Andhra Pradesh: 'Hindi played a key role in the freedom struggle'

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

of the tamils of bangalore who have been living here for generations there are those who do not know kannada. however, they do know dakhini which they refer to as hindi, dakhini, or dakhini hindi or dakhini urdu or urdu. The wikipedia article tells me that many of the tamils of bangalore are descendants of migrants from north arcot and south arcot districts of TN. These districts were Nawab of Arcot country and so it is natural that these people were familiar with dakhini hindi (also known as dakhini urdu).

of the northindians on such who have been posting for years, none know tamil or any other indian language besides hindi. however, one of them pontificates ceaselessly about language prescriptions for others. IMO he should STFU, also known as shutting the fuck up.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:Inasmuch as English words used in Tamil (e.g., car, radio etc.,) are not considered Tamil, Sanskrit words used in Tamil (e.g., visesham, vivekam etc.,) are not considered Tamil. These languages have no bearing on Tamil nor do they have any relationship to Tamil. Hindi or Dhakini is totally foreign and unrelated to Tamil.

Unless you learn some rudiments of Tamil, you are incompetent to discuss the relationship Tamil has with any language, let alone Hindi. And it is extremely unlikely that, sitting on that high Hindi horse of yours, you'd even condescend to learn a south indian language to comprehend what is being repeated ad nauseum: "Tamil has no relationship to Dhakini or any other variant of Hindi". All you have done is to make excuses as to why you haven't learned even a smattering of the Tamil lexicon.

On the contrary everyday tamil words like 'neer' (for water) are of sanskrit origin. Moreover the first text on tamil grammar (Tolkappiyam) acknowledges its debt to sanskrit.

the last word in this yet to be written. one profitable approach to research in this area is to compare vedic sanskrit (VS) with modern sanskrit (MS). all words in MS not present in VS should be subjected to a rigorous examination of its origins. we already know from the work of the eminent dravidian linguist the late bhadriraju krishnamurthy that dravidian languages have been rich sources of loan words to MS. other sources could be languages like munda. i doubt neer is originally from VS.

truthbetold wrote:I lived in Bangalore and worked with tamils. yes. there is friction between tamils and locals. but all most all tamils speak Kannada while a lot of ni types clai.m ig.norance of Kannada

bw wrote:6 pages?

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:Inasmuch as English words used in Tamil (e.g., car, radio etc.,) are not considered Tamil, Sanskrit words used in Tamil (e.g., visesham, vivekam etc.,) are not considered Tamil. These languages have no bearing on Tamil nor do they have any relationship to Tamil. Hindi or Dhakini is totally foreign and unrelated to Tamil.

Unless you learn some rudiments of Tamil, you are incompetent to discuss the relationship Tamil has with any language, let alone Hindi. And it is extremely unlikely that, sitting on that high Hindi horse of yours, you'd even condescend to learn a south indian language to comprehend what is being repeated ad nauseum: "Tamil has no relationship to Dhakini or any other variant of Hindi". All you have done is to make excuses as to why you haven't learned even a smattering of the Tamil lexicon.

On the contrary everyday tamil words like 'neer' (for water) are of sanskrit origin. Moreover the first text on tamil grammar (Tolkappiyam) acknowledges its debt to sanskrit.

the last word in this yet to be written. one profitable approach to research in this area is to compare vedic sanskrit (VS) with modern sanskrit (MS). all words in MS not present in VS should be subjected to a rigorous examination of its origins. we already know from the work of the eminent dravidian linguist the late bhadriraju krishnamurthy that dravidian languages have been rich sources of loan words to MS. other sources could be languages like munda. i doubt neer is originally from VS.

i don't agree with your approach. the reason is that even the Rig Veda contains words which are believed to be of dravidian origin. It could in fact be that words of dravidian origin which are present in Vedic sanskrit were later eschewed or avoided in classical sanskrit.

panini press wrote:Master Rashmun claims that Bangalore was once part of Madras state. Madras state existed as a political entity between independence and states' reorganization in 1956. Here is a helpful map of southern India during that period.



The blue line indicates the borders of modern Karnataka. Identifying the location of Bangalore on this map is left as an exercise for Master Rashmun.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
Currently, there is more need for bhaiyyas to learn Marati, Tamil, Telugu and Kannada than for SIs to learn any cowbelt language.

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:If India breaks down as a political entity, Hindi will go the place of Persian, Sanskrit.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:If India breaks down as a political entity, Hindi will go the place of Persian, Sanskrit.

not quite. persian, sanskrit, and tamil are ancient languages with a rich body of classical literature which have stood the test of time. hindi is a relatively recent language which has not had time to build up the kind of textual literature that p,s, and t have had. so if it dies it won't go the way of s. it will just go. by the way persian is still very much alive and kicking in iran.

but thanks for the report about the northindian blue collar workers in chennai.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:
I was just pointing out that being cliquish causes resentment. My aim was to provide some constructive criticism.

the most cliquish behavior i have seen is that of IIT madras professors, CSIR scientists in chennai, and various bureaucrats and functionaries working in central govt organizations in chennai of northindian origin. they live in enclaves surrounded by their own kind, never venturing out in public, getting their everyday business done through household help, and never learning a stitch of tamil despite living in chennai for decades. the men are by far much worse than the women who are forced to learn a few words to survive. that is the definition of cliquish behavior.

please use this as constructive criticism.

I have heard a similar complaint from kanandigas about tamilians in bangalore. They say that many tamils born and brought up in bangalore do not know kannada.

truthbetold wrote:Ps,
what is this once india breaks down as a political entity? Why is that considered a possibility large enough to think about consequences?

goodcitizn wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:
I was just pointing out that being cliquish causes resentment. My aim was to provide some constructive criticism.

the most cliquish behavior i have seen is that of IIT madras professors, CSIR scientists in chennai, and various bureaucrats and functionaries working in central govt organizations in chennai of northindian origin. they live in enclaves surrounded by their own kind, never venturing out in public, getting their everyday business done through household help, and never learning a stitch of tamil despite living in chennai for decades. the men are by far much worse than the women who are forced to learn a few words to survive. that is the definition of cliquish behavior.

please use this as constructive criticism.

I have heard a similar complaint from kanandigas about tamilians in bangalore. They say that many tamils born and brought up in bangalore do not know kannada.

Coincidentally I am visiting Bangalore. Although I come here infrequently my fluency in Kannada is getting better each time to the point where I can shop in Malleswaram and other places speaking only in the local tongue. My parents moved here from Tamil Nadu after retirement. My mother, as was my late father, is extremely fluent in Kannada. She even gets Kannada magazines as she has become quite literate in that language. The same goes for a number of my relatives and friends who came to this state from elsewhere. That is NOT the case with most, if not all, north indians who continue to show great reluctance to learning the local language saying that their Hindi is sufficient to get by. I have even heard some of them say that it is unIndian not to know Hindi, touting it to be the national language when the truth is to the contrary. The problem I have with you is your "Ostrich's head in the sand" mentality. You continue to make blatant statements casting a blind eye to ground reality.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:Master Rashmun claims that Bangalore was once part of Madras state. Madras state existed as a political entity between independence and states' reorganization in 1956. Here is a helpful map of southern India during that period.



The blue line indicates the borders of modern Karnataka. Identifying the location of Bangalore on this map is left as an exercise for Master Rashmun.

Surprising that Telanganites are only targeting coastal guys in their demand for a separate state. They should attack Maharashtra and Karnataka as well!

panini press wrote:The Rashmun Method yields some interesting results when applied to history. Here are some of the recent ones:

1. Bangalore was part of Madras State.
2. The city of Madras was once ruled by the Nawab of Arcot. The British founded the city, but somehow the Nawab of Arcot became its ruler at some point.
3. The Nizam banned the Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen in 1946. India still asked him to ban it again in March 1948!
4. Maratha rule did not extend to Uttar Pradesh.

Keep them coming, Master Rashmun!

Rashmun wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:
I was just pointing out that being cliquish causes resentment. My aim was to provide some constructive criticism.

the most cliquish behavior i have seen is that of IIT madras professors, CSIR scientists in chennai, and various bureaucrats and functionaries working in central govt organizations in chennai of northindian origin. they live in enclaves surrounded by their own kind, never venturing out in public, getting their everyday business done through household help, and never learning a stitch of tamil despite living in chennai for decades. the men are by far much worse than the women who are forced to learn a few words to survive. that is the definition of cliquish behavior.

please use this as constructive criticism.

I have heard a similar complaint from kanandigas about tamilians in bangalore. They say that many tamils born and brought up in bangalore do not know kannada.

Coincidentally I am visiting Bangalore. Although I come here infrequently my fluency in Kannada is getting better each time to the point where I can shop in Malleswaram and other places speaking only in the local tongue. My parents moved here from Tamil Nadu after retirement. My mother, as was my late father, is extremely fluent in Kannada. She even gets Kannada magazines as she has become quite literate in that language. The same goes for a number of my relatives and friends who came to this state from elsewhere. That is NOT the case with most, if not all, north indians who continue to show great reluctance to learning the local language saying that their Hindi is sufficient to get by. I have even heard some of them say that it is unIndian not to know Hindi, touting it to be the national language when the truth is to the contrary. The problem I have with you is your "Ostrich's head in the sand" mentality. You continue to make blatant statements casting a blind eye to ground reality.

Why do kannadigas have a problem with tamils who do not know kannadiga, but not with north indians who do not know kannadiga? One explanation is that they consider hindi to be their second language since it exists in their great state in the form of the southern indian language Dakhini.

Rashmun wrote:
I’d like to enlighten all the ill-enlightened Bangaloreans that the urdu you think is the urdu we speak is not the urdu we speak. The urdu you speak thinking it’s the urdu we speak is the urdu I like to call the “autowala urdu”. When we respond to you the same way you speak to us (like confident tannery road goondas), it’s because we are indulging you and having a laugh at your expense. Not because that’s the way we really speak.

It’s not what you say. You have got the gist of it. You just don’t know how to construct your sentences. It’s actually the accent you speak in that’s really funny. For instance you will say “hamme jakko vahn tairya Ta”.

Sorry. It should be “Mai jaako vhan thairya tha.” That is if you are speaking middle grade.
Sophisticated grade would be “Mai jaako vhan khadko tha.”
Crass grade would be “Mai jaako vhan japleko tha.”

And what we speak is not even urdu as much as it is what is loosely called “Dakhni”. Yes, it’s a dialect spoken in “Deccan” India. Snigger if you want – but it has its own grades of sophistication, variations, intonations, and accents. Like the rest of the world, we will judge you on your usages, pronunciations, and sentence constructions. And when Dakhni speakers say something – most often you can place them immediately - based on all the parameters listed above. I can tell you if you are from Bidar, Cuttack, Chennai, Virajpet, Bangalore, Bangalore – Shivajinagar, Bangalore – Jaynagar, Bangalore – Kalasipalya, Bangalore – Cantonment, or Bangalore – confused identity. The way you can place a North Kannadiga by their Kannada? That way only.

If you are a hindi speaker – a good thumb rule to speaking dakhni is merging two words to make one. We are kinda lazy that way. So “Aa kar” becomes “Aako” “Aati hoon” becomes “Aatiyun” and “Ja raha hoon” becomes “Jaroon”

So now that you are sufficiently educated. Let’s get to the fun part! Don’t get so stuck with the so so and ba ba. I’ll teach you some really fun words. At the end of this, you will be able to learn a really fun sentence you can use on your dakhni-speaking friends.

PISSED WITH SOMEONE?

Masti – Masti for the dakhnis does not mean fun as it does in Hindi. It’s actually used to refer to someone with too much attitude. Equal to the Kannada “kobbu”. Use it like “unku khoob masti” for your seniors or “usey khoob masti” for your peers.
Maatimilla (male) Maatimilli (female) – Literally translated means the one who has merged with the mud/one who is worth rubbing his face in the mud.
Diwani Bala (female) – What your amma will call you when you piss her off. It translates to the mad woman who embodies an evil spirit.
Diwani Rand (female) – What your amma will call you when you piss her off beyond redemption. It translates to mad erm. Let’s keep it clean. You know what it means.
Khadmoot(male) – Literally translated it means 'the man who pees standing'. But it's an insulting word because in our community standing and peeing is considered uncultured and disgusting. So, a 'khadmoot' is an uncouth who indulges in his own pleasures.


WANT TO GET DESCRIPTIVE?

Kangi-choti-haa-hoo – Literally translates to “Comb-plait-ooh-aah”. But what it really means is that you got all dressed up for nothing.
Martingdi (female) Martingda (male) – Describes a very emaciated person
Potta (male) Potti (female) – A manner in which to refer to young people. It implies that they are prone to the unruly ways and attitudes and temptations of youth. It can be used both scornfully and playfully. And often used collectively as potta-pottiyan.
Diwane shah - Literally translated means 'The Mad Duke'. Often also used as "crack shah". So you might just want to call out to someone "Aji, O diwane shah, idhar aao".
Khadi – Means upright. Typically used to prefix laat which means kick.
Dum latka le ko – Doing something with your tail dangling. Often shortened to “Latka le ko”


WANT TO GET EMOTIVE?

Kheench ko – Describes the way you would cause harm to someone – slap, kick, etc. Alternatively you can use “Thaid kar ko”. But you have to say it with a lot of stress on the vowels. So phonetically it will sound “KHEEEEENCH ko” or “ThAAAIIIDDD karko”. Kheench ko actually translates to pull hard. So your sentence would go something like this “Kheench ko ek laat martiyun”. Which means that I am going to pull hard and give you one kick.
Chittad – Means Ass. Of the hindquarters kind. So ‘I am going to pull hard and kick his ass’ translates to “Mai use kheench ko chittad po ek laat martiyun”
Speaking of chittad. There is a fun something we say to ask someone to get lost in a very colourful way. “Bhains ki chittad, kheench ko kattar”. Translates to “Pull the buffalo’s ass hard and bite it”. There is a way of saying it. Imagine you are saying this to a jungle drumbeat. In the ta-ka-takara-takarataka hoo haa hoo haa rhythm.Bhains-ki-chittadkheench-ko-kattar. Bhains-ki-chittadkheench-ko-kattar.


SO THIS IS HOW YOU PUT IT IN A SENTENCE

If you are going to speak to a guy say:


“Kya re martingde maatimille. Khoob masti ki tujhe. Ab aako tere chittad po kheeeench ko ek khadi laat detun dekh. Phir pottiyan ke saka ‘kangi-choti-haa-hoo’ karko roleko baithinga”

Translates – What you emaciated mud mixer. You got too much attitude is it? Just wait and watch, I am going to come and pull hard, and give you one upright kick on your arse. Then you will sit like a young errant girl crying comb-plait-ha-hoo.

If you are targetting a girl say:


“Kya ge maatimilli. Woh khadmoot potte se baatan karleko ko thi so? Kheench ko ek khadi laat chittad pe maroongi. Ja ab bhains ki chittad, kheench ko kattar. Aur hamna bhi zari lako de.”

Translates – What you mud mixer, were you talking to that errant boy who pees standing? I am going to pull hard and give you one standing kick on your arse. Go, go pull the buffalo’s arse and chomp on it. And give us some too!”

If you are truly interested in Dakhni as a language check this out. And if you want to formulate more colourful sentences, you may contact me directly .

THE END.

http://www.zanyoutbursts.com/2011/04/kya-ba-so-ba-ji-ji-learning-to-speak.html

Rashmun wrote: What is Dakhni?

Dakhni is the lingua franca of the Deccan. The Deccan is roughly the area between the Narmada and Tungabhadra or Krishna. On the east it is bounded by the Mahanadi and on the west by the Western Ghats. It is the great South Indian plateau. Politically it is comprised of Berar (present-day Vidarbha with Nagpur as its important city), ten Telangana districts of Andhra Pradesh, the Maharashtra districts of Latur, Nanded, Ahmednagar, Beed and Aurngabad, and the Karnataka districts of Bijapur, Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bellary.

However as a spoken language Dakhni is widely used even outside this region. It is the lingua franca of all the Muslims in South India and is understood by all those who have access to Hindi. In many Hindi films, Dakhni words and dialogues are used and in films like ‘Hero Hiralal’ and ‘Sushman’, Dakhni was the main language. Recent films like ‘Angrez’ and ‘Hyderabadi Nawab’ also use Dakhni profusely. There are no current census figures for speakers of Dakhni because no one reports Dakhni as a mother tongue. Still the estimates of Dakhni speakers will run into crores, because its variants are spoken in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamilnadu. As folk tradition, in the urs of Sufi saints, in the songs used by beggars and fakirs, Dakhni is still widely used.

Linguistically it is a variant of Khari Boli as spoken in the Meerat region in U. P. However it has some specific differences. For “no’ it uses nako instead of nahin, for the word ‘only’ as used in Indian English it uses cha instead of hee and for OK it uses hau instead of han. In terms of vocabulary, up to 30% is constituted of local words so that in Telangana it has Telugu words, in Karnataka Kannada words and in Maharashtra Marathi and so on. As a rule, it is the first language of the Muslims in the region but most people exhibits bilingualism.

[url=http://www.bangalorenotes.com/dakhni.htm

goodcitizn wrote:

Rashmun wrote: What is Dakhni?

Dakhni is the lingua franca of the Deccan. The Deccan is roughly the area between the Narmada and Tungabhadra or Krishna. On the east it is bounded by the Mahanadi and on the west by the Western Ghats. It is the great South Indian plateau. Politically it is comprised of Berar (present-day Vidarbha with Nagpur as its important city), ten Telangana districts of Andhra Pradesh, the Maharashtra districts of Latur, Nanded, Ahmednagar, Beed and Aurngabad, and the Karnataka districts of Bijapur, Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bellary.

However as a spoken language Dakhni is widely used even outside this region. It is the lingua franca of all the Muslims in South India and is understood by all those who have access to Hindi. In many Hindi films, Dakhni words and dialogues are used and in films like ‘Hero Hiralal’ and ‘Sushman’, Dakhni was the main language. Recent films like ‘Angrez’ and ‘Hyderabadi Nawab’ also use Dakhni profusely. There are no current census figures for speakers of Dakhni because no one reports Dakhni as a mother tongue. Still the estimates of Dakhni speakers will run into crores, because its variants are spoken in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamilnadu. As folk tradition, in the urs of Sufi saints, in the songs used by beggars and fakirs, Dakhni is still widely used.

Linguistically it is a variant of Khari Boli as spoken in the Meerat region in U. P. However it has some specific differences. For “no’ it uses nako instead of nahin, for the word ‘only’ as used in Indian English it uses cha instead of hee and for OK it uses hau instead of han. In terms of vocabulary, up to 30% is constituted of local words so that in Telangana it has Telugu words, in Karnataka Kannada words and in Maharashtra Marathi and so on. As a rule, it is the first language of the Muslims in the region but most people exhibits bilingualism.

[url=http://www.bangalorenotes.com/dakhni.htm

http://www.bangalorenotes.com/dakhni.htm[/quote[/url]]

One of our neighbors in Bangalore is Sri. Raghavendra who is a retired teacher from Shantiniketan High School. He came to visit my mother for Sankaranti celebration. I was curious about Dhakini and asked him about its influence on Kannada. I didn't realize that the insinuation of a muslim-based language as being an integral part of Kannada would infuriate him. But it did. I don't know if it was due to his religious belief or cultural pride. At any rate, he categorically denied Dhakini having any place in Kannada literature. Apparently, he has an advanced degree in Kannada and had collaborated with Mr. Satyanarayana (father of late acress Soundarya) who was a Kannada writer for movies, well-versed in Kannada. His comment was that Kannada is a unique south indian language that has ties with Tamil and Sanskrit etymologically but has absolutely no connection with any variant of Hindi, Urdu or Dhakini. "Colloquial Kannada is tainted because of the influx of northerners over the years," he said, "but not Kannada literature."

I go for long walks early in the mornings down Rajkumar Road (a major highway in Rajaji Nagar) where shops and business firms are located on both sides of the street. Almost all the sign boards are in Kannada with English thrown in infrequenly but no Hindi. The only one that had all three languages was the Bank of Baroda. That says something about the languages considered most useful by Kannadigas.

Frankly, I am getting a little tired of reading your recycled, dog-eared, moth-eaten, termite-ridden Dhakini Muckini posts. I am not interested in buying any bridge from Brooklyn.

goodcitizn wrote:

Rashmun wrote: What is Dakhni?

Dakhni is the lingua franca of the Deccan. The Deccan is roughly the area between the Narmada and Tungabhadra or Krishna. On the east it is bounded by the Mahanadi and on the west by the Western Ghats. It is the great South Indian plateau. Politically it is comprised of Berar (present-day Vidarbha with Nagpur as its important city), ten Telangana districts of Andhra Pradesh, the Maharashtra districts of Latur, Nanded, Ahmednagar, Beed and Aurngabad, and the Karnataka districts of Bijapur, Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bellary.

However as a spoken language Dakhni is widely used even outside this region. It is the lingua franca of all the Muslims in South India and is understood by all those who have access to Hindi. In many Hindi films, Dakhni words and dialogues are used and in films like ‘Hero Hiralal’ and ‘Sushman’, Dakhni was the main language. Recent films like ‘Angrez’ and ‘Hyderabadi Nawab’ also use Dakhni profusely. There are no current census figures for speakers of Dakhni because no one reports Dakhni as a mother tongue. Still the estimates of Dakhni speakers will run into crores, because its variants are spoken in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamilnadu. As folk tradition, in the urs of Sufi saints, in the songs used by beggars and fakirs, Dakhni is still widely used.

Linguistically it is a variant of Khari Boli as spoken in the Meerat region in U. P. However it has some specific differences. For “no’ it uses nako instead of nahin, for the word ‘only’ as used in Indian English it uses cha instead of hee and for OK it uses hau instead of han. In terms of vocabulary, up to 30% is constituted of local words so that in Telangana it has Telugu words, in Karnataka Kannada words and in Maharashtra Marathi and so on. As a rule, it is the first language of the Muslims in the region but most people exhibits bilingualism.

http://www.bangalorenotes.com/dakhni.htm[/quote]

One of our neighbors in Bangalore is Sri. Raghavendra who is a retired teacher from Shantiniketan High School. He came to visit my mother for Sankaranti celebration. I was curious about Dhakini and asked him about its influence on Kannada. I didn't realize that the insinuation of a muslim-based language as being an integral part of Kannada would infuriate him. But it did. I don't know if it was due to his religious belief or cultural pride. At any rate, he categorically denied Dhakini having any place in Kannada literature. Apparently, he has an advanced degree in Kannada and had collaborated with Mr. Satyanarayana (father of late acress Soundarya) who was a Kannada writer for movies, well-versed in Kannada. His comment was that Kannada is a unique south indian language that has ties with Tamil and Sanskrit etymologically but has absolutely no connection with any variant of Hindi, Urdu or Dhakini. "Colloquial Kannada is tainted because of the influx of northerners over the years," he said, "but not Kannada literature."

I go for long walks early in the mornings down Rajkumar Road (a major highway in Rajaji Nagar) where shops and business firms are located on both sides of the street. Almost all the sign boards are in Kannada with English thrown in infrequenly but no Hindi. The only one that had all three languages was the Bank of Baroda. That says something about the languages considered most useful by Kannadigas.

Frankly, I am getting a little tired of reading your recycled, dog-eared, moth-eaten, termite-ridden Dhakini Muckini posts. I am not interested in buying any bridge from Brooklyn.

your prejudice and bias shines through and through. instead of walking up and down rajaji nagar, go to the shiva temple at marathahalli and see the hindi signboard in front of it (the signboard displays writing in three languages--english, kannada, and hindi). all the shops in marathalli and indranagar have signboards in english because they cater to the upper strata of society. talk to vegetable sellers and fruit sellers (and coconut sellers) and autowalahs and barbers in hindi--wait, you probably are unable to communicate in hindi.

Colloquial Kannada is the language of the people just as colloquial hindi and colloquial urdu is the language of the common people. Literary kannada, literary tamil, literary hindi, etc. are for the educated elite and not for the common people. I am getting tired of dealing with your patently prejudiced and jaundiced mindset.

Finally, the fact that kannadigas respect hindi is evident when you go to the websites of bangalore based institutes and organizations like IISC, HAL, etc.

http://hal-india.com/aboutus.asp

http://www.iisc.ernet.in/

The IISC website has a hindi version but not a kannada version--probably enough to make you and your friend puke.

Rashmun wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:

Rashmun wrote: What is Dakhni?

Dakhni is the lingua franca of the Deccan. The Deccan is roughly the area between the Narmada and Tungabhadra or Krishna. On the east it is bounded by the Mahanadi and on the west by the Western Ghats. It is the great South Indian plateau. Politically it is comprised of Berar (present-day Vidarbha with Nagpur as its important city), ten Telangana districts of Andhra Pradesh, the Maharashtra districts of Latur, Nanded, Ahmednagar, Beed and Aurngabad, and the Karnataka districts of Bijapur, Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bellary.

However as a spoken language Dakhni is widely used even outside this region. It is the lingua franca of all the Muslims in South India and is understood by all those who have access to Hindi. In many Hindi films, Dakhni words and dialogues are used and in films like ‘Hero Hiralal’ and ‘Sushman’, Dakhni was the main language. Recent films like ‘Angrez’ and ‘Hyderabadi Nawab’ also use Dakhni profusely. There are no current census figures for speakers of Dakhni because no one reports Dakhni as a mother tongue. Still the estimates of Dakhni speakers will run into crores, because its variants are spoken in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamilnadu. As folk tradition, in the urs of Sufi saints, in the songs used by beggars and fakirs, Dakhni is still widely used.

Linguistically it is a variant of Khari Boli as spoken in the Meerat region in U. P. However it has some specific differences. For “no’ it uses nako instead of nahin, for the word ‘only’ as used in Indian English it uses cha instead of hee and for OK it uses hau instead of han. In terms of vocabulary, up to 30% is constituted of local words so that in Telangana it has Telugu words, in Karnataka Kannada words and in Maharashtra Marathi and so on. As a rule, it is the first language of the Muslims in the region but most people exhibits bilingualism.

http://www.bangalorenotes.com/dakhni.htm[/quote]

One of our neighbors in Bangalore is Sri. Raghavendra who is a retired teacher from Shantiniketan High School. He came to visit my mother for Sankaranti celebration. I was curious about Dhakini and asked him about its influence on Kannada. I didn't realize that the insinuation of a muslim-based language as being an integral part of Kannada would infuriate him. But it did. I don't know if it was due to his religious belief or cultural pride. At any rate, he categorically denied Dhakini having any place in Kannada literature. Apparently, he has an advanced degree in Kannada and had collaborated with Mr. Satyanarayana (father of late acress Soundarya) who was a Kannada writer for movies, well-versed in Kannada. His comment was that Kannada is a unique south indian language that has ties with Tamil and Sanskrit etymologically but has absolutely no connection with any variant of Hindi, Urdu or Dhakini. "Colloquial Kannada is tainted because of the influx of northerners over the years," he said, "but not Kannada literature."

I go for long walks early in the mornings down Rajkumar Road (a major highway in Rajaji Nagar) where shops and business firms are located on both sides of the street. Almost all the sign boards are in Kannada with English thrown in infrequenly but no Hindi. The only one that had all three languages was the Bank of Baroda. That says something about the languages considered most useful by Kannadigas.

Frankly, I am getting a little tired of reading your recycled, dog-eared, moth-eaten, termite-ridden Dhakini Muckini posts. I am not interested in buying any bridge from Brooklyn.

your prejudice and bias shines through and through. instead of walking up and down rajaji nagar, go to the shiva temple at marathahalli and see the hindi signboard in front of it (the signboard displays writing in three languages--english, kannada, and hindi). all the shops in marathalli and indranagar have signboards in english because they cater to the upper strata of society. talk to vegetable sellers and fruit sellers (and coconut sellers) and autowalahs and barbers in hindi--wait, you probably are unable to communicate in hindi.

Colloquial Kannada is the language of the people just as colloquial hindi and colloquial urdu is the language of the common people. Literary kannada, literary tamil, literary hindi, etc. are for the educated elite and not for the common people. I am getting tired of dealing with your patently prejudiced and jaundiced mindset.

Finally, the fact that kannadigas respect hindi is evident when you go to the websites of bangalore based institutes and organizations like IISC, HAL, etc.

http://hal-india.com/aboutus.asp

http://www.iisc.ernet.in/

The IISC website has a hindi version but not a kannada version--probably enough to make you and your friend puke.

Why should I puke seeing Hindi? I have no aversion to Hindi. Unlike you who lived in Karnataka for years, yet unable to read or speak Kannada, I can get by speaking a little Hindi, if need be, having not lived anywhere in north india except for a few months in Delhi as an exchage student from Madras Christian College to St. Stephens. I can also read Hindi. It is you who are prejudiced in that you consider Hindi to be enough to serve as a link language so you don't have to learn any other south indian language. Dhakini is just an excuse for you to sell your bunch of baloney.

goodcitizn wrote: I am not interested in buying any bridge from Brooklyn.

Rashmun wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:Master Rashmun claims that Bangalore was once part of Madras state. Madras state existed as a political entity between independence and states' reorganization in 1956. Here is a helpful map of southern India during that period.



The blue line indicates the borders of modern Karnataka. Identifying the location of Bangalore on this map is left as an exercise for Master Rashmun.

Surprising that Telanganites are only targeting coastal guys in their demand for a separate state. They should attack Maharashtra and Karnataka as well!

The map given by the Mudboy is for 1956. Here is the 1854 map:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:Master Rashmun claims that Bangalore was once part of Madras state. Madras state existed as a political entity between independence and states' reorganization in 1956. Here is a helpful map of southern India during that period.



The blue line indicates the borders of modern Karnataka. Identifying the location of Bangalore on this map is left as an exercise for Master Rashmun.

Surprising that Telanganites are only targeting coastal guys in their demand for a separate state. They should attack Maharashtra and Karnataka as well!

The map given by the Mudboy is for 1956. Here is the 1854 map:

Master Rashmun, Madras state existed from 1947 to 1969. In 1969, the name of Madras state was changed to Tamil Nadu. You claimed that Bangalore was part of Madras state. It never was. Hope that helps. Incorrect maps from 1854 are not germane to your original claim.

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Rashmun wrote:you are now quarreling over trivialities

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Third point: The link you give does not say anything along the lines of what you claim i said. is this a case of Liar Liar pants on fire i.e. an example of the by now discredited PP Method?

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Fourth point: What i meant was that Marathas had not conquered the whole of uttar pradesh, not even a substantial portion of present day Uttar Pradesh. I clarified this in subsequent posts.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Second point: The huge land donations by the Nawabs of Arcot for churches, temples, mosques, educational institutions etc. in Chennai would not have been possible if Chennai would have been under British rule throughout. The official Nawab of Arcots website also says that they were ruling Chennai (at least for some time)

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Fourth point: What i meant was that Marathas had not conquered the whole of uttar pradesh, not even a substantial portion of present day Uttar Pradesh. I clarified this in subsequent posts.

Any intelligent person who reads your original post can understand what you meant, and why you needed at all to make further "clarifications" to it .

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Second point: The huge land donations by the Nawabs of Arcot for churches, temples, mosques, educational institutions etc. in Chennai would not have been possible if Chennai would have been under British rule throughout. The official Nawab of Arcots website also says that they were ruling Chennai (at least for some time)

It doesn't as far as I recall; it says that the princeling lived in Chennai.

panini press wrote:On the status of Bangalore, I have already told you why you are wrong. Bangalore Cantonment was like Secunderabad Cantonment -- a British garrison in a princely state. Those garrisons were not part of any presidency.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Third point: The link you give does not say anything along the lines of what you claim i said. is this a case of Liar Liar pants on fire i.e. an example of the by now discredited PP Method?

https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:1. I said parts of modern Bangalore were definitely part of Madras state, in particular Bangalore cantonment.

They never were. See above.

Rashmun wrote:2. At one point of time the Nawab of Arcot ruled the city of Madras. That is why they were able to give the land for the temple tank at Kapaleeshwar temple and also helped build Parathasarathi temple and various other temples, mosques, and churches.

You don't need to rule a place to donate land in that place. Nawab of Arcot never ruled the city of Chennai.

Rashmun wrote:3. I do not recall saying this.

Well, you did: https://such.forumotion.com/t5819p150-nizam-s-generous-side-and-love-for-books#46504.
Rashmun: 3. In 1946, the Nizam banned the Majlis.

Rashmun wrote:4. What i explained was that between two thirds and three fourths of modern UP was a part of the State of Awadh (Oudh).

Here is what you said: https://such.forumotion.com/t8208-up-vs-south-india-during-1857#62109

Rashmun: Maratha rule did extend upto parts of Madhya Pradesh but i do not believe it extended upto Uttar Pradesh.

Go ahead and try to walk that back.

Second point: The huge land donations by the Nawabs of Arcot for churches, temples, mosques, educational institutions etc. in Chennai would not have been possible if Chennai would have been under British rule throughout. The official Nawab of Arcots website also says that they were ruling Chennai (at least for some time)

It doesn't as far as I recall; it says that the princeling lived in Chennai.

your memory has failed you. nothing unusual.

Rashmun wrote:In a way i was quoting someone and not stating anything myself.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:In a way i was quoting someone and not stating anything myself.

Thanks for summarizing the vast majority of your posts on all topics.