URDU

Hashim Kidwai on Politics of Urdu

Balraj Madhok's article "Politics of Urdu" is biased and is contrary to facts. His contention that what distinguishes Urdu from Hindi and other Indian languages is its overload of Turkish, Persian and Arabic words and Arabic script in which it is written is quite against facts. out of a total of 55,960 words in the Urdu dictionary only 13,625 that is, less than 25 per cent, are of Persio-Arabic origin and as many as 21,600 are purely of Hindi origin and the remaining belong to other sources. Similarly, his other contention or premise that Urdu was imposed during the.. Mughal rule and that it took the place of Persian as the court language is not correct. (Throughout the Mughal rule) Persian remained the court language. Urdu became a court language much later. It was not imposed from above. it was the genuine spirit of unity and goodwill that imbued both Hindus and Muslims to forgo their respective languages and to merge them into a new language, Urdu, essentially Indian in origin, but with full capacity to nourish and develop.

As against this contention of Mr. Madhok that in course of time Khari Boli Hindi which comprehends all varieties of Hindi gained currency as the common language of people of UP, Bihar and Punjab is contradicted by the following statements of Dr. Tarachand and Bhartendu Harish Chandra. Mr. Madhok's contention cannot be accepted against the statements of these two.

According to Dr. Tarachand, renowned scholar- historian, Khari Boli or Urdu emerged as a fit language for polite speech and literary language in the Deccan as well. It was the lingua franca of India and the speech of polite society whether Hindu or Muslim. As late as in 1871 Bhartendu Harish Chandra stated in the preface of his book on the origin of Agarwal community "The speech of Agarwal's of all their men and women is Khari Boli or Urdu (Unki boli stri or purush sabaki, Khariboli or Urdu hai)." What was true of the Agarwal community was equally true of others. It was only at the beginning of the 19th century that modern Hindi started its career (National Language of India edited by Z.A. Ahmed). Urdu is thus entirely Indian in origin and is the living embodiment of our national composite culture.

About its all-India character Sardar Patel writing to his deputy R.R. Devakar in 1949 on the language policy of All India Radio and the Ministry of Information of which he was the Minister, said "sense, Urdu like Hindi cannot belong to one region. Those who speak and understand are not concentrated in one geographical. To this extent Urdu differs from other regional languages".

There are refugees from the Punjab a majority of whom definitely speak and understand this language better than any other language. In UP there is a large concentration of those who speak it. it is, therefore, quite clear to me that you cannot confine Urdu to any one particular region. (Sardar Patel's Correspondence volume 8 page 380). In the pamphlet "Muslims of India" published by the Publications Division of the Ministry of Information it has been stated "however it may be said that Urdu serves as a common link among them and millions of others all over the country. It started as an amalgam of Arabic, Persian and Turkish with the local vocabulary syntax". He advises Urduwallas to commit linguistic hara-kiri by adopting the Devnagri script. Why does he not give advice to Bengali-speaking, Tamil, Telugu, Kannad, Malayalam and Marathi-speaking people to adopt Devnagri script".

(Source: Letter to The Hindustan Times)

C.P. Bhambhri on Linguistic Chauvinism

The BJP's language policy is linked with their concept of "one-nation theory" and such a nation canno be constructed without one common language, and that language is Hindi. Much water has flown down the Ganges since Lohia wrote his Thesis on India, but the Lohia socialists still continue to cling to his caste versus caste and Hindi versus English language as the route towards social revolution. Since Mulayam Singh Yadav is sharing power in India, and the BJP is an important political force in the country, the politics of language is likely to assume greater importance. Since many other social, cultural and political groups not only do not share the commitment of Hindi enthusiasts, they actually contest the claim of Hindi to emerge as pre-eminent in the garb of one of the official languages of India.

These linguistic contests are not unknown in our country. If the BJP and the Lohia socialists seriously observe the diversity of India, they will have to go back to the long history of the country. India has clearly identifiable socio-cultural and socio-lingual regions and these regions have cultural identities of their own. Indians are the inheritors of rich heterogeneities which are linked together with commonalities and feelings of mutual respect and tolerance. Conflicts have emerged, but solutions have been found by avoiding the extremes and following a policy of accommodation. Can the multiple tribal communities of Nagaland or Meghalaya agree with any one common tribal language? The answer which these states found was in accepting English in place of multiple tribal languages. The moral of the experience of some of the "seven sisters" of the North-East is very clear: That language problem is decided either by the politics of compromise or by confronting and experiencing violent linguistic conflicts.

It has also been witnessed that any growth of linguistic fanaticism becomes competitive. India has a very delicate socio-linguistic balance and the politics of extremes will create explosive social situation. During the last 50 years, India has created a national economic market and a national labor market. This process of migration will encourage some common language to be expected. Politics of imposition of language from grow gradually from below. More than this should not above will prove disastrous for national unity.

(Source: The Pioneer, 28 June, 1996)