Jump to content

Talk:Urdu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 August 2024

[edit]

Add this template:

{{Hindustani_language}} 118.172.31.7 (talk) 02:30, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Professor Penguino (talk) 08:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query

[edit]

@Foreverknowledge why edits has been omitted? Jabirttk351 (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reference took information verbatim from Wikipedia, including edits I myself have made about the scripts. Doesn’t meet the criteria for a reference Foreverknowledge (talk) 10:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose you did not check the reference. Mentioned citation very clearly mentioned this. Jabirttk351 (talk) 11:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The cited reference took information from Wikipedia. Foreverknowledge (talk) 11:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I understand. Jabirttk351 (talk) 11:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:CIRCULAR. –Austronesier (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks. Jabirttk351 (talk) 11:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Azmat

[edit]

AAzmat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.56.203.153 (talk) 20:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current Description

[edit]

The current description may not be to the liking of many Wikipedia users and readers because, Urdu has the status of national language and language of public communication (lingua franca) in Pakistan, where it is also the official language, along with English. And the educated population of Pakistan who took over the bureaucracy and finance department of Pakistan, etc. were Urdu speakers, who were Muhajirs. Also, Sir Syed, Liaquat Ali Khan, Ali brothers, etc. are considered important names in the history of Pakistan, all of them spoke Urdu as their mother tongue. Therefore, I request to change this description from "Language spoken in India and Pakistan" to "Language spoken in Pakistan and India" or "Language spoken chiefly in South Asia" so that the people reading it do not feel anything biased or unsatisfying, especially the population of India and Pakistan. Thank you very much. AlidPedian (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Professor Penguino Kindly answer me. I look forward to your reply. AlidPedian (talk) 10:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think changing the short description to "Language spoken chiefly in South Asia" would be good. Unfortunately, the article isn't letting me change it. Professor Penguino (talk) 06:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt anyone is going to perceive bias when they read the words "India and Pakistan" unless they have a huge chip on their shoulder. PepperBeast (talk) 15:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course we did, but the old-India-POV editors, unable to accept the reality
  • that Urdu has declined markedly in its birthplace in India even among many educated Muslim families;
  • that on the BBC Urdu website only 10% of the posters are from addresses in India, the rest no longer able to read the Urdu script, let alone write;
  • that the only country in which Oxford University Press publishes books in Urdu (both pedagogic and literary) is Pakistan;
  • that Bollywood songs with a few words of Urdu in the mix do not constitute Urdu;
  • that the birthplace of a language does not produce mother's milk of the language;
  • that the average person in Pakistan's whose mother tongue is not Urdu is nevertheless able to read, write, and speak Urdu with more skill that the average "Urdu speaker" in India;
  • that in the 75 years since decolonization in South Asia, Pakistan has produced some great Urdu poets, witness, off the top of my head: Faiz Ahmed Faiz, Ada Jafri, Zehra Nigah, Munir Niazi, Nasir Kazmi, Habib Jalib, Ahmad Faraz, Kishwar Naheed, Fahmida Riaz, and Iftikhar Arif, but India, sadly, has produced nothing that can match, only Bollywood songwriters such as Javed Akhtar or Gulzar whom Indians consider to be Urdu poets.
very determinedly never allowed us to change anything in this article and also in Hindustani language, a subterfuge employed in contempory India for expanding the definition of Urdu to include any pidgin-Hindi speaker in India.
PS I don't have a chip on my shoulder. Among other things I have written the FA India).
PPS It's not like I haven't tried. I've certainly collected more sources than anyone before or after. See:
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS Not that anything will change in this page's lead, but the Britannica article on Urdu begins: "Urdu language, member of the Indo-Aryan group within the Indo-European family of languages. Urdu is spoken as a first language by nearly 70 million people and as a second language by more than 100 million people, predominantly in Pakistan and India." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PPS The Oxford English Dictionary entry on Urdu, n. & adj. states: An Indo-Aryan language of northern South Asia (now esp. Pakistan), closely related to Hindi but written in a modified form of the Arabic script ... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I've changed it to South Asia based on the discussion here. Fowler, the death of Urdu in India may be greatly exaggerated - despite the dearth of poets and the overall decline in the number of speakers. There are several Urdu newspapers for example and therefore, presumably, plenty of Urdu speakers. RegentsPark (comment) 15:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Very true, RP, about the newspapers. I've often wondered about that. They are probably read in Muslim neighborthoods, and to that extent, the ghettoization of Muslims in India has perhaps had a salutary effect, for sprinkled among the majority, the newspapers would not have survivived, let lone sprouted anew. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And it is taught presumably widely if to few in the NCERT curriculum. See for example the textbooks from grades one through twelve.
    Perhaps there will be a rebirth, for the script is important in the language, perhaps more so than some other languages. A simple example is place names. In Urdu, the -abad constructions (abad=settled by) are usually two separate words: Feroze Abad, Farrukh Abad, Ghazi Abad, Faisal Abad, ... they give you a glimpse into a cultural history. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Native to

[edit]

@Fowler&fowler @Professor Penguino @Pepperbeast @RegentsPark Thanks for the consideration, I have also noticed that in the "Native to" section of the template, it says "India and Pakistan". I would also like to request that "Pakistan and India" or "Pakistan, Hindi-Urdu Belt, and Deccan" be written here instead, because of the same reason, I provided in my previous request. Thanks once again. 💗 AlidPedian (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Professor Penguino @Fowler&fowler @RegentsPark @Pepperbeast Kindly respond. AlidPedian (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what do you understand by "native to?" Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fowler&fowler If "Native to" refers here to the place where Urdu originated, then only India should be written here, because Urdu originated from there (the present-day Northern India, and not from the present-day Pakistan). Obviously, It is not the case. The article of Turkish language has multiple countries in this section. But if it refers to the places from where this language is flourishing and had significant development, then Pakistan should be written here first (along with India). Because if Modern Standard Urdu is the tenth most-spoken language in the world today, the main reason for this is because it is the national language and lingua franca of Pakistan, and also the significant number of Urdu-speakers, who stayed in India after the partition of India. And that is why I requested that it be written here as "Pakistan and India" or "Pakistan, Hindi-Urdu belt, and Deccan region." AlidPedian (talk) 14:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems "Native to" will become (no matter how you rephrase) a slightly different version of the next argument in the infobox, "Region."
So, unless there is consensus around, something very specific, such as the Muslim military encampments of northeastern Delhi, Ghaziabad, and Muradnagar. (cf. the later, Mughal, "Zaban-e-Urdu-Mualla," language of the exalted camp), or if you want to go back further, viz to Amir Khusrow and list the region of Hazrat Nizamuddin Dargah, Delhi, it is best to leave the "Native to" argument blank. What do you think @RegentsPark: Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on this. As a matter of personal preference, I would leave it blank because languages (natural languages) don't suddenly arise out of nothing. However, if there are definitive sources then that's a different matter. RegentsPark (comment) 16:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]