Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)
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)
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)
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 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)
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)
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
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)
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] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:02 AM, 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. The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. Just my two cents, 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)
On Wednesday 14 November 2012 09:31 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote: The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. [citation needed] Then Why don't they just called Indic language, other than Indo-Aryan family of Languages. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, [who?] and reasonably so. Just my two cents, Anirudh IMHO, This is the most funniest argument I've ever heard on this matter. :-) ___ 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)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2012/11/14 Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com: On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:02 AM, 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. The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. Not necessarily. According to Meriam-Webster, the adjective Indic may refer to Indo-Aryan and to all of India. Moreover, Indic scripts refers to all Brahmic scripts, and that is the most common term today. The English Wikipedia redirected [[Indic languages]] to [[Indo-Aryan languages]], but that was a mistake, and I just fixed it. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. No, not derogatory. At worst, it's ambiguous. Making up bad connotations for normal words is not so constructive. -- 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)
The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. *in·dic*/ˈindik/ Adjective: Relating to or denoting the group of Indo-European languages comprising Sanskrit and the modern Indian languages that are its descendants.Not sure whether it is derogatory though 'Indian' would be a better term. -- Vikram Vincent ___ 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)
I don't know which dictionary this is. Merriam-Webster says that it can be both: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indic Indic is very common in discussion of computing in the languages of India and its neighboring countries, all of which face similar challenges. There's nothing derogatory in it. 2012/11/14 Vikram Vincent vincentvik...@gmail.com The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. *in·dic*/ˈindik/ Adjective: Relating to or denoting the group of Indo-European languages comprising Sanskrit and the modern Indian languages that are its descendants.Not sure whether it is derogatory though 'Indian' would be a better term. -- Vikram Vincent ___ 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)
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:02 AM, 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. The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. factually incorrect . Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. cant understand this part . Do you mean Aryan supremacy ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_race ? 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
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Indic languages (was Re: Spoken Wikipedia for Indic Languages)
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 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. As a movement of individuals who are dedicated to the process of building the world's largest repositories of information, we should be mindful of lingual and cultural realities and sensitivities. This is not just about being politically correct, but also accuracy in the representation of _factual_ information. Again, this is simply my personal opinion and observation. :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages Cheers, Anirudh On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote: -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2012/11/14 Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com: On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:02 AM, 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. The word Indic refers generally to the Indo-Aryan family of languages, which does not include Dravidian languages prevalent in Southern India. Not necessarily. According to Meriam-Webster, the adjective Indic may refer to Indo-Aryan and to all of India. Moreover, Indic scripts refers to all Brahmic scripts, and that is the most common term today. The English Wikipedia redirected [[Indic languages]] to [[Indo-Aryan languages]], but that was a mistake, and I just fixed it. Hence, bunching the entire system of Dravidian languages together with the Indo-Aryan languages in India may seem derogatory to some, and reasonably so. No, not derogatory. At worst, it's ambiguous. Making up bad connotations for normal words is not so constructive. -- 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 ___ 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)
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Anivar Aravind anivar.arav...@gmail.comwrote: factually incorrect . Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts The article you refer to lacks proper citations. ___ 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 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
