Chennai: At a time when states including Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra and West Bengal are up against the three-language policy, Prime Minister Narendra Modi...
Remarks come amid strain in ties between BJP, its ideological parent. Just this week, RSS sarsanghachalak said quality healthcare, education were becoming unaffordable for average Indian.
New Delhi: Operation Sindoor was centre stage in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 79th Independence Day address from the Red Fort on Friday, highlighting India’s...
New Delhi: Amid the American tariff hike, PM Narendra Modi in his 12th consecutive Independence Day speech reiterated that India will not compromise on...
Modi reinforced his previous recommendations to address the crisis, urging families to purchase 10% less cooking oil, and reduce its consumption by the same margin on a regular basis.
Highlighting the various recent natural disaster, the prime minister in his I-Day address expressed solidarity for those affected & said the centre and state governments were closely monitoring the situation.
President of India has honoured 16 BSF personnel with gallantry medals for show of exemplary courage in the 87-hour ‘war’ between India and Pakistan that followed the launch of Op Sindoor.
The 'ghuspaithiya' narrative is being whipped up precisely when illegal immigration has actually diminished. Like most BJP-RSS ideas, it’s just an unimaginative Right-wing trope.
With non-leather products driving global footwear demand between 2020 and 2024, India’s global market share stood at 1.85% in 2024, says a NITI Aayog report.
ISKP, a sub-continental branch of the Islamic State, is said to have vowed to extend operations in Kashmir, on encouragement from Pakistan’s security establishment.
Pakistan’s army has been a rentier force available to a reasonable bidder. It has never come to the aid of any Muslims including Palestinians or the Gazans, except making noises here and there.
Let us be a bit braver here.
Bharatiya languages coexisted for centuries, never saw feuds like this.
Then, two things happened:
(1) Urdu was born as a direct consequence of Rasulullah (SAWS)’s OG two-nation theory – believers being supposed to differentiate themselves from non-believers in every aspect (including language). You can see this in Urdu, e.g. Urdu people will set themselves apart form Hindi-speakers by even things as petty as minor pronunciation differences (e.g. prārthanā –> prāthnā , parvat –> parbat, etc.), and of course the entire Perso-Arabicisation that is obvious at a first glance.
Significance: This is the beginning of the idea of language as a marker of communal identity, separate from and antithetical to that in the immediate environment (I am not pro-homogenisation, so I reject the idea of “one” mainstream – but the difference here is intended to set oneself apart, or really stick out [like a sore thumb sometimes] from one’s immediate surroundings).
(2) The advent of English which came with a clear hierarchy, where all languages of the uncivilised “orient” were inferior, rustic, backward, and not worth studying or using in education, science, official purposes etc.
Significance: Combined with the rise of British power, the capture of education by missionary and colonialist forces over a couple of centuries gradually led to the internalisation of the hierarchy of world languages, where English is at the top, and other western languages a close second, with Bharatiya languages being good-for-nothing at best or often even a mark of shame.
Thus, we internalised two different notions from these historical experiences: (1) Urdu imperialism taught us that language is a marker of identity (it is, no doubt) – BUT “identity” is perverted into a separatist/adversarial sense. Then, (2) taught us that there is a hierarchy of languages, superior and inferior, a view we did not hold before (as an example, consider the rich exchange of vocabulary between Thamizh and Sanskrit, and how both nourished and enriched the other Bharatiya languages in their spheres of influence).
Let us be a bit braver here.
Bharatiya languages coexisted for centuries, never saw feuds like this.
Then, two things happened:
(1) Urdu was born as a direct consequence of Rasulullah (SAWS)’s OG two-nation theory – believers being supposed to differentiate themselves from non-believers in every aspect (including language). You can see this in Urdu, e.g. Urdu people will set themselves apart form Hindi-speakers by even things as petty as minor pronunciation differences (e.g. prārthanā –> prāthnā , parvat –> parbat, etc.), and of course the entire Perso-Arabicisation that is obvious at a first glance.
Significance: This is the beginning of the idea of language as a marker of communal identity, separate from and antithetical to that in the immediate environment (I am not pro-homogenisation, so I reject the idea of “one” mainstream – but the difference here is intended to set oneself apart, or really stick out [like a sore thumb sometimes] from one’s immediate surroundings).
(2) The advent of English which came with a clear hierarchy, where all languages of the uncivilised “orient” were inferior, rustic, backward, and not worth studying or using in education, science, official purposes etc.
Significance: Combined with the rise of British power, the capture of education by missionary and colonialist forces over a couple of centuries gradually led to the internalisation of the hierarchy of world languages, where English is at the top, and other western languages a close second, with Bharatiya languages being good-for-nothing at best or often even a mark of shame.
Thus, we internalised two different notions from these historical experiences: (1) Urdu imperialism taught us that language is a marker of identity (it is, no doubt) – BUT “identity” is perverted into a separatist/adversarial sense. Then, (2) taught us that there is a hierarchy of languages, superior and inferior, a view we did not hold before (as an example, consider the rich exchange of vocabulary between Thamizh and Sanskrit, and how both nourished and enriched the other Bharatiya languages in their spheres of influence).