TMA
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2015
- Messages
- 4,425
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Please bear in mind that attacking my person does not support your arguments. It only weakens them.I know where you are coming from my dear little "school boy" ...because you are applying the "Constantinople" analogy here which is wrong for plenty of reasons. Allama Iqbal was a great philosopher, scholar and a statesman, a dreamer but not a messenger or prophet whose words are divine. Furthermore, you have no idea about the evolution in his thoughts. So it depends when did he wrote it. Also it does not imply he is talking about Urdu..he may very well be referring to Hindi itself and both languages existed in parallel. Mirza Ghalib, Mir Taqi Mir, Momin, all were great Urdu poets.
I am not applying any analogy.
I stated that Allama Iqbal called Urdu Hindi and that Pakistanis should not be ashamed of also calling it Hindi. I did not say that referring to the National Language as Urdu be banned. Did I?
Allama Iqbal also referred to Urdu as Urdu as well. It is just two different names for the same language.
All I want is Pakistanis to not be frightened of their Linguistic History even if technically Urdu/Hindi is not a Pakistani language but since we made it a National Language we might as well accept the history of it.
Pakistani should not be afraid to refer to Urdu as Hindi at times. It is those who "nativised" the beautiful Hindi language due to their hatred of Muslim culture, they ought to call their language by a "native" word.
We ought to make clear though by Hindi we mean the original Hindi written in the Person-Arabic script with the plethora of Person-Arabic idiom and vocabulary.
I mean can you imagine de Normanizing/delatinising English and re-germanifying it to make it "native"?
It is highly unlikely that he was referring to the re sankritized Devangari Hindi but if that is what you think then fine.