Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Vickram Crishna
Judging from this clarification, it seems that a position is being created
that the Indus valley civilisation was the sole active player in the
separation of Dravidian from non-Dravidian communities, and that we should
shun any attempt to use the word Indic, as that might show unnecessary
respect to the Indus valley lot, in comparison. But is this true, or an
accurate reflection of historical events, or is it just blurred hindsight,
or even some agenda?

Here's the relevant excerpt from the page on the Indus valley civilisation:

See also: Substratum in Vedic Sanskrit

The IVC has been tentatively identified with the toponym Meluhha known from
Sumerian records. It has been compared in particular with the civilizations
of Elam (also in the context of the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis) and with
Minoan Crete (because of isolated cultural parallels such as the ubiquitous
goddess worship and depictions of bull-leaping). [87] The mature (Harappan)
phase of the IVC is contemporary to the Early to Middle Bronze Age in the
Ancient Near East, in particular the Old Elamite period, Early Dynastic to
Ur III Mesopotamia, Prepalatial Minoan Crete and Old Kingdom to First
Intermediate Period Egypt.

After the discovery of the IVC in the 1920s, it was immediately associated
with the indigenous Dasyu inimical to the Rigvedic tribes in numerous hymns
of the Rigveda. Mortimer Wheeler interpreted the presence of many unburied
corpses found in the top levels of Mohenjo-Daro as the victims of a warlike
conquest, and famously stated that Indra stands accused of the
destruction of the IVC. The association of the IVC with the city-dwelling
Dasyus remains alluring because the assumed timeframe of the first
Indo-Aryan migration into India corresponds neatly with the period of
decline of the IVC seen in the archaeological record. The discovery of the
advanced, urban IVC however changed the 19th century view of early
Indo-Aryan migration as an invasion of an advanced culture at the expense
of a primitive aboriginal population to a gradual acculturation of
nomadic barbarians on an advanced urban civilization, comparable to the
Germanic migrations after the Fall of Rome, or the Kassite invasion of
Babylonia. This move away from simplistic invasionist scenarios parallels
similar developments in thinking about language transfer and population
movement in general, such as in the case of the migration of the
proto-Greek speakers into Greece, or the Indo-Europeanization of Western
Europe.

It was often suggested that the bearers of the IVC corresponded to
proto-Dravidians linguistically, the breakup of proto-Dravidian
corresponding to the breakup of the Late Harappan culture. [88] Today, the
Dravidian language family is concentrated mostly in southern India and
northern Sri Lanka, but pockets of it still remain throughout the rest of
India and Pakistan (the Brahui language), which lends credence to the
theory. Finnish Indologist Asko Parpola concludes that the uniformity of
the Indus inscriptions precludes any possibility of widely different
languages being used, and that an early form of Dravidian language must
have been the language of the Indus people. However, in an interview with
the Deccan Herald on August 12, 2012, Asko Parpola clarified his position
by admitting that Sanskrit-speakers had contributed to the Indus Valley
Civilization. [89] Proto-Munda (or Para-Munda) and a lost phylum (perhaps
related or ancestral to the Nihali language) [90] have been proposed as
other candidates.

The civilization is sometimes referred to as the Indus Ghaggar-Hakra
civilization [5] or the Indus-Sarasvati civilization by Hindutva groups,
which is based on theories of Indigenous Aryans and the Out of India
migration of Indo-European speakers.
-

It seems the jury is still out on this, and there is no value to adopting
polarised viewpoints at this stage, just four months after the latest
information about this issue, which is so ambivalent. Considering the
history is of so many thousand years back, and that there is so little
definitive data about this particular aspect of it, why should we get so
didactic? Do we have a better (ie more inclusive) word at hand?

-- 
Vickram
Fool On The Hill
The cameras were all around. We've got you taped; you're in the play.
Here's your I.D. (Ideal for identifying one and all.)
Invest your life in the memory bank; ours the interest and we thank you.
Jethro Tull: A Passion Play (1973)
On Nov 14, 2012 1:02 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote:

 My email was not directed at anyone personally.  It was simply a response
 to the observation Srikanth made and from what I glanced from Wikipedia
 articles.[1]  In the context of linguistics, you will be hard-pressed to
 find reliable sources that refer to Indic languages as a generic term for
 all of Indian languages.

 The word 'Indic' itself is a derivative of the word Hindus or Indus
 referring to the Indus Valley Civilization, which did not stretch as far as
 

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Pradeep Nair
hi,

If any Indic Wikipedian finds it derogatory, let them step up and say so. We 
can use the term Indian Language Wikipedian then. Whatever works.

warm regards, 

Pradeep Mohandas
How Pradeep uses email? - http://goo.gl/6v1I9



 From: Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il
To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2012 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for 
Indic Languages)
 
2012/11/14 Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com:
 The word 'Indic' itself is a derivative of the word Hindus or Indus
 referring to the Indus Valley Civilization, which did not stretch as far as
 Deccan India where the Dravidian family of languages have been prevalent.
 The distinction between the Indic languages and Dravidian languages is an
 important one, and they should not be confused to be one and the same.

So are the words India and Indian. If this logic is true, then the
English name of the Republic of India, and the name of this mailing
list would be derogatory as well. Evidently, to most people they
aren't.

Nobody here is dismissing Dravidian languages. Everybody understands
that they are distinct. It's just that the word Indic often refers
to them, too. When the context and the meaning may be unclear, use
Indo-Aryan and Dravidian.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Anirudh Bhati
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Amir E. Aharoni 
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:

 So are the words India and Indian. If this logic is true, then the
 English name of the Republic of India, and the name of this mailing
 list would be derogatory as well. Evidently, to most people they
 aren't.


The use of the word India as a singular polity was a choice made by our
former colonial master.  The name India found general agreement among the
leaders of the new republic, who not so coincidentally, were also
overwhelmingly from the northern parts of India.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India#Etymology

The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics by PH Matthews distinguishes
Indic scripts from the Dravidian scripts, clearly specifying that Indic
refers to the languages belonging to the Indo-Aryan Family (see page 175 of
410)

Text reproduced below:

Indian scripts . Writing systems derived directly or indirectly from the *
Brahmi script, attested in ancient India from the second half of the 1st
millennium BC. Modern forms include *Devanagari, used in particular for
Hindi, and the separate scripts, often with characters of very different
shapes, that have developed for other major*Indo-Aryan and for the *
Dravidian languages: in addition, those of *Tibetan, and of most languages
in South-east Asia, including *Burmese, *Khmer, *Lao, and *Thai. Earlier
forms were used still more widely, in Central Asia with the spread of
Buddhism and e.g. for *Javanese before the Muslim conquest.

The basic type is *alpha-syllabic, as *Devanagari. The precise historical
links, both within and outside ,are still partly uncertain: but for those
in South-east Asia, the Mon script, attested in Burma ( Myanmar) from the
11 th to the 12th century AD, and before it the Grantha script, used in the
coastal area of Tamil Nadu from the 5th century AD, were major
intermediaries.

Indic = Indo-Aryan.
(Source:
http://www.questia.com/read/55186560/the-concise-oxford-dictionary-of-linguistics
)

Kind Regards,

Anirudh
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
2012/11/14 Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com:
 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics by PH Matthews distinguishes
 Indic scripts from the Dravidian scripts, clearly specifying that Indic
 refers to the languages belonging to the Indo-Aryan Family (see page 175 of

This is one particular - and concise - dictionary. There are many
other sources that don't make this distinction, for example the
Unicode Consortium's documents about South Asian scripts:
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.1.0/

Unicode calls all South Asian scripts Indic. This is the common term
in discussions of computing in these languages, which this list is
about.

Again: Let's not make up controversy.

--
Amir

___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Anirudh Bhati
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Amir E. Aharoni 
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:

 Again: Let's not make up controversy.


No one is trying to rake up a controversy.  This is a polite discussion, at
least on my part, so I will appreciate if you do not allude otherwise.

I have presented an authoritative academic source, and in contrast you have
relied on a document that provides technical description of the Unicode
standard.

I am happy to simply disagree with you over a mailing list discussion,
however, the English Wikipedia community demands proper academic citations
and sources for our articles.

Thanks,

Anirudh
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Anivar Aravind
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
 amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:

 Again: Let's not make up controversy.


 No one is trying to rake up a controversy.  This is a polite discussion, at
 least on my part, so I will appreciate if you do not allude otherwise.

 I have presented an authoritative academic source, and in contrast you have
 relied on a document that provides technical description of the Unicode
 standard.

If you need an academic sources , there are plenty in print formats

Language in South Asia
Edited by: Braj B. Kachru, University of Illinois, Chicago
Edited by: Yamuna Kachru, University of Illinois, Chicago
Edited by: S. N. Sridhar, State University of New York, Stony Brook

http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1166851/?site_locale=en_GB


The Indic Scripts: Palaeographic and Linguistic Perspectives
by P. G. Patel, Pramod Pandey, Dilip Rajgor
Publisher: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd. (2007)
http://www.flipkart.com/indic-scripts-8124604061/p/itmdytjkzepcxuzq?pid=9788124604069

You can find extracts through google book search, if needed

~ Regards
Anivar

___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


[Wikimediaindia-l] Universal Language Selector

2012-11-14 Thread praveenp


Apology: I am not from Indus Valley and not even a north Indian; I don't 
know whether I am allowed to write here. ;-)  Anyway I am posting 
because this may affect so many languages, including those True Indian 
Indus Vally languages. :-p


Dear Friends,

I have seen extensive development in ULS, and it is live in 
translatewiki.net. It is a kind of joined form of Narayam and Webfonts, 
and intended to provide easy access to any users including new users in 
non-Latin wikies. It looks like sooner or later will reach our wikies.


I agree that Narayam and Webfonts need some UI love, but even with that 
fact, they are easily understandable and usable. Atleast to me, ULS is 
no ullas. It is complex and UI is too confusing. For eg, you may need to 
enable keymap on each text area before typing in your language. I 
switched myself to IBus, just for convenience.


I hope I am wrong, but I urge others to check ULS and report problems 
find by you. Doing so, it is possible to make it atleast usable. :-)


praveenp




___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages

2012-11-14 Thread Theo10011
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Amir E. Aharoni 
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:

 If he didn't explain it, then you can presume that it's wrong. There's
 nothing to discuss, and there's nothing wrong with saying Indic
 languages.


Heh, I didn't know you became a cultural authority on what words were
wrong, from the last few visit(s) to India. :P Anyway, It would be any
linguist's folly to presume the cultural context of words, without knowing
the culture and what precedes the word. I suppose this should give Anirudh
the same authority to instruct what words are wrong in context of your
homeland, incognizant of any political undertones and cultural issues?

Besides that particular part, I agree with you.

Regards
Theo
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)

2012-11-14 Thread Theo10011
This is getting rather silly.

Amir might not realize that he is flirting with some political undertones,
with his argument, but is also the same stance on the word that I've had
against Anirudh'd characterization. I might have had a
brief discussion with Anirudh about this a couple of years ago, and my
position is the same as Amir's. It's a leap to consider the two the same,
and that one is referring to the Indo-Aryan group when they say 'Indic'.
Here's the etymology of Indic[1] from Etymonline, which is the one Amir is
going by, Merriam-Webster on the other hand[2], as pointed earlier, accepts
both views. Given that the term is listed as an adjective, and has Latin
root *Indicus* and Greek root *Indikos*, both of which denote of India;
might help. This might also relate to how foreigners perceive a word
innocuously, vs. how the people being referred to see it. Ethnolinguistics
is far more interesting.

I pointed out then, and I'd do so again, that Anirudh's classification
might have a shade of influence from the nationalistic stand on the usage
of the term[3]. It's hard to debate this issue, when you are arguing over
the intention and context of a single word. To everyone unaware, Indic is
just some extension of India, denoting 'of India' and nothing more, while
some can choose to equate the word to a subset of a linguistic family and
bring up divisions thereof. The only thing that separates them is probably
context.

Regards
Theo

[1]http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Indicallowed_in_frame=0
[2]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indic?show=0t=1352908404
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan#Usage_of_Aryan
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l


Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Universal Language Selector

2012-11-14 Thread Theo10011
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:35 PM, praveenp me.prav...@gmail.com wrote:


 Apology: I am not from Indus Valley and not even a north Indian; I don't
 know whether I am allowed to write here. ;-)  Anyway I am posting because
 this may affect so many languages, including those True Indian Indus
 Vally languages. :-p


There's no need for that kind of rhetoric. I don't think even Anirudh
identifies himself as a North Indian, I might on the other hand, and I
haven't made any statements against you.

If it helps, you are all more True Indian(s) than I am. This is a silly
point that is turning political, please try not to inflame the discussion
any further.



 Dear Friends,

 I have seen extensive development in ULS, and it is live in
 translatewiki.net. It is a kind of joined form of Narayam and Webfonts,
 and intended to provide easy access to any users including new users in
 non-Latin wikies. It looks like sooner or later will reach our wikies.

 I agree that Narayam and Webfonts need some UI love, but even with that
 fact, they are easily understandable and usable. Atleast to me, ULS is no
 ullas. It is complex and UI is too confusing. For eg, you may need to
 enable keymap on each text area before typing in your language. I switched
 myself to IBus, just for convenience.

 I hope I am wrong, but I urge others to check ULS and report problems find
 by you. Doing so, it is possible to make it atleast usable. :-)


+1

Regards
Theo
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l