On 12/13/05, Abhishek Hazra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No...let me rephrase and re-emphasise that. FLUENT Gujarati is not something that comes easily to new generations anymore. While Gujarati remains a functional language - the grammar structures will still be retained, other languages creep into the language too easily. Most Gujarati families speak a mixture of the two - I am now making horrifying generalisations based on my interactions with people there. Please also bear in mind that I havent been living in Gujarat the last five years - but fluent and 'pure' gujarati is no longer in vogue. Only the very rich or the very 'cultured' speak it. Gujarati theatre is almost dead. The gujarati film industry definitely is. The language we speak in the urban pockets is the language of functioning and not of poetry. Gujarati Literature is now only fossilised in Hindi movie representations.
I am just saying that in spite of the fact that Gujarati as a language was at the basis of the separation of the state from Maharashtra, there was a definite disawoval of the language - the reasons are many and diverse -hence when the onslaught of the 'outsider' - in Gujarat's case, it was the insider outsider - the NRI - happened, it was easy for the identity to be not threatened and thus made the transition easier.
I seem to have opened a can of worms
Nishant
>> It was perhaps easier in a state like gujarat where the language got slowly eroded over fifty odd years...so much so that now fluent gujarati is a thing of privilege in the urban pockets.
so in these urban pockets that you mention, none of the children ever study gujarati in school? even desultorily? for an affluent gujarati (nuclear) family which has never stayed out of gujarat, what is the lingua franca in the domestic space?
No...let me rephrase and re-emphasise that. FLUENT Gujarati is not something that comes easily to new generations anymore. While Gujarati remains a functional language - the grammar structures will still be retained, other languages creep into the language too easily. Most Gujarati families speak a mixture of the two - I am now making horrifying generalisations based on my interactions with people there. Please also bear in mind that I havent been living in Gujarat the last five years - but fluent and 'pure' gujarati is no longer in vogue. Only the very rich or the very 'cultured' speak it. Gujarati theatre is almost dead. The gujarati film industry definitely is. The language we speak in the urban pockets is the language of functioning and not of poetry. Gujarati Literature is now only fossilised in Hindi movie representations.
I am just saying that in spite of the fact that Gujarati as a language was at the basis of the separation of the state from Maharashtra, there was a definite disawoval of the language - the reasons are many and diverse -hence when the onslaught of the 'outsider' - in Gujarat's case, it was the insider outsider - the NRI - happened, it was easy for the identity to be not threatened and thus made the transition easier.
I seem to have opened a can of worms
Nishant
On 12/13/05, Nishant Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Point. I never thought of the infrastructural demands it would require. I do remember the amount spent in Mumbai though when they started changing it all.
That not withstanding, the move was desired and favoured by many, wasnt it? I mean, from somebody who has lived all around the country for many years, Bangalore was and remains a more hostile place resistant to me as an outsider. And I am not saying this as a poor victim full of righteous indignation...but I can see how traditional structures of identity and linguistic articulation have been undermined in the matter of a few years and can perhaps understand the discontent that the local might experience.
It was perhaps easier in a state like gujarat where the language got slowly eroded over fifty odd years...so much so that now fluent gujarati is a thing of privilege in the urban pockets. I guess the state, now that it has proved its inefficacy in providing the infrastructure for the dreams it promised, needed to be seen doing at least something...And I guess changing names is the easiest thing ever.
Nishant--On 12/13/05, Jessica Prabhakar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Umm..I think the crores that will go into renaming
everything.. from legal paperwork to what-have-you
could have been better used.
Bangalore is known internationally .. 'Bangalored' is
a widely-used phrase.. so now it'll be Bengaloorued???
Any side-effects that the first half of the name
spells Bengal?
In Kannada it was pronounced Bengalooru anyway...so
technically the two names always existed.
Jess
--- Nishant Shah < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO this has got nothing to do with either the
> progress or introjection of
> the city into the past. When shiv sena did it with
> Bombay, they too were
> playing the same politics. I think this is one of
> the last vestiges of the
> fact that Indian states were created on the basis of
> language...and now that
> the outsider is no longer the fair skinned seven
> seas invader but from
> within the nation - Bangalore is facing huge
> migration right now, about
> 5,000 new people every month - the traditional
> Kannadiga identity faces a
> huge threat.
>
> This move at renaming is a recognition of the fact
> that the outsiders cannot
> be stopped anymore but the local can be created -
> even if only in the
> language and the signage that identifies a
> particular place. I don't see
> what the big deal about renaming the city is...most
> cities have two names
> anyway. Ahmedabad, for example, for any localite
> will always be Amdawad and
> it doesn't create a lot of problem.
>
> This is just a political move to assuage the rising
> local hostilities to
> make things easier for the embrace of globalisation
> - without which of
> course, we will all die and be poor and illiterate.
> sob!
>
> Nishant
>
> On 12/12/05, Jessica Prabhakar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Biju Chacko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 12/12/05, Jessica Prabhakar
> < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > He seems determined to drag Bangalore back
> into
> > > the
> > > > 70s or earlier. A pot of beans?
> > >
> > > Bangalore was called Bengaluru in the '70s ???
> Or do
> > > you mean something else?
> > >
> > > -- b
> > >
> > > PS: I didn't know you were on this list.
> Welcome!
> > >
> > >
> >
> > He seems to be retracting all progress made by the
> > previous CM.. step by step.
> >
> > Yes, been lurking for a year or more.. I think I
> > beeped now and then!
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Nishant says
> Tell me something about yourself.
> Go ahead...tell all
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Nishant says
Tell me something about yourself.
Go ahead...tell all
--
Nishant says
Tell me something about yourself.
Go ahead...tell all
