:
Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
panini press wrote:
Huzefa Kapasi wrote:assumptions assumptions assumptions. how do you know that he had not insisted on hearing the translation in a language he understood?
If he did, that is no better than asking a Tamil colleague for Tamil cuss words and posting them here without understanding a word of the language!
silly comparison. i will just go on in your refrain and say that sonia gandhi, who only haltingly speaks/understands hindi, is stupid for she reads out from prepared text speeches that she hardly understands. and that obama is stupid for he lectures NRIs on the importance of diwali without checking out the veracity of the contents of his text speech.
Sonia Gandhi speaks -- haltingly or not -- a language that she has learned. Deve Gowda read out words he did not understand. The former -- learning the largest spoken language of the country -- is good politics. The latter is stupid and duplicitous. If you consider this thinking loony, so be it.
I don't know why it is so difficult to grasp this... a "speech" is one person communicating what (s)he thinks to a large audience. One cannot communicate one's own thoughts in a language one doesn't understand. Mouthing words one doesn't understand doesn't make for "delivering a speech." There is a good reason interpreters are used when a person who doesn't know the language of the audience wants to address the audience. It is for authenticity of expression and feeling, which can never be achieved when the speaker doesn't know the language he is mouthing.

If Deve Gowda had someone super eloquent in Hindi deliver the address by standing behind him and he just lip sync'ed it, at least the audience would have had the pleasure of listening to a well-spoken speech. It is lame for a PM to address a national audience in a language he is unfamiliar with, including its script.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:24 am

sonia gandhi may have had other reasons to learn hindi -- communicating with the relatives she acquired through marriage for example.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:25 am

i always find it off-putting when politicians try to communicate in a language unfamiliar to them simply for the purpose of scoring some brownie points with the audience. not a fan of ich bin ein berliner either.

by Idéfix Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:26 am

goodcitizn wrote:
panini press wrote:
panini press wrote:
Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
panini press wrote:If he did, that is no better than asking a Tamil colleague for Tamil cuss words and posting them here without understanding a word of the language!
silly comparison. i will just go on in your refrain and say that sonia gandhi, who only haltingly speaks/understands hindi, is stupid for she reads out from prepared text speeches that she hardly understands. and that obama is stupid for he lectures NRIs on the importance of diwali without checking out the veracity of the contents of his text speech.
Sonia Gandhi speaks -- haltingly or not -- a language that she has learned. Deve Gowda read out words he did not understand. The former -- learning the largest spoken language of the country -- is good politics. The latter is stupid and duplicitous. If you consider this thinking loony, so be it.
I don't know why it is so difficult to grasp this... a "speech" is one person communicating what (s)he thinks to a large audience. One cannot communicate one's own thoughts in a language one doesn't understand. Mouthing words one doesn't understand doesn't make for "delivering a speech." There is a good reason interpreters are used when a person who doesn't know the language of the audience wants to address the audience. It is for authenticity of expression and feeling, which can never be achieved when the speaker doesn't know the language he is mouthing.

If Deve Gowda had someone super eloquent in Hindi deliver the address by standing behind him and he just lip sync'ed it, at least the audience would have had the pleasure of listening to a well-spoken speech. It is lame for a PM to address a national audience in a language he is unfamiliar with, including its script.

I can get behind this lip-syncing idea. Totally in keeping with Indian filmi tradition. I am even open to having the fluent Hindi speaker pre-record the speech in a remote, off-site location like "playback singers" do, with his audio piped to the speakers in real time while Deve Gowda provides the visuals.

by goodcitizn Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:28 am

panini press wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
panini press wrote:
panini press wrote:
Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
silly comparison. i will just go on in your refrain and say that sonia gandhi, who only haltingly speaks/understands hindi, is stupid for she reads out from prepared text speeches that she hardly understands. and that obama is stupid for he lectures NRIs on the importance of diwali without checking out the veracity of the contents of his text speech.
Sonia Gandhi speaks -- haltingly or not -- a language that she has learned. Deve Gowda read out words he did not understand. The former -- learning the largest spoken language of the country -- is good politics. The latter is stupid and duplicitous. If you consider this thinking loony, so be it.
I don't know why it is so difficult to grasp this... a "speech" is one person communicating what (s)he thinks to a large audience. One cannot communicate one's own thoughts in a language one doesn't understand. Mouthing words one doesn't understand doesn't make for "delivering a speech." There is a good reason interpreters are used when a person who doesn't know the language of the audience wants to address the audience. It is for authenticity of expression and feeling, which can never be achieved when the speaker doesn't know the language he is mouthing.

If Deve Gowda had someone super eloquent in Hindi deliver the address by standing behind him and he just lip sync'ed it, at least the audience would have had the pleasure of listening to a well-spoken speech. It is lame for a PM to address a national audience in a language he is unfamiliar with, including its script.
I can get behind this lip-syncing idea. Totally in keeping with Indian filmi tradition. I am even open to having the fluent Hindi speaker pre-record the speech in a remote, off-site location like "playback singers" do, with his audio piped to the speakers in real time while Deve Gowda provides the visuals.

by Guest Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:57 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:sonia gandhi may have had other reasons to learn hindi -- communicating with the relatives she acquired through marriage for example.

english would have sufficed for communicating with the relatives.

by Guest Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:19 pm

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:sonia gandhi may have had other reasons to learn hindi -- communicating with the relatives she acquired through marriage for example.

english would have sufficed for communicating with the relatives.

true. independence speeches and her husband's side's tryst with destiny. actually, or so i heard, when sonia met rajiv in cambridge, sonia was taking ESL classes in cambridge.

by Idéfix Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:03 pm

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:KV has addressed some of the reasons why this article is pusillanimous. i agree with nearly all of what she has written. there is nothing laudable about a PM reading out a hindi speech that he doesn't understand out a document written in kannada script. that a prime minister would read a speech he doesn't even understand is at once both stupid and dangerous.

further he says it is "typically" indian to speak to one's mother in malayalam, father in english, driver in hindi and so on. i am sorry, but that is typically southern indian, not indian. the typical northindian, to wit rashmun, speaks hindi and then lectures the rest of india about learning hindi. tharoor is nothing but a spineless southern indian politician.

he writes an article about linguistic diversity in india and doesn't even once mention the virulent politics of the issue, and the tamilians' historically consistent and courageous stand on thwarting hindi imposition in the 60s!

tharoor's article = EPIC FAIL

KV is saying that Deve Gowda should have given his indepence day speeches in Kannada? Do you agree with this? Or are you of the opinion that he should have given them in English--a language which only 5-10 % of Indians understand?
assuming that kannada is the language deve gowda knows best, he should have given the speech in kannada.

I respectfully disagree. There is no point in a Prime Minister addressing his countrymen in a language which most do not understand.
i know that you disagree. i don't know what you mean by "there is no point." the purpose of the speech is to convey an inspiring message to the people of india. no matter what language was used, hundreds of millions of people would not have understood the speech. that's the reality of india. that's not a difficult problem to solve; translation into any number of languages is quite easily done, as it routinely is, in the united nations.

Jerji, it look like you are upset I did not acknowledge your newly rediscovered voice. So let me take this opportunity to formally congratulate you. Congrats Jerji, congrats Sachin, congrats Sonia!

by Guest Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:42 pm

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:i know that you disagree. i don't know what you mean by "there is no point." the purpose of the speech is to convey an inspiring message to the people of india. no matter what language was used, hundreds of millions of people would not have understood the speech. that's the reality of india. that's not a difficult problem to solve; translation into any number of languages is quite easily done, as it routinely is, in the united nations.

the indian nation is not the united nations assembly to be so easily used as an example for comparison sir loony ji sir jee.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:16 pm

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:i know that you disagree. i don't know what you mean by "there is no point." the purpose of the speech is to convey an inspiring message to the people of india. no matter what language was used, hundreds of millions of people would not have understood the speech. that's the reality of india. that's not a difficult problem to solve; translation into any number of languages is quite easily done, as it routinely is, in the united nations.
the indian nation is not the united nations assembly to be so easily used as an example for comparison sir loony ji sir jee.

regardless, as far as language is concerned it very much is like the united nations.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:20 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Kayalvizhi wrote:Hindians refuse to learn local languyages and use Hindi arrogantly saying it is Rashtriya Basha. Stores, auto drivers go alonmg with kit. In essence the Hindian migrants spread Hindi like AIDS virus killing local cuilture slowly

Kayal, if a bunch of yahoos coming in and speaking arrogantly in Hindi is sufficiently to kill off local languages, that speaks very poorly of the sustainability of those languages anyway. Robbed of local government patronage, and exposed to the free market, I doubt if any of them would really survive as literary languages. So why get so emotionally invested in these historical curiosities in the first place?

languages are part of our cultural heritage, of who we are. there is solid evidence that they even affect the way we think. it is but natural for humans to be emotional about language, just like we are attached to our relatives and our childhood memories. it is your view that is very curious and atypical.

It is just the strength of feelings for a language, which is after all a mere medium for communicating one's ideas, which surprises me. Specific to you, I don't see a similar passion for your religion or castu or sub-castu, which are even more exclusive attributes of the cultural heritage which defines who you are. So why just this one element of your identity?

PS: Pls note, I'm not decrying or looking down on this. I'm just curious.

there are cultural aspects of religion and caste that leave nobody untouched, even those of us who are areligious and consider ourselves casteless. this happens even to those who explicitly disavow religion. i'd say the strong interest in CM is one way my being a hindu and a trambrahm (by birth) has affected me.

by Idéfix Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:23 pm

Another good comparable for India in matters of language is the European Union. All major languages of Europe are official languages, and most documents are produced in English, French, and German. There is no expectation that the current Portuguese president of the EU read out a German "speech" if he doesn't know the German language himself. He may speak in his native Portuguese or English, and Germans in the audience can get the message through an interpreter.

by Idéfix Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:26 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are cultural aspects of religion and caste that leave nobody untouched, even those of us who are areligious and consider ourselves casteless. this happens even to those who explicitly disavow religion.

True; as an adult I have never considered myself a member of the religious or caste group I was born into. But some cultural aspects of the communities I was born into do influence my outlook, preferences, and biases.

by Idéfix Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:54 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:It is just the strength of feelings for a language, which is after all a mere medium for communicating one's ideas, which surprises me.

I would argue that a language is much more than a mere medium for communicating one's ideas. Languages are repositories of culture and knowledge. This is true at several levels.

First, for literary languages, the body of a culture's literature is a unique representation of its history and heritage. It is impossible to fully translate the mood and meaning of the best works of Telugu literature into English. It is impossible to translate the layers of meaning in Urdu ghazals into English poetry. A thousand additional words of dry commentary will be needed to convey the rich meaning and mood of each couplet or turn of phrase; reading those dry lines of prose commentary will ruin the effect of reading the poetry itself. Each work usually has some references to other works in the collective body of literature, and reading a translation without the context of those other works does not provide the full experience. The languages Telugu and Urdu are essential for an appreciation of the full richness of the work of Gurajada and Ghalib respectively.

Second, language has an influence on one's very manner of thinking. It is not a mere medium for expressing one's thoughts, but it shapes one's thought process.

Third, language has embedded in it a society's body of knowledge accumulated over generations. This is true even for non-literary languages, and this function as a repository of knowledge is distinct from the body of literature in that language. Each language has unique turns of phrase, idioms, proverbs, and constructs that are influenced deeply by the geography, environment, history, economy, polity, cuisine, the arts, etc. of its people. The Inuit languages have many more words for solid precipitation than the Dravidian languages, and English and Portuguese have more words related to seafaring and navigation than do Telugu and Hindi.

All this is not to say that we should try to preserve our languages as they are today. Languages evolve over time, and the marketplace decides how that occurs. I am sure several of India's 600+ census-enumerated languages will disappear during this century. I hope the literary languages survive this change, just as I hope our art forms and cuisine survive modernization.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:28 pm

And Sanskrit has more words for the mind....

Be careful before you are engulfed by chaddism.

Trying to understand the importance of the "three levels" in dakhin when a vendor in Saroornagar says, bendkaa, chikkudkaaa, kaakarkaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

by Propagandhi711 Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:52 pm

panini press wrote:
Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

KV is saying that Deve Gowda should have given his indepence day speeches in Kannada? Do you agree with this? Or are you of the opinion that he should have given them in English--a language which only 5-10 % of Indians understand?
assuming that kannada is the language deve gowda knows best, he should have given the speech in kannada.

I respectfully disagree. There is no point in a Prime Minister addressing his countrymen in a language which most do not understand.
i know that you disagree. i don't know what you mean by "there is no point." the purpose of the speech is to convey an inspiring message to the people of india. no matter what language was used, hundreds of millions of people would not have understood the speech. that's the reality of india. that's not a difficult problem to solve; translation into any number of languages is quite easily done, as it routinely is, in the united nations.
Jerji, it look like you are upset I did not acknowledge your newly rediscovered voice. So let me take this opportunity to formally congratulate you. Congrats Jerji, congrats Sachin, congrats Sonia!

sirji jerji's venom is neutralized by "respectfully disagree" and "without utmost respect"...proper deference and respect to his virile seniority is the the ticket to his continued patronage, even for vile naarthindians

by Merlot Daruwala Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:46 pm

panini press wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:It is just the strength of feelings for a language, which is after all a mere medium for communicating one's ideas, which surprises me.
I would argue that a language is much more than a mere medium for communicating one's ideas. Languages are repositories of culture and knowledge. This is true at several levels.

Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.

panini press wrote:First, for literary languages, the body of a culture's literature is a unique representation of its history and heritage. It is impossible to fully translate the mood and meaning of the best works of Telugu literature into English. It is impossible to translate the layers of meaning in Urdu ghazals into English poetry.

This is circular logic, where you fall in love with the beauty of a specific syntax and set of semantics. No different from how programmers a few decades back used to wax eloquent about the "elegance" of Ada or Pascal. People also fall in love with vintage cars, but I don't see anybody setting fire to themselves demanding more 50-year old cars on the street. Or for their preferred version of classical music to be made some societal standard. It is this obsession with language, that makes it such an emotive issue to people, enough to disregard their own lives, I find puzzling.

panini press wrote:Second, language has an influence on one's very manner of thinking. It is not a mere medium for expressing one's thoughts, but it shapes one's thought process.

There is no denying that regardless of language, every child learns to think. And we have thinkers belonging to every linguistic group. So there is no superior or inferior language in that regard. As long as the parents offer a rich and expressive vocabulary for the child to be able to express itself, I don't see why a specific language should be preferred over some other.

panini press wrote:Third, language has embedded in it a society's body of knowledge accumulated over generations. This is true even for non-literary languages, and this function as a repository of knowledge is distinct from the body of literature in that language. Each language has unique turns of phrase, idioms, proverbs, and constructs that are influenced deeply by the geography, environment, history, economy, polity, cuisine, the arts, etc. of its people. The Inuit languages have many more words for solid precipitation than the Dravidian languages, and English and Portuguese have more words related to seafaring and navigation than do Telugu and Hindi.

True. But as societies evolve, they continually shed the vestiges of an earlier way of life. The farming mankind shed the unique idioms, constructs and milieu of the hunter society and so on. I'm sure my great grand parents who led rural lives would have had an entirely different vocabulary and set of constructs compared to those of my parents who are city-born, although I'm sure they retained those cultural markers which continued to be relevant in the changed milieu, and the process continues with my generation. That is what evolution is all about.

Clinging on to a set of ancestral markers, imagining that it is something precious is irrational. If those were truly precious, they would not have changed and would not require chauvinistic activism or legislative protections and tax-funded subsidies to prop them up. See for example, how Indian cuisine has held its own without any state intervention, with idli and dosa joints flourishing in every corner belying fears of extinction when MacDonald first entered the country.

On the contrary, the Karnataka government has a special Kannada Book Authority, which just goes into the market and buys up Kannada books worth a few crores every year and dumps them into state-run libraries where nobody reads them. And there is a state-funded Sahitya Parishat that routinely makes grandiose statements about the "healthy" state of the Kannada book industry, completely ignoring the facts on the ground.

by Kris Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:58 pm

[quote="Merlot Daruwala"]

panini press wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:It is just the strength of feelings for a language, which is after all a mere medium for communicating one's ideas, which surprises me.
I would argue that a language is much more than a mere medium for communicating one's ideas. Languages are repositories of culture and knowledge. This is true at several levels.

Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.

>>>> I haven't read the whole thread, but in the end this is an emotional issue that does not lend itself to deconstruction. It is for the same reason religion triggers certain emotions in some or patriotism does in others. Insofar as these are personal, it is a 'no harm, no foul' scenario. The problem lies in trying to map this over to broader world views which results in jingoism.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:05 am

Kris wrote:
>>>> I haven't read the whole thread, but in the end this is an emotional issue that does not lend itself to deconstruction. It is for the same reason religion triggers certain emotions in some or patriotism does in others. Insofar as these are personal, it is a 'no harm, no foul' scenario. The problem lies in trying to map this over to broader world views which results in jingoism.

I agree. I was just curious why language raises such passions in people like Max or PP who are otherwise quite dispassionate and rational on traditional emotive issues like religion and nationalism.

Also, to clarify, I'm not referring to resisting Hindi / Sinhala cultural hegemony, which is a good fight. Apart from that, I still see an emotive connection with language which I wanted to explore.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:06 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.

merlot i think you are seriously underestimating the emotive power of language. let me try to illustrate with one of my absolute favorite verses from the poetry of the tamil vaishnavite saint thirupANAzhwar which begins with the line, "koNdal vaNNanai kovalanai veNNai uNda vAyan....". the rest of the verses and the meaning of this poem is not important to what i want to say. but Azhwar begins with the words koNdal vaNNanai to describe lord ranganthan. the words means one who is dark; dark as the clouds laden and pregnant with moisture from the oceans, rivers, and lakes. the imagery that those two words evoke for a people so accustomed to monsoon clouds is not easily translated to english. despite losing my faith, these poems still make my hair stand on end. and they wouldn't sound the same in english or hindi, the two other languages i know. not even close.

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:10 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.

merlot i think you are seriously underestimating the emotive power of language. let me try to illustrate with one of my absolute favorite verses from the poetry of the tamil vaishnavite saint thirupANAzhwar which begins with the line, "koNdal vaNNanai kovalanai veNNai uNda vAyan....". the rest of the verses and the meaning of this poem is not important to what i want to say. but Azhwar begins with the words koNdal vaNNanai to describe lord ranganthan. the words means one who is dark; dark as the clouds laden and pregnant with moisture from the oceans, rivers, and lakes. the imagery that those two words evoke for a people so accustomed to monsoon clouds is not easily translated to english. despite losing my faith, these poems still make my hair stand on end. and they wouldn't sound the same in english or hindi, the two other languages i know. not even close.

The comparison with computer languages is very apt. There are ugly computer languages and elegant and beautiful computer languages.

by bw Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:14 am

i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:15 am

quiz for CM fans - what raga is this viruththam set to?

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:19 am

bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

how much formal exposure do you have to tamil literature compared to your study of english literature? because i do believe fascination is a thing that grows with exposure. there are a lot of people wholly blind to the beauty of mathematics to begin with, but once they have been exposed to some of it, realize what people mean when they say mathematics is beautiful. i feel it's the same thing with literature too.

by Kris Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:22 am

bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

>>>> I cannot tie it to any political issue, maybe because I don't see either of the languages I know well being under any threat (the anti-hispanic crowd's and the KV types' paranoia notwithstanding). However, I must confess to often being moved by poetry as I am by classical architecture. As to food, let's just say the bar is rather high- i.e. needs to be edible Smile

by FluteHolder Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:23 am

The comparison with computer languages is very apt. There are ugly computer languages and elegant and beautiful computer languages.
>>
It is not. Computer languages are for machines while other is for humans who can think/feel/enjoy. They represent culture of the region/history/race and if the language dies the culture/history/race dies. This will be hard to understand to those who enjoy thrusting the language in other's throat either by force or incentives be it Hindians or Sinhalas.

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:29 am

FluteHolder wrote:The comparison with computer languages is very apt. There are ugly computer languages and elegant and beautiful computer languages.
>>
It is not. Computer languages are for machines while other is for humans who can think/feel/enjoy. They represent culture of the region/history/race and if the language dies the culture/history/race dies. This will be hard to understand to those who enjoy thrusting the language in other's throat either by force or incentives be it Hindians or Sinhalas.

Love for a particular computer language can arouse as much passion as love for a natural language. For instance:

http://infohost.nmt.edu/tcc/help/lang/python/vsperl.html

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:30 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
quiz for CM fans - what raga is this viruththam set to?

i had a hard time figuring out what you are saying. then i deeciohered cm means carnatic music and not chief minister jayalalitha

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:32 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
quiz for CM fans - what raga is this viruththam set to?

i had a hard time figuring out what the heck you are saying. then i deeciohered cm means carnatic music and not chief minister jayalalitha

CM = carnatic music, viruththam = singing a poem in tune without percussive accompaniment.
i was assuming a basic familiarity with terminology used on this board.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:34 am

sorry, but i had to get this in. anyone who thinks the passions aroused by natural language with all its associated cultural and literary richness to a computer language is arguing for the sake of it, or is a complete low wattage idiot.

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:40 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:sorry, but i had to get this in. anyone who thinks the passions aroused by natural language with all its associated cultural and literary richness to a computer language is arguing for the sake of it, or is a complete low wattage idiot.

I have witnessed posters flaming each other in online forums because of their love for the computer language of their choice coupled with their contempt or dislike with some other computer language. Very reminiscent of your love for thamizh coupled with your contempt or dislike for Hindi.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:46 am

i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:47 am

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:sorry, but i had to get this in. anyone who thinks the passions aroused by natural language with all its associated cultural and literary richness to a computer language is arguing for the sake of it, or is a complete low wattage idiot.

I have witnessed posters flaming each other in online forums because of their love for the computer language of their choice coupled with their contempt or dislike with some other computer language. Very reminiscent of your love for thamizh coupled with your contempt or dislike for Hindi.

Typically perl programmers admire or at least respect python whereas the typical python programmer has contempt and dislike for perl. This is very representative:

http://sedition.com/a/3054

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:50 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

You have in the past stated that the Hindi language is only a couple of hundred years old and that there is no point in learning hindi unless one is keen to read the stories of Premchand.

by bw Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:52 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

how much formal exposure do you have to tamil literature compared to your study of english literature? because i do believe fascination is a thing that grows with exposure. there are a lot of people wholly blind to the beauty of mathematics to begin with, but once they have been exposed to some of it, realize what people mean when they say mathematics is beautiful. i feel it's the same thing with literature too.

i studied tamil at school only for two years and found it very hard. that's because i moved to madras for my middle school with zero exposure to reading/writing tamil (or hindi). it didn't help that we had a very strict teacher. made me hate the whole experience and despite my mother's attempts to get me interested, i was happy to dump tamil and switch to sanskrit.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:53 am

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

You have in the past stated that the Hindi language is only a couple of hundred years old and that there is no point in learning hindi unless one is keen to read the stories of Premchand.

that was part of a larger discussion of which you have conveniently removed the context. if you are going to quote me, i suggest you do so completely and in context. and even in your selective quote i see neither the word dislike nor hate.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:57 am

bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

how much formal exposure do you have to tamil literature compared to your study of english literature? because i do believe fascination is a thing that grows with exposure. there are a lot of people wholly blind to the beauty of mathematics to begin with, but once they have been exposed to some of it, realize what people mean when they say mathematics is beautiful. i feel it's the same thing with literature too.

i studied tamil at school only for two years and found it very hard. that's because i moved to madras for my middle school with zero exposure to reading/writing tamil (or hindi). it didn't help that we had a very strict teacher. made me hate the whole experience and despite my mother's attempts to get me interested, i was happy to dump tamil and switch to sanskrit.

i studied formal tamil right up to grade twelve and have since kept up studying it on and off on my own as time allows. is it possible for you to grant that our very different responses to the language and its literature are colored by the length of our familiarity with it and our individual experiences with it?

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:57 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

You have in the past stated that the Hindi language is only a couple of hundred years old and that there is no point in learning hindi unless one is keen to read the stories of Premchand.

that was part of a larger discussion of which you have conveniently removed the context. if you are going to quote me, i suggest you do so completely and in context. and even in your selective quote i see neither the word dislike nor hate.

But the words I give is indicative of your contempt for Hindi.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:59 am

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

You have in the past stated that the Hindi language is only a couple of hundred years old and that there is no point in learning hindi unless one is keen to read the stories of Premchand.

that was part of a larger discussion of which you have conveniently removed the context. if you are going to quote me, i suggest you do so completely and in context. and even in your selective quote i see neither the word dislike nor hate.

But the words I give is indicative of your contempt for Hindi.

no it is indicative of your interpretation of what i said. to repeat, i neither like nor dislike hindi.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:05 am

FluteHolder wrote: if the language dies the culture/history/race dies.

Yeah? Pestilence, war, famine and death rain down on that race? If your kids prefer to speak in English rather than Tamil, all of you die?

by Guest Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:05 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't care enough about hindi to even develop an opinion on whether i like it or dislike it. at best i can say i am indifferent to the language itself, although i do have strong opinions about any attempts to impose it.

You have in the past stated that the Hindi language is only a couple of hundred years old and that there is no point in learning hindi unless one is keen to read the stories of Premchand.

that was part of a larger discussion of which you have conveniently removed the context. if you are going to quote me, i suggest you do so completely and in context. and even in your selective quote i see neither the word dislike nor hate.

But the words I give is indicative of your contempt for Hindi.

no it is indicative of your interpretation of what i said. to repeat, i neither like nor dislike hindi.

Then why do you wrongly say that Hindi is a couple of hundred years when we have the 800 year old hindi poetry of Amir Khusrau before us. Why do you say or insinuate that Premchand is the only hindi writer worth reading?

by bw Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:07 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

how much formal exposure do you have to tamil literature compared to your study of english literature? because i do believe fascination is a thing that grows with exposure. there are a lot of people wholly blind to the beauty of mathematics to begin with, but once they have been exposed to some of it, realize what people mean when they say mathematics is beautiful. i feel it's the same thing with literature too.

i studied tamil at school only for two years and found it very hard. that's because i moved to madras for my middle school with zero exposure to reading/writing tamil (or hindi). it didn't help that we had a very strict teacher. made me hate the whole experience and despite my mother's attempts to get me interested, i was happy to dump tamil and switch to sanskrit.

i studied formal tamil right up to grade twelve and have since kept up studying it on and off on my own as time allows. is it possible for you to grant that our very different responses to the language and its literature are colored by the length of our familiarity with it and our individual experiences with it?

granted.

i do not find it unnatural at all that people have an emotional bond with their mother tongue. i am just not one of them, that's all. my kids know not a word of hindi or tamil or any other indian language. never felt the urge to teach them either.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:10 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
quiz for CM fans - what raga is this viruththam set to?

i had a hard time figuring out what you are saying. then i deeciohered cm means carnatic music and not chief minister jayalalitha

Kayal, if you can't understand the castu and sub-castu codes, you don't belong.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:13 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.

I disagree. Computer languages are devised for the sole purpose of efficiently communicating instructions to a computer. They have extremely limited vocabularies, and have well-defined grammars that are far simpler than those of any major human language. Computer languages are designed for a specific purpose, while human languages are the products of several millennia worth of sociocultural evolution.

It is possible to get the story of the Mahabharata from an English translation. The cultural ethos and background are much subtler and cannot be conveyed from a straight English translation. You would need a much longer explanation that wouldn't be as much fun to read to get that accomplished in English, while the very process of learning Sanskrit would expose you to much of the cultural ethos of the people who spoke and wrote in that language.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:It is this obsession with language, that makes it such an emotive issue to people, enough to disregard their own lives, I find puzzling.

I don't get why anyone would try to kill himself over a language. But I think language is certainly more than syntax and semantics.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:True. But as societies evolve, they continually shed the vestiges of an earlier way of life. The farming mankind shed the unique idioms, constructs and milieu of the hunter society and so on. I'm sure my great grand parents who led rural lives would have had an entirely different vocabulary and set of constructs compared to those of my parents who are city-born, although I'm sure they retained those cultural markers which continued to be relevant in the changed milieu, and the process continues with my generation. That is what evolution is all about.

I am all for letting the marketplace decide this evolution. I am opposed to government interference in this process.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:16 am

Kris wrote:>>>> I haven't read the whole thread, but in the end this is an emotional issue that does not lend itself to deconstruction. It is for the same reason religion triggers certain emotions in some or patriotism does in others. Insofar as these are personal, it is a 'no harm, no foul' scenario. The problem lies in trying to map this over to broader world views which results in jingoism.

Yes, this is very true. I am wary of cultural jingoism, and I am also vary of jingoism on the basis of language. This is why I find statements like "my language is better than yours" boorish and ignorant.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:20 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:I agree. I was just curious why language raises such passions in people like Max or PP who are otherwise quite dispassionate and rational on traditional emotive issues like religion and nationalism.

Also, to clarify, I'm not referring to resisting Hindi / Sinhala cultural hegemony, which is a good fight. Apart from that, I still see an emotive connection with language which I wanted to explore.

I believe I am quite rational on the matter of language. I am aware of my emotional attachments to Telugu, Hyderabadi, and Sanskrit, but I don't go out of my way to protect, defend, or even promote them. I have learned other languages besides these due to a personal interest, and I enjoyed learning those languages as well. I am just vigorous in resisting cultural hegemony as you call it.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:23 am

bw wrote:i must be weird. i have never felt a strong urge to defend or protect my language. i have never been fascinated by tamil literature despite having been surrounded by people who couldn't stop waxing poetic about it.

when it comes to food and i hear of people stuffing idlis with eggs and dosa(i)s with panneer, yeah, i have a thing or two to say.

Nothing weird about that... each person latches on to and appreciates different parts of their cultural heritage. To each her own.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:25 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:sorry, but i had to get this in. anyone who thinks the passions aroused by natural language with all its associated cultural and literary richness to a computer language is arguing for the sake of it, or is a complete low wattage idiot.

Let us not the rule out the possibility that it may be both.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:34 am

panini press wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Logically speaking, human languages are no different from computer languages. Like the logic embodied in the latter, the culture and knowledge embodied in one language are very easily ported to another. One's not any poorer reading the English versions of of the Mahabharata or Ramayana versus a native version that our ancestors might have read.
I disagree. Computer languages are devised for the sole purpose of efficiently communicating instructions to a computer. They have extremely limited vocabularies, and have well-defined grammars that are far simpler than those of any major human language. Computer languages are designed for a specific purpose, while human languages are the products of several millennia worth of sociocultural evolution.

More on the differences between computer languages and natural languages. Computer languages are almost entirely syntax and (a small) vocabulary. In contrast, natural languages are much more than syntax and vocabulary. In most literary languages, the greatest writers are those who violated the rules of established syntax and extended the vocabulary. There is very little room for an alankAram or a clever samAsam in a computer language. You can perhaps eke out a labored pun, but it would likely be most inefficient, and therefore looked down upon, to do so.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:46 am

panini press wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:I agree. I was just curious why language raises such passions in people like Max or PP who are otherwise quite dispassionate and rational on traditional emotive issues like religion and nationalism.

Also, to clarify, I'm not referring to resisting Hindi / Sinhala cultural hegemony, which is a good fight. Apart from that, I still see an emotive connection with language which I wanted to explore.
I believe I am quite rational on the matter of language. I am aware of my emotional attachments to Telugu, Hyderabadi, and Sanskrit, but I don't go out of my way to protect, defend, or even promote them. I have learned other languages besides these due to a personal interest, and I enjoyed learning those languages as well. I am just vigorous in resisting cultural hegemony as you call it.

Got it. Thanks.

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com