The lecture series organised by the Ministry of External Affairs and the Embassy of Lithuania showed that India and Lithuania are very close when it comes to their culture, language, and ways of thinking.
While the language war in other states is targeting those who can't speak the local language, in Bengal, even those whose mother tongue is Bengali have to constantly prove their Bengali-ness.
Mini deal will likely see no cut in 10% baseline tariff on Indian exports announced by Trump on 2 April, it is learnt, but additional 26% tariffs are set to be reduced.
Capable of being fired in plain and high-altitude areas, it has day-and-night capability and two-way data link to support post-launch target, aim-point update.
As Narendra Modi becomes India’s second-longest consecutively serving Prime Minister, we look at how he compares with Indira Gandhi across four key dimensions.
My original comment got removed, not sure what was offensive about it. This article is very much anti-Sanskrit in tone. Once again, let me say it: Criticism is welcome but why this unnecessary hatred (though it tries to hide it with polished words and phrases).
On the face of it, Indians have a peculiar relationship with the term “South Asia”. Of all the groups we have discussed so far, Indians have the most to lose with the adoption of this term, and the epistemological replacement/erasure of the “Indian Subcontinent”. So why would any Indian be interested in using this term? It is a mystery indeed, but I think there are two primary, and interconnected, reasons for this.
(The reader is urged to read that article completely).
The author concludes his article with these lines, “The language of science and progress is not English, or Persian, or Greek, or Latin. Nor is it Sanskrit. It is mathematics, it is reason, it is evidence: the common heritage of all humanity.”.
Though the last para is couched in wonderful, progressive language, the entire article is very much a rant against Sanskrit (which is already a “dead” language, compared to other Indic languages).
The author pretends to be very much progressive and what not, but he hates Sanskrit. There is no other word to put it. Yes, Sanskrit is far from perfect, which language is? At one point, Sanskrit was called the mother of languages, language of the Gods, etc. The speakers of each language have their own pride, arrogance and ego.
Here in Tamil Nadu, our Tamil (Thamizh) language is supposed to be so ancient that it is at least 10,000 years old according to some groups!
It’s easier to bash Sanskrit because none of us cares. The author would not dare to write a critical or even an unbiased article about any other Indian language because there are vocal, fanatical groups which will make him regret his statements.
Suddenly very suddenly, books like “Snakes in the Ganga” and terms like “fifth column” start making sense.
Interesting read and definitely worth reflecting on.
I’ll also be waiting for a similar take on the history of Urdu, which has also seen a deeni stagnation (e.g. there’s no word for science or most modern disciplines, most literature including contemporary has religious undercurrents).
My original comment got removed, not sure what was offensive about it. This article is very much anti-Sanskrit in tone. Once again, let me say it: Criticism is welcome but why this unnecessary hatred (though it tries to hide it with polished words and phrases).
Reading this article, reminded me of this article: https://theemissary.co/the-indian-mimicry-behind-south-asia/
I will quote one paragraph from that article:
On the face of it, Indians have a peculiar relationship with the term “South Asia”. Of all the groups we have discussed so far, Indians have the most to lose with the adoption of this term, and the epistemological replacement/erasure of the “Indian Subcontinent”. So why would any Indian be interested in using this term? It is a mystery indeed, but I think there are two primary, and interconnected, reasons for this.
(The reader is urged to read that article completely).
The author concludes his article with these lines, “The language of science and progress is not English, or Persian, or Greek, or Latin. Nor is it Sanskrit. It is mathematics, it is reason, it is evidence: the common heritage of all humanity.”.
Though the last para is couched in wonderful, progressive language, the entire article is very much a rant against Sanskrit (which is already a “dead” language, compared to other Indic languages).
The author pretends to be very much progressive and what not, but he hates Sanskrit. There is no other word to put it. Yes, Sanskrit is far from perfect, which language is? At one point, Sanskrit was called the mother of languages, language of the Gods, etc. The speakers of each language have their own pride, arrogance and ego.
Here in Tamil Nadu, our Tamil (Thamizh) language is supposed to be so ancient that it is at least 10,000 years old according to some groups!
It’s easier to bash Sanskrit because none of us cares. The author would not dare to write a critical or even an unbiased article about any other Indian language because there are vocal, fanatical groups which will make him regret his statements.
Suddenly very suddenly, books like “Snakes in the Ganga” and terms like “fifth column” start making sense.
Interesting read and definitely worth reflecting on.
I’ll also be waiting for a similar take on the history of Urdu, which has also seen a deeni stagnation (e.g. there’s no word for science or most modern disciplines, most literature including contemporary has religious undercurrents).