Urdu
in India - III
By Dr. Rizwana Rahim
Chicago, IL
Imagine what would happen to
ANY language, not just to Urdu, that continues
to nourish and enrich other languages, but does
not receive adequate support for its own continued
survival and growth, or even proper credit and
recognition for the support it provides other
languages: This would be exsanguination, a slow
draining of its life-blood.
If language X offers no upward mobility or increased
opportunities, its use in schools and elsewhere
would, as a consequence, decline with time, and
the next generation would prefer (quite understandably)
another (say, Language Y) that offers what X couldn't.
Language X could easily be Hindi itself, compared
to English (Language Y). Continued vitality and
growth of a language lie in the 'genetics' of
the language itself, i.e., how well a language
is received and regarded by each succeeding generation
in the daily life of its 'users' in both personal
and official/business. Vitality and growth will
be reflected in such indices as its output and
progress in literature (books, newspapers, etc),
science and technology and other areas.
In addition to its continued usage by coming generations,
growth of a language is indicated by its usage,
for example, in newspapers, books and other such
indices over the years. Using the Ministry of
Information data, Paul Brass looked at the language
newspapers and their annual circulation from 1960
to 1987. In 1960, there were 680 Urdu newspapers
(~ 8.5% of the total newspapers published in the
country then), whereas Hindi had 1,532 (~19%,
or 2x Urdu papers), English 1,647 (slightly more
than Hindi), and 2,718 papers in other regional
languages. From 1960 to 1987 (nearly 30 years),
the total newspapers in all languages jumped three-fold
(from 8,026 to 24,629) and in 1987 (level of increase
in parentheses): Urdu (1,676; 2.4x); Hindi (7,783;
over 5x); English (4,322; 2.6x) and regional languages
(8,335; 3x). Despite the relative increases and
their levels, the share of Urdu out of total newspapers
declined from 8.7% in 1960 to 6.8 % nearly three
decades later (similar decline was also seen in
English papers, from 20.5 % to 17.5 % -- but during
the same period, Hindi's share grew from 19% to
31.6%, with regional papers claiming over a third
(33.8%) of the total share.
Some nationalist groups have long believed that
since Urdu is too reminiscent of the Muslim and
Moghul past, it must no longer have a place of
recognition or prominence in a free independent
India (or the 'Urdu=Muslim' or 'Hindi-Hindu' myth).
Such comments are baseless:
(i) The language that seems to have kept the free
independent India united so far (including through
the highly divisive, strife-ridden States' Reorganization
period of the 1950s) is not Hindi or any of the
indigenous languages but English, reminiscent
for a more recent British past. English not only
outlasted its initial 15-year lease-of-life granted
in the 1950 Constitution but if Advani's assurances
during the Eighth Schedule debate are any indication,
the language of our British past would also continue
as a unifying force in a linguistically-diverse
independent India, in addition to providing India
a distinct edge in this IT age.
(ii) After the decline of Apabhransha, modern
Hindi itself emerged (1283) with Khusro's pahelis
and mukris (he was also the first to use the term
'Hindavi'). And, it's in the works of Sharfuddin,
Banda Niwaz Gailurdaz, Wjahi Ali, Sultan Kuli
Qutabshah, Shah Turab etc., that one can see the
'khari boli' or the established form of Hindi,
while Kabir's works (1398-1518) mark the origin
of "Nirguna-Bhaki" period, and
(iii) Another unforgettable contribution to Hindi
was from neither a Hindu nor a Muslim or a Sikh,
but from John B. Gilchrist, a principal at Fort
Williams College of Calcutta (established by British
East India Company), who, for teaching BEIC employees,
wrote Hindi grammar and compiled a dictionary
in 1796 (the first published Hindi book): its
critical impact on the growth of Hindi literature
cannot be ignored or minimized.
In Pakistan, however, Urdu is the official language
but it happens to be the mother tongue of only
8% of the population. Urdu and Pushto are almost
equally widespread as the first language, which
is far behind 48% of the population who speak
Punjabi, but lot closer to the cluster of languages
that are the mother tongue of minority populations:
Sindhi (12%) and Siraiki, a Punjabi variant (10%).
Of course, there are some linguistic problems
in a country that the religion couldn't hold together
in 1971 that language wanted to put asunder. Nevertheless,
it's a valiant gesture indeed for Urdu and its
survival and promotion.
For promotion of Urdu, the Indian government has
taken some steps, including appointing the Gujral
Commission and creating National Council for the
Promotion of Urdu Language (NCPUL), an autonomous
organization created by the Union Ministry of
Human Resource Development. Both of them have
had little success to speak of: Gujral Commission
is unable to see its recommendations accepted
and implemented, and NCPUL, a successor to the
now-defunct Bureau for the Promotion of the Urdu
Language and the Taraqqi-e-Urdu Board, is mired
in other difficulties and thus largely ineffective
so far.
A colleague of mine, Dr Khan Dawood L. Khan, whose
articles have also appeared in 'The Pakistan Link',
has raised these concerns about Urdu with the
Indian Minister of Information and Broadcasting,
Shri Jaipal Sudini Reddy: Indian songs, movies
and TV shows contain a lot of Urdu words. All
of them are labeled as 'Hindi' productions, none
even co-listing Urdu among the credits. Since
all these productions (movies, TV productions,
songs etc) are registered with the Ministry to
obtain its approval certificates, it also has
the responsibility to see that its certified products
display proper labels. Dr Khan's letter (22 April
2005) offered his suggestion, which I thought
was reasonable, but so far he has received neither
an acknowledgment nor a response. A translation
of this letter was also published as 'open' letter
in "Munsif" (19 May 2005) of Hyderabad,
AP/India, on the Editorial page, under letters
["Hindi ga'naon mein Urdu ul-faaz"].
Here's the text of the letter (22 April 2005)
to Shri Jaipal Sudini Reddy, Union Cabinet Minister,
Information Broadcasting and Culture, New Delhi,
India (sjaipal@sansad.nic.in ) :
"Indian movies, TV programs and songs (all
labeled and certified as 'Hindi') contain a lot
of Urdu words. Such productions are categorized
as ‘Hindi,’ and Urdu is NOT even co-listed
in the credit.
“I believe it is unfair to Urdu, which is
after all one of the recognized official Indian
languages.
“Hindi is a rich language, and as a native
speaker of these both languages, I'm always pleased
to see Urdu contributions to 'Hindi'. But this
happens to be at the expense of Urdu. To be fair,
Urdu needs proper recognition and properly listed
in credits.
“If a Hindi movie/TV program/song contains
a significant number of Urdu words, I think it
would be reasonable to list/categorize it as ‘Hindi/Urdu.’
For this, I suggest the 10-15% Urdu words as the
minimal required contribution.
“I think I represent the sentiment of many
Urdu-speakers who feel this step-brotherly treatment.
I hope this suggestion receives a serious consideration
in your Ministry. I would appreciate an early
response (by email or post)."
Those similarly interested in this issue can pursue
this matter, as part of Constitutional rights
of linguistic minorities under Article 20 (to
preserve "distinct language script or culture"),
Article 30 ("All minorities, whether based
on religion or language, shall have the right
to establish and administer educational institutions
of their choice") and Article 350 for seeking
redress of the grievances to any central or state
official/agency/authority [ "Every person
shall be entitled to submit a representation for
the redress of any grievance to any officer or
authority of the Union or a state in any of the
languages used in the Union or in the state, as
the case may be"] and its sub-sections Article
350 A & B.
Such slow dissolution of any language will certainly
have an overall impact on the cultural amalgam
of a country.
References:
1. Paul R. Brass. The Politics of India, Since
Independence
[The New Cambridge History of India. IV-I], 2nd
ed., 1994
2. Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.), 2005. Ethnologue:
Languages of the World, Fifteenth edition. Dallas,
Tx.: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com/.
http://www.ethnologue.com/web.asp
3. Tej K. Bhatia. Colloquial Hindi. Rutledge.
New York. 1996
[* 'Romeo and Juliet' by Shakespeare, Act 2, scene
2, lines 43–44; ** Gertrude Stein, 1922]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
