Talk:Hindi Belt/Archive 1

Bihari languages are not Hindi
This map based on the reference - "Language families and branches, languages and dialects in A Historical Atlas of South Asia, Oxford University Press. New York 1992." has been titled "Distribution of Hindi languages" here. It claims that Bihari languages are Hindi, which is no more considered true. Bihari languages are not Hindi. Kindly refer articles on Bihari_languages, Maithili, Magadhi .. references are available there. If you need more references kindly let me know. Manoj nav (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

This map is very wrong in the sense that it doesn't depict southern or Dakhni hindi anywhere. On the other hand it shows areas that are not even Hindi dialect speaking like all of Himachal Pradesh which is a Western Pahari speaking area which has upto 90% legibility with Dogri and neighbouring dialects of Punbjabi and even parts of Jammu and Kashmir upto Punchch as part of the Hindi belt. Also, some districts of eastern Punjab and Chandigarh are also included which are exclusively Punjabi speaking. It seems an attempt to artificially "expand" the Hindi speaking area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.3.201 (talk) 07:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hindi-speaking ethnic groups
I know that there is no single ethnic group for Hindi-speakers, but I'm sure that there must be a few ethnic groups who do only speak Hindi (for example the people of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh), not counting people from Bihar, Rajasthan, Haryana etc. I'm certain the people in the three former states cannot purely belong to the Rajput, Bhili, Rajasthani, or any other such ethnic group

The articles regarding the three states above say nothing more than something along the lines of the population is diverse, with Indo-Aryan peoples being in the majority. These mysterious Aryan ethnic groups, who I have found no references to, are what I would like to know about. Can anyone name them? --Maurice45 (talk) 17:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * No mystery. Punjabi people, Jat people, Kashmiri people, Rajput people, etc, etc, etc. Look under Indo-Aryan peoples. --Hunnjazal (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

This map is very wrong in the sense that it doesn't depict southern or Dakhni hindi anywhere. On the other hand it shows all of Himachal Pradesh(Western Pahari speaking area) and even parts of Jammu and Kashmir upto Punchch as Hindi belt. Also, some districts of eastern Punjab and Chandigarh are also included which are exclusively Punjabi speaking. It seems an attempt to artifially "expand" the Hindi speaking area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.3.201 (talk) 07:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Do not merge with North India
North India and the Hindi Belt (btw why does the name of this article keep changing?) are not the same at all. There are many regions of North India that are not Hindi speaking - Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal, Punjab. Then there are areas which are Hindi speaking that aren't included under some definitions of North India as unambiguously being part of it (e.g. Madhya Pradesh). They are related concepts but distinct. Just as England and Great Britain are distinct but related - though millions of people might refer to them interchangeably. Or, for that matter, Madras and South India are distinct, though millions of North Indians and Pakistanis may refer to them interchangeably (usage derived from the erstwhile Madras Presidency, which really did cover a good chunk of South India, though not the entirety). It doesn't make any sense to merge them at all. Unless there is a good counterargument, I will proceed to delete the "discuss" tag. --Hunnjazal (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I am deleting the flag. It was a pretty non-controversial call anyway. --Hunnjazal (talk) 17:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

hindi in west bengal and orissa
for heavem's sake, most bongs cannot read and write hindi properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.224.126.50 (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Reversion
User Katheeja who has been editing this article lately has been indef blocked as a sock. see - Sockpuppet investigations/Shinas/Archive. I have reverted his additions --Sodabottle (talk) 05:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

fsdfbgfnjtytnt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.76.153.66 (talk) 10:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No need to go on a merging spree
This article, (Hindi languages), is about various dialects of Hindi. Whereas Hindustani language is another version of Hindi language, thus making it a subset of this article, rather than qualifying them to be merged. (Ekabhishek (talk) 04:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC))


 * I agree fully. YoshiroShin (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that Hindustani language should not be merged with Hindi language but I also disagree with the comment that Hindustani language is subset of Hindi languages. Actually both Hindi languages & Urdu languages are derivative of Hindustani language one being Sanskritized another being Arabo-Persianized due to socio-political reasons. Hindi & Urdu are more formalised language guarded by formal rules of grammar, script, etc while Hindustani is spontenous language of masses across Doab & adjacent regions (primarily Awadh) from last 200 years initially it was blend of Urdu, Persian, Hindi and later English also mixed into it. Hindustani is the actual language used in Bollywood and for communication between people of different regions.
 * Hindustani has been lingua franca of Northern India right from later Mughal period thru British period to modern days, the picture became little bit distorted due to event of split of Hindustan into India, Pakistan and later Bangladesh with each country taking Hindi, Urdu & Bangla respectively to their helm replacing Hindustani as medium of comunique. During British time Hindustani was standard instrument of communication in Northern India i.e. for Bengal Presidency, NWFP, Sindh, Rajputana etc. i.e. whole of todays Pakistan, Northern India, Western India and Central India at that time more than 75% of British Indian Empire, initially script was Nastaliq later Devnagiri also got place but this was only difference in script and not in words (british documents, stamps and coins are good example of this). So Hindustani is niether Hindi nor Urdu but is much broader then that.


 * -Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 06:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

"Actually both Hindi languages & Urdu languages are derivative of Hindustani language one being Sanskritized another being Arabo-Persianized due to socio-political reasons."

You seem a little confused there... There are no "Urdu languages", and you're mixing up Hindi languages with Modern Standard Hindi.

The way I understand it is that here there is a group of closely related languages called the "Hindi languages". Of those, Khariboli was one of them and it became the most used of all the Hindi languages. Persian, English, Portuguese, etc. loanwords came into the Khariboli which was also called Hindustani, and were in common usage by many. Some would refer to this Hindustani/Khariboli as "Hindi" or "Urdu" or just "Hindustani", depending on their background. After partition, Hindustani/Khariboli was standardized for Perso/Arabic and with Sanskritizations removed, and it was called Urdu. So, Urdu can refer to Hindustani or to Urdu register of Hindustani. On the other side, Hindustani was standardized into a Sanskritized register with Perso-Arabic loans removed. This was called Modern Standard Hindi. So, "Hindi" can refer to Hindustani, Modern Standard Hindi, or the Hindi languages.

Therefore, Hindustani is Khariboli, which is one of the Hindi languages. Urdu and Modern Standard Hindi are two standardized registers of Khariboli/Hindustani.

I hope this clears up any confusion. YoshiroShin (talk) 04:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Fiji Hindi
This should be integrated into the list of languages. Sarcelles (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Is it something like Latin or Germanic languages?
If we use the term in Europe, we could talk about "Latin languages" (French, Italian, Spanish, Romanian, Portuguese): 200 million people in Europe.

Or an equivalent to "Germanic languages" (German, English, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian): 200 million people in Europe.--88.23.27.247 (talk) 05:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Definitions
It is not necessary to belabour the point that these "dialects" can with equal right be described as "languages". It is perfectly commonlpace that there is no linguistically stringent distinction between "language" and "dialect", these terms are entirely political/cultural.

Clearly, this wide definition of Hindi is designed so that Hindi comes up as the majority language in India. The central government chose to use this definition until 1991. In 2001, they apparently published two figures, of 258 million vs. 422 million "Hindi speakers". This should make abundantly clear that the definition is essentially arbitrary and a matter of politics. This article does not need to editorialize as to which usage is "correct", it just needs to document the history of usage, official or otherwise, detachedly. --dab (𒁳) 08:26, 23 January 2012 (UTC)