Why Chennai can't and won't speak Hindi

[Vinod2070]

-Tami people are not queuing up to watch Hindi movies.
-Still the best music director is doing music in Tamil for Tamil people and he shall do in Hindi for Hindi people...brrra obvious?
-The same music director spoke in Tamil when he won Oscar not in Hindi.
-Now about Vellore..it's my hometown and ironic now you just dragged it into discussion. why talk about Bengal when we arguing about Hindi? Begalis are not jumping to impose Bengali or to make it national language.
-If some Hindi movie critic is Tamil then even I can name whole bunch of other language speaking Tamil movie critics...

This is the very exact thing we don't want to hear. You want us to speak in Hindi just because we have to communicate with you?
What's special about you?

eventually Hindi can't and won't be national language and Chennai will always speak in Tamil.

Are we not chasing shadows here?

Hindi is not the national language, it is just the most widely spoken language both in terms of native speakers as well as non native speakers.

There is not one individual here who has talked about imposing any language on anyone else.

Yes, you don't have to learn Hindi if we have to communicate with you or vice versa.

It is great that every Indian takes pride in his native language and culture and also appreciates the culture of the rest of the Indians. There are many commonalities especially those coming from the shared Dharma.

Though it would help if all of us don't take the pride too far and become chauvinists.

Depends on how you define Aryans(, there certainly is no evidence for the whole of the Indo-European family having migrated from India. Also the linguistic case remains formidable. While it is an interesting hypothesis, that unfortunately is all it is. It is easier to blow holes in the conventional AIT than it is to offer an alternate hypothesis backed by evidence.

If at all there was a migration (in any direction), it won't be of people wholesale taking over new lands and displacing people. Primarily it was a movement of culture and languages and many Aryans became totally a part of their new lands and lost their own language and culture in short order.

Some key examples being the earliest datable Aryan records. They are found in West Asia for the Kassites, Hittites and the Mitannis. These people were clearly outsiders, they spoke Indo Aryan languages and they can be linked only to India as the records clearly indicate references to Surya, Marut, Indra, Bhaga etc.

They could not have come from anywhere else. Anyway, this topic still needs much more scholarship that is not motivated by a need to prove something that has already been decided (Aryan invasion in 1500 BC) and spin the evidence around it.

Not too many and his was an honest effort.

OK, I have seen some of these (honest?) mistakes in translation being used by motivated people endlessly.

 

[Bang Galore]

A
Some key examples being the earliest datable Aryan records. They are found in West Asia for the Kassites, Hittites and the Mitannis. These people were clearly outsiders, they spoke Indo Aryan languages and they can be linked only to India as the records clearly indicate references to Surya, Marut, Indra, Bhaga etc.

An argument can be made for the Mitanni but we know too little even there to be conclusive( a good relation would be some of the names which are likely similar to Rg vedic names). Even less with the Kassites(extremely thin) and not really heard that argument with the Hittites(speaking Indo Aryan).

(The Mitanni & Kassites, if accepted as Indo-Aryan - both or just the Mittani would blow conventional OIT arguments out of the water, especially any dating)

 

[RazPaK]

The fact that the southies that comment on this thread cannot or refuse to speak Urdu, proves the Op's disposition.

 

[Vinod2070]

But fake Arbis have been made to speak Urdu (which is just Hindi with a few foreign words)!

 

[abjktu]

The fact that the southies that comment on this thread cannot or refuse to speak Urdu, proves the Op's disposition.

boww..bow...boww..bow
keep quiet,, razpak...your master is coming....

 

[RazPaK]

boww..bow...boww..bow
keep quiet,, razpak...your master is coming....

Allah swt is not coming. He is already here. He is everywhere.

 

[Vinod2070]

An argument can be made for the Mittani but we know too little even there to be conclusive( a good relation would be some of the names which are likely similar to Rg vedic names). Even less with the Kassites(extremely thin) and not really heard that argument with the Hittites(speaking Indo Aryan).

Well I am reading a book that shows the following similarities with Rigvedic names:

Mittanis: Mi-it-ra, In-da-ra, U-ra-wa-na and Na-sha-at-ti-ya (The vedic gods Mitra, Indra, Varuna and Nasatyas).

This is besides the numerals showing a striking resemblance to corresponding Sanskrit words.

Kaissites: They had gods like Surias and Maruttas (Surya and Maruta from the vedas) and names like Indabugas (Indra+Bhaga)

About Hittites, I think we only know they spoke an Aryan language.

 

[Bang Galore]

Well I am reading a book that shows the following similarities with Rigvedic names:

Mittanis: Mi-it-ra, In-da-ra, U-ra-wa-na and Na-sha-at-ti-ya (The vedic gods Mitra, Indra, Varuna and Nasatyas).

This is besides the numerals showing a striking resemblance to corresponding Sanskrit words.

Kaissites: They had gods like Surias and Maruttas (Surya and Maruta from the vedas) and names like Indabugas (Indra+Bhaga)

I'm aware of the similarities. The names of the Mitanni are very similar to Rg vedic names.The evidence of Rg vedic gods however is not assumed to be proof of an "Indian" identity since the argument is that these were "Aryan" (of the invasion/migration fame) Gods. That refrence(Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya) btw, is recorded in a treaty as "witnesses" agreed to by Suppiluliuma (Hittite) and Shattiwaza(Mitanni), in. 1380 BC

About Hittites, I think we only know they spoke an Aryan language

Indo-European yes, Aryan? Unlikely.

 

[abjktu]

Allah swt is not coming. He is already here. He is everywhere.

bow...boww...bowww...
rona math karo,betta....bhook lagi hai,kya?? pareshaan math...masterji abhi aavoonga..kuch samay wait karo...
thank you..

 

[Vinod2070]

I'm aware of the similarities. The names of the Mitanni are very similar to Rg vedic names.The evidence of Rg vedic gods however is not assumed to be proof of an "Indian" identity since the argument is that these were "Aryan" (of the invasion/migration fame) Gods. That refrence(Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya) btw, is recorded in a treaty as "witnesses" agreed to by Suppiluliuma (Hittite) and Shattiwaza(Mitanni), in. 1380 BC

Indo-European yes, Aryan? Unlikely.

Yes, but won't it be strange if only the Indian branch of supposed immigrant Aryans retained those references (in the original natural form) but most of the others didn't?

In fact, the Indian branch shares more commonalities with the mythology of even many of the European branches than they do with each other.

Indian traditions can explain things about the mythology of those branches that they themselves retained no memory of (or have no tradition of). The Indian branch retains the connection with the natural origins of the mythology rather than just the latter anthropological connections.

 

[Bang Galore]

Yes, but won't it be strange if only the Indian branch of supposed immigrant Aryans retained those references (in the original natural form) but most of the others didn't?

In fact, the Indian branch shares more commonalities with the mythology of even many of the European branches than they do with each other.

Indian traditions can explain things about the mythology of those branches that they themselves retained no memory of (or have no tradition of). The Indian branch retains the connection with the natural origins of the mythology rather than just the latter anthropological connections.

Very strange. I have always been inclined to support the idea of the Mittani being clear Indo-Aryans. The names known show a very clear Rg vedic connection. However for any alternate hypothesis beyond the Mitanni, we should go by the evidence, which whatever there is, is extremely thin if at all. No point in refuting the AIT for its "lack of evidence" while supporting another theory for which evidence, at best, is equally lacking.

 

[Indischer]

Very strange. I have always been inclined to support the idea of the Mittani being clear Indo-Aryans. The names known show a very clear Rg vedic connection. However for any alternate hypothesis beyond the Mitanni, we should go by the evidence, which whatever there is, is extremely thin if at all. No point in refuting the AIT for its "lack of evidence" while supporting another theory for which evidence, at best, is equally lacking.

Not to forget that their word for One-Eika/Aika, is clearly an Indo-Aryan usage as opposed to the Iranic Eiva/Aiva. Too many precise coincidences to overlook.

 

[Vinod2070]

Very strange. I have always been inclined to support the idea of the Mittani being clear Indo-Aryans. The names known show a very clear Rg vedic connection. However for any alternate hypothesis beyond the Mitanni, we should go by the evidence, which whatever there is, is extremely thin if at all. No point in refuting the AIT for its "lack of evidence" while supporting another theory for which evidence, at best, is equally lacking.

I agree with you.

These various theories should be treated as unproven hypothesis and not taught as fact anywhere in the world.

Let unbiased scholarship flower and depending on the weight of discovered facts, the consensus can emerge. It needs to be all kept in perspective.

The current scenario of the AIT being officially taught all over the world as fact and this being used for political purposes is a travesty that needs to be put to a stop.

I personally feel that the OIT has far more merit and weight of facts behind it than AIT. Of course I can't be accused of being totally unbiased.

As soon as you start taking into account what the Puranas explicitly tell you (and they can be verified till ~3100 BC by using comparative mythology from other sources), the whole AIT falls on the face.

Of course, the Puranas go far beyond 3100 BC and it is absurd for motivated historians to reject the overwhelming evidence when the same Puranas are used for the period after 600 BC as fact.

 

[manlion]

Of course, the Puranas go far beyond 3100 BC and it is absurd for motivated historians to reject the overwhelming evidence when the same Puranas are used for the period after 600 BC as fact.

the only Aryan religious source that can be relied upon, in regard to early Aryan history, is the Rig veda. the other literatures such as puranas are mythological and much later period works, some puranas are as recent as 500 AD

even in Hindu orthodox traditions, puranas are relied upon as secondary not primary sources

Smriti - Hindupedia, the Hindu Encyclopedia

 

[abjktu]

the only Aryan religious source that can be relied upon, in regard to early Aryan history, is the Rig veda. the other literatures such as puranas are mythological and much later period works, some puranas are as recent as 500 AD

even in Hindu orthodox traditions, puranas are relied upon as secondary not primary sources

Smriti - Hindupedia, the Hindu Encyclopedia

so,what is your point??? India should be split into two halves...one for aryans and other for dyasu dravidans???...are you happy now???dei,there is no Aryans or dravidans here..we are Indians...don't bother too much for us...Chennai may speak Tamil or hindi...what it has to do with srilankans like you??..please,leave here...and go to your Ceylon...and fly a kite...
thank you...