I come from a Sourashtra speaking community. We’re a small bunch of people immigrated from Gujarat to Southern parts in different waves during the Middle Ages, mostly because of war and trade.
Our language has been preserved though the common speak and has no agreed upon script, so it is majorly taught to the children by their parents and relatives. Most of us know Tamil/Kannada/Telugu because of the main language in the place we live in and also use it to publish local magazines.
The magazines though are published in Hindi, Tamil, Sourashtra scripts, the interest is declining at a fast rate. Fewer people want to buy and even fewer want to write. In my city, some are distributed for free only to see it being used for packing pakodas and samosas. Another factor is, many in our community marry people from outside the communities (I'm not against that) and their children can barely understand the language. Our language is still not in the endangered category, but I see it becoming one in the coming decades. More people in our community are getting educated, becoming modern (by western standards), want their children to communicate in English and as a result most people have become middle-class to rich. The reasons for our endangerment is partly because of modernisation.
I'm seeing the coming generations have lesser and lesser interest in growing the language as my Grandpa rightly feared, and will be one of the ones forgotten by the end of this century.
I have many friends who speak Sourashtra. It is always exciting and interesting to see how much they love their language and want to keep it in day-today interaction in house hold. I think any language that is spoken in kitchen and in dining table will survive long. Sourashtra will to!
The notion of an 'old language' is weird. What does that even mean? Why is Bo one of the oldest languages? Is Greek old? Is English old? Is Lithuanian old? Is Tamil old? Korean? Chinese (which one?)? Any language? If your answer is 'yes', then (a) please explain what you mean, and (b) rest assured that it is not the same language today as when it was 'young' (whatever that means) -- 'young X' is probably a different language than 'old X', but what does that mean for 'X'? I don't get it.
Such a weird notion. It seems to me that 'old' for a language is often used to imply that it is 'important' (culturally? presumably yes.), which feels, well, not racist, but maybe 'linguist' -- OK, that word is already occupied... Even fighting exists about which language is 'oldest' -- could you please make up the rules of the game before playing?
Anyway -- this is just me not understanding what people mean.
As the article says pre-neolithic, if you are not aware Andaman is also home to the sentinelese, a known isolated and uncontacted tribe who have preserved their way of life for 60,000 years of isolation.
Oldest language could be a distinct language that has preserved its uniqueness. Due to the ice age, European languages can not be the oldest.
The isolation of these tribes and the long human habitation in these regions could make the languages some of the oldest as well as primitive.
I think what people who talk about "old languages" use to determine a language's age is something like "what's the earliest date an ancestor of this language was used in writing" or "how long has this area been inhabited by populations genetically similar to modern speakers of this language".
Personally, I think most languages are old, except for constructed languages like Toki Pona that have only existed for a short time.
Well very old languages like Tamil have a very ancient person with whom a modern speaker could have a mutually intelligible conversation. An English speaker could not speak English with someone from 1000 years ago but a Tamil speaker could.
Thirukural[1] is a classic Tamil text on philosophy and secular ethics, which is considered to be at-least 1500 years old. Many verses of this text can be easily read and understood by anyone with intermediate level proficiency in Tamil. And so are most text from Sangam literature[2], which are even older. Thiruvasagam[3] and other Bakthi literature are widely used as a prayer hymns and can be understood with basic language training.
Tamil has two forms. Sentamil and Koduntamil, both survived till date. Sentamil is the formal/literary form and Koduntamil is the colloquial form used by common people. Koduntamil is made of simplified and shortened forms of words from Sentamil, some loan words and slang words. Due to the cultural and political influences in the last few centuries, there are many loan words from European and Persian languages in Koduntamil.
Other Dravidian languages[4] such as Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada has heavy influence of Sanskrit. There were efforts to Sankritise Tamil as well by using Sankrit words in Tamil syntax, which was called Manipravalam. Manipravalam was in use till early 20th century. In the beginning of 20th century, Tanittamil Iyakkam[5] aka Pure Tamil Movement restored the language and Maripravalam is no more in use. The formal Tamil used today, such as in news bulletins and official documents, is very close to the classical form.
Pure Tamil Movement, the two language policy[6] adopted by Tamil Nadu government and related efforts helped preserve the language. Although the Tamil speaking population is lesser compared to other languages such as Hindi and Telugu, Tamil has a thriving art, literature and media industry which are economically successful too.
Recent archeological research at Keezhadi has revealed a 6th century BCE Sangam era settlement in Vaigai river valley[7]. If more research confirms the findings, Tamil would be one among the oldest surviving classical languages.
Learning Sanskrit and loving it. Chanting sanskrit mantras relaxes my facial muscles and feel lightweight on forehead.. might sound dramatic to some, but it's true....
The whole issue of language v/s dialect is a complex one; but I have adjusted to the one in this popular article [1]: if you speak a language and can enter into a conversation with a speaker of a variation on that language relatively easily, it qualifies as a dialect.
> A Mandarin-speaker can no more “adjust” to Cantonese than a Swede could “adjust” to German.
Most of the well-known Indian languages actually fail this test. Someone who has grown up speaking Hindi cannot reliably converse with someone in Bangla, Sambalpuri, or Tamil. If anything, the word "dialect" is overused regarding India – Bhojpuri [2] was often mentioned as a dialect of Hindi; but as a fluent Hindi speaker I cannot claim to understand or have a fluid conversation with someone speaking Bhojpuri. I am glad that it is at least sometimes referred to as a language now.
Unknown attribution, I've read that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy. Not entirely applicable here though, as there are likely geographic and historical separations at play too.
In 1932 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communal_Award British regime offered separate electorates/countries to Muslim/Sikh/Christian/Parsi/Buddhist/Jain/SC/ST where Upper caste/Brahmin/Bania/Kshatriya can live on a Visa
> The politics behind promoting Hindi is a religious one. It makes convenient to promote the varna system(modern caste system).
As someone with some knowledge around this subject, this is a simplistic and inflammatory bad-faith reading of a very complex topic – how do you create a common country out of hundreds of splintered cultures, languages, and religions spoken by millions of people? The nearest parallel to how many languages India is the European Union, and I would wager that given the differing scripts and such, India's diversity of languages exceeds that of the EU's.
And people have been trying to unite this complex mixture as a country since the 1700s! (thinking of the British attempts here; much earlier if you include pre-British empires).
The imposition of Hindi has been the one of the (failed) ways to have such a common language. It is quite a vast topic, but one example is that Mahatma Gandhi himself started the South India Hindi Outreach Institute to promote Hindi as a means of integration between (broadly speaking) North and South India.
Also, the issue of caste in India is a pretty complex one as well, but having spent some time in south India, I can confidently say that casteism is way more prevalent there than Hindi, which casts some doubts on the effectiveness of the politics you allude to (even presuming it exists).
> The politics behind promoting Hindi is a religious one. It makes convenient to promote the varna system(modern caste system). This is the reason the religious party and organizations(BJP, RSS) promotes Hindi and forces in to the education of all non-hindi speaking states too.
Rest of your comment is factual, except not sure if Tamil is the oldest language or Sanskrit or some other is.
But the above quoted part of your comment is utter BS.
The reason to promote Hindi is nationalistic rather than religious. Why should the lingua franca of any country be a foreign language, it should be a local language. Hindi fits the bill amongst all other Indian languages is because it has the largest footprint and hence best odds of success, as opposed to say Tamil which is primarily spoken in 1 state.
This is just nonsense. Hindi has nothing to do with caste system. Hindi was promoted because of the need for a common language for a nation with 300+ official languages (not counting the dialects) - as it's the language that is most commonly spoke and understood. It's again absolutely nonsense about BJP/RSS. In the recent times the only party that worked for the poor/lower castes/class is BJP. Most regional parties works for the dominant upper castes and congress further discriminated against the dalits/STs during UPA2 with their legislations (and always been the party of upper castes + muslims and christians).
> The politics behind promoting Hindi is a religious one. It makes convenient to promote the varna system(modern caste system)
You lost me there. Usual white man's burden speaking. BJP is not a "religious" party in any sense of the word. Hindi is just ridiculously popular language mostly because of Bollywood. Since most politicians tend to be 'hindi' speaking they try to make Hindi even more popular as it benefits them where as regional parties see that as threat.
The article takes as a given that preserving language is a good thing and it is a tragedy when a language dies.
I say that languages divide us and silo us. It is a triumph when a language dies because the people who previously spoke it now think and speak in a different language. Of course we should try to preserve any literature or folk-lore.
I look forward to the day when everyone on earth will be able to speak and communicate in a single language.
Different languages have different nuances for things so there are ideas and ways of thinking that are lost when a language dies, as you may have accidentally alluded to. I grew up in Colorado and my family normalized many terms like couloir or scree that got me in a bit of temporary trouble with an English instructor in Texas who thought I'd been fishing for exotic words to use in a paper. He was a great guy and accepted my explanation that these were words I used frequently while growing up: they are my language.
I say why not have an environment for people to have the opportunity to learn multiple languages so that the inherent beauty of the variety of languages is preserved, and yet, we can communicate and silo. As a matter of fact, then multiple languages could actually come to bond us together.
Goethe said something along the lines- “He who does not know foreign languages does not know anything about his own”. As for the inherent beauty in a language, most would agree that certain thing expressed in language X 'tastes' different than in Y. As for uniting, I am neither German nor Persian, but it is my ability to use German or Persian that unites me to both the cultures (and people) in a much deeper way; of course, you can argue that the fact that I drew the boundaries of German/Persian is in itself a problem, and having had a single language would have been the ideal, but again, I doubt that since language X might be superior in terms of certain expressions over Y (until proven otherwise).
So should we just have one programming language? Should we have just one OS? Should we have one computer game? One social media? Should we have one political party? One school? One store? One book?
> I look forward to the day when everyone on earth will be able to speak and communicate in a single language.
[+] [-] Onewildgamer|5 years ago|reply
Our language has been preserved though the common speak and has no agreed upon script, so it is majorly taught to the children by their parents and relatives. Most of us know Tamil/Kannada/Telugu because of the main language in the place we live in and also use it to publish local magazines.
The magazines though are published in Hindi, Tamil, Sourashtra scripts, the interest is declining at a fast rate. Fewer people want to buy and even fewer want to write. In my city, some are distributed for free only to see it being used for packing pakodas and samosas. Another factor is, many in our community marry people from outside the communities (I'm not against that) and their children can barely understand the language. Our language is still not in the endangered category, but I see it becoming one in the coming decades. More people in our community are getting educated, becoming modern (by western standards), want their children to communicate in English and as a result most people have become middle-class to rich. The reasons for our endangerment is partly because of modernisation.
I'm seeing the coming generations have lesser and lesser interest in growing the language as my Grandpa rightly feared, and will be one of the ones forgotten by the end of this century.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saurashtra_language
[+] [-] guruparan18|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beeforpork|5 years ago|reply
Such a weird notion. It seems to me that 'old' for a language is often used to imply that it is 'important' (culturally? presumably yes.), which feels, well, not racist, but maybe 'linguist' -- OK, that word is already occupied... Even fighting exists about which language is 'oldest' -- could you please make up the rules of the game before playing?
Anyway -- this is just me not understanding what people mean.
[+] [-] naruvimama|5 years ago|reply
Oldest language could be a distinct language that has preserved its uniqueness. Due to the ice age, European languages can not be the oldest.
The isolation of these tribes and the long human habitation in these regions could make the languages some of the oldest as well as primitive.
[+] [-] LudwigNagasena|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yorwba|5 years ago|reply
Personally, I think most languages are old, except for constructed languages like Toki Pona that have only existed for a short time.
[+] [-] ponker|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] furyroad|5 years ago|reply
Tamil has two forms. Sentamil and Koduntamil, both survived till date. Sentamil is the formal/literary form and Koduntamil is the colloquial form used by common people. Koduntamil is made of simplified and shortened forms of words from Sentamil, some loan words and slang words. Due to the cultural and political influences in the last few centuries, there are many loan words from European and Persian languages in Koduntamil.
Other Dravidian languages[4] such as Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada has heavy influence of Sanskrit. There were efforts to Sankritise Tamil as well by using Sankrit words in Tamil syntax, which was called Manipravalam. Manipravalam was in use till early 20th century. In the beginning of 20th century, Tanittamil Iyakkam[5] aka Pure Tamil Movement restored the language and Maripravalam is no more in use. The formal Tamil used today, such as in news bulletins and official documents, is very close to the classical form.
Pure Tamil Movement, the two language policy[6] adopted by Tamil Nadu government and related efforts helped preserve the language. Although the Tamil speaking population is lesser compared to other languages such as Hindi and Telugu, Tamil has a thriving art, literature and media industry which are economically successful too.
Recent archeological research at Keezhadi has revealed a 6th century BCE Sangam era settlement in Vaigai river valley[7]. If more research confirms the findings, Tamil would be one among the oldest surviving classical languages.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tirukku%E1%B9%9Fa%E1%B8%B7
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangam_literature
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiruvasagam
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanittamil_Iyakkam
[6] https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/policy-lessons-in-tami...
[7] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/keeladi-fi...
[+] [-] zerop|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bodhiandpysics1|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ssvss|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tgv|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quadrifoliate|5 years ago|reply
The whole issue of language v/s dialect is a complex one; but I have adjusted to the one in this popular article [1]: if you speak a language and can enter into a conversation with a speaker of a variation on that language relatively easily, it qualifies as a dialect.
> A Mandarin-speaker can no more “adjust” to Cantonese than a Swede could “adjust” to German.
Most of the well-known Indian languages actually fail this test. Someone who has grown up speaking Hindi cannot reliably converse with someone in Bangla, Sambalpuri, or Tamil. If anything, the word "dialect" is overused regarding India – Bhojpuri [2] was often mentioned as a dialect of Hindi; but as a fluent Hindi speaker I cannot claim to understand or have a fluid conversation with someone speaking Bhojpuri. I am glad that it is at least sometimes referred to as a language now.
----------------------------------------------------
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/di...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhojpuri_language
[+] [-] politelemon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] embit|5 years ago|reply
http://www.peopleslinguisticsurvey.org/
[+] [-] known|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ape4|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ffpip|5 years ago|reply
Some languages are already dead, except for academic purposes.
[+] [-] naruvimama|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] strawberrypuree|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] john4532452|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] quadrifoliate|5 years ago|reply
As someone with some knowledge around this subject, this is a simplistic and inflammatory bad-faith reading of a very complex topic – how do you create a common country out of hundreds of splintered cultures, languages, and religions spoken by millions of people? The nearest parallel to how many languages India is the European Union, and I would wager that given the differing scripts and such, India's diversity of languages exceeds that of the EU's.
And people have been trying to unite this complex mixture as a country since the 1700s! (thinking of the British attempts here; much earlier if you include pre-British empires).
The imposition of Hindi has been the one of the (failed) ways to have such a common language. It is quite a vast topic, but one example is that Mahatma Gandhi himself started the South India Hindi Outreach Institute to promote Hindi as a means of integration between (broadly speaking) North and South India.
Also, the issue of caste in India is a pretty complex one as well, but having spent some time in south India, I can confidently say that casteism is way more prevalent there than Hindi, which casts some doubts on the effectiveness of the politics you allude to (even presuming it exists).
----------------------------------------------------
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakshina_Bharat_Hindi_Prachar_...
[+] [-] yumraj|5 years ago|reply
Rest of your comment is factual, except not sure if Tamil is the oldest language or Sanskrit or some other is.
But the above quoted part of your comment is utter BS.
The reason to promote Hindi is nationalistic rather than religious. Why should the lingua franca of any country be a foreign language, it should be a local language. Hindi fits the bill amongst all other Indian languages is because it has the largest footprint and hence best odds of success, as opposed to say Tamil which is primarily spoken in 1 state.
[+] [-] quetzthecoatl|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway20-20|5 years ago|reply
Not sure how Hindi is related to the caste system. Caste system plagues all of India irrespective of the mother tongue.
> forces in to the education of all non-hindi speaking states too
Education is a state subject in India, the union government cannot force a language on a state
[+] [-] ffpip|5 years ago|reply
The same misconception is present with national sport (believed to be Hockey, actually is no sport)
[+] [-] pkd|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Karishma1234|5 years ago|reply
You lost me there. Usual white man's burden speaking. BJP is not a "religious" party in any sense of the word. Hindi is just ridiculously popular language mostly because of Bollywood. Since most politicians tend to be 'hindi' speaking they try to make Hindi even more popular as it benefits them where as regional parties see that as threat.
Stop drinking Equality Lab's kool aid.
[+] [-] RcouF1uZ4gsC|5 years ago|reply
I say that languages divide us and silo us. It is a triumph when a language dies because the people who previously spoke it now think and speak in a different language. Of course we should try to preserve any literature or folk-lore.
I look forward to the day when everyone on earth will be able to speak and communicate in a single language.
[+] [-] wavefunction|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davehcker|5 years ago|reply
Goethe said something along the lines- “He who does not know foreign languages does not know anything about his own”. As for the inherent beauty in a language, most would agree that certain thing expressed in language X 'tastes' different than in Y. As for uniting, I am neither German nor Persian, but it is my ability to use German or Persian that unites me to both the cultures (and people) in a much deeper way; of course, you can argue that the fact that I drew the boundaries of German/Persian is in itself a problem, and having had a single language would have been the ideal, but again, I doubt that since language X might be superior in terms of certain expressions over Y (until proven otherwise).
[+] [-] vram22|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] disown|5 years ago|reply
So should we just have one programming language? Should we have just one OS? Should we have one computer game? One social media? Should we have one political party? One school? One store? One book?
> I look forward to the day when everyone on earth will be able to speak and communicate in a single language.
We already do. It's called math.
[+] [-] ponker|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] srtjstjsj|5 years ago|reply