The New Wave of Indian Type
design.google
design.google
Huh, somebody is making a vast over-simplification, presumably in a well-intentioned attempt to package this in a way the Western mind can comprehend. Which frankly is futile. India is much more diverse than that.
In my youth I spent some time bumming around Saurashtra, a region in Gujarat state that's about 150 miles square. Nearly 50 languages are indigenous to that one region alone. Not dialects. Languages. It's wonderful, but nuts.
That was almost 20 years ago; no doubt it's more homogenous now, which is sad to think about. A century ago nearly 80 languages were spoken there, so linguistic diversity has been declining fast. Any effort to preserve it deserves applause.
Over a 200km distance, people definitely would have trouble understanding each other without using a common standardised language ("Standard Dutch", which we learn in school), even when "officially" they are speaking the same "language". On TV, people who don't use the standardised language are subtitled.
So, I haven't been to India, but what you describe seems quite natural.
Xenophobic much?
Even dialects have very different sounding words or pronunciations which increases the complexity exponentially. But I am trying it only with an eye on its potential. NLP will simply act as the catalyst for technology adoption in the rural and semi-rural area.
I'm thinking to study China's approach here since I heard even Chinese is incredibly diverse.
For younger generation this is not a problem, back in my college life where people in the same class came from different areas, from Xinjiang to Canton to the northeast corner. We have no problem understanding each other though sometimes funny with unique words or accents.
It seems that the problem is not as severe in China as in India.
It is similar to the way the Chinese government assigns non-native political officials to rule each region, and severely censors any politically controversial communication/media. That is, it is yet another tool of authoritarian social control, an effort to forestall any political opposition to the central government and its unresponsive top-down decision-making process.
India does not have the same kind of authoritarian governing institutions, so similar forced homogenization would not be politically viable.
Except they are not mutually unintelligible. Put someone from heilongjiang province in Sichuan and they will still be able to understand the language, albeit with more difficulty.
Though there are dialects that do have completely different pronunciation, they all use the same underlying script, save a select few minority languages. Mandarin Chinese is taught in school, but everyone still uses the local dialect to speak with each other.
I'm not even denying the CCP has ulterior motives in doing this, but your original claim was simply incorrect and disingenuous.
When youve talked to one of them youve talked to all of them.
Wu (Shanghainese and the other related dialects of the Yangtze river delta), Yue (Cantonese), Hakka, Xiang and Min are absolutely languages. They're at least as divergent as the Romance languages or the different "dialects" of Arabic. Having a single written standard does not make the spoken varieties one language. And even if it did Cantonese has a written standard even if it's not used much, so there are at least two Chinese languages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_varieties_of_Chinese https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Written_Cantonese
The relationship is similar to that between English and German or French and Italian.
Only Mandarin and Cantonese even have a fully developed way of writing with characters. Up until relatively recently Mandarin itself was considered a spoken language, until a written standard (ie correspondence of characters with the words people actually spoke) was developed. Hokkien is in the process of this now in Taiwan, they literally have a government department choosing characters for words (They started off with 900 or something, not sure where they are up to now).
Native speaker here. I have absolutely no idea where you get that.
Cantonese is just one of many dialects, and in fact, it is not a single dialect: People from different parts of Guadong province actually speak Cantonese very differently. Should you consider those different languages?
Cantonese, Hokkien and Mandarin do sound like different languages, but not all dialects are. Most Chinese speaker can understand dialects spoken in central, and north parts of China, even though they usually can't speak those dialects.
Even though some of the dialects sounds very differently, the words, syntax, sentences being used are actually the same. That's how people can read what other people speaking other dialects write, with no problem.
To complicate the issue even more, there're not one, but two writing systems currently being used: Simplified Chinese is used in China mainland and Singapore, while Traditional Chinese is used in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. That's the reason people from mainland China (no matter what dialect they speak, even Cantonese) cannot read Hong Kong newspaper fluently
The two writing systems are different but they have one to one mapping for each character. So it's also not two unrelated system.
Mandarin wasn't really written until about 120 years ago. Before people would write classical Chinese. It's a "written vernacular/白話文".
> Cantonese is just one of many dialects, and in fact, it is not a single dialect: People from different parts of Guadong province actually speak Cantonese very differently. Should you consider those different languages?
No, I'd consider them different dialects of a language called Cantonese.
> Even though some of the dialects sounds very differently, the words, syntax, sentences being used are actually the same.
Nonsense. Hokkien has a different grammar, even the personal pronouns don't match up 1:1. They're clearly in the same language family, sure, but so are English and German.
> That's the reason people from mainland China (no matter what dialect they speak, even Cantonese) cannot read Hong Kong newspaper fluently
No, it's not. I've seen Taiwanese people try and read Hong Kong newspapers, and they can't do it fluently.
This is true, but it's a separate issue from having various dialects. Language evolves as time goes by, and in the case of Chinese before "written vernacular", people would write in the same form of ancient Chinese (regardless of pronunciation) which diverged a lot from what people actually speak. With the promotion of "written vernacular", people started to write what they speak, irrelevant of dialects.
Even though each of the dialects have some special vocabulary, and even different grammar, that doesn't mean they're not still "MOSTLY" the same.
I speak a southern Chinese dialect myself (I don't know what to call it in English) which is also dramatically different from Mandarin. Yes it has a few words that we commonly used, that I thought to be unique, but it turns out all of the characters and words exist in standard Chinese dictionary. Those words actually existed for a long time, and they are just no longer commonly used by other people. That said, learning to speak Mandarin is no where close to be like learning a new language. Vast majority parts of the language are still the same. Hokkien might be slightly more different but still no where close to being a separate language.
On the other hand, Japanese is undoubtedly a separate language, even though it also use Chinese characters (plus about 100 characters of their own), and many of the Chinese characters and words in Japanese actually means the same as they do in Chinese. No one would claim Japanese as a dialect of Chinese, because the difference is both significant and clear.
I think you also agree that both Taiwanese and people from mainland China CAN read Hong Kong newspapers, just not as fluently. Part of the reason is what I said, different writing systems. The other reason is that people do use some different words, especially for new concepts. Since Taiwan, Hong Kong and mainland China has been fairly separated for a long time, divergence is inevitable. For example, new words like "program" is translated in different ways: "程序" in mainland China, and "程式“ in Taiwan. Again, this has nothing to do with dialects. Mandarin speakers form mainland China would not be able to read Taiwan newspapers as fluently even though it's also Mandarin. Cantonese speakers from Guangdong province couldn't read Hong Kong newspaper as fluently even though it's also Cantonese.
On the other hand, I grew up watching many Hong Kong movies that were spoken in Cantonese but with Chinese captions. The captions needed no translation at all - They were just what the actors were saying. After watching many of those, I could even understand some Cantonese though I still couldn't speak those. I admit there are occasionally some word that seems unfamiliar to me, but it didn't impacted much. I don't believe you can do that with a different language.
No, people started to write down what they spoke in Mandarin. It wasn't irrelevant to the language they spoke, it was tailor made for Mandarin. Hong Kong went through this exact same process, and came out with a different written language. Which is why you have a cantonese wikipedia and a mandarin (w/ traditional chinese characters) wikipedia. And which is why Taiwanese people who can read mandarin in traditional characters fluently can't read cantonese in traditional characters fluently.
French and Spanish are 'mostly the same'. Same alphabet and everything. And they're not dialects. With languages like Hokkien it's more like the difference between English and German.
I speak a southern Chinese dialect myself (I don't know what to call it in English) which is also dramatically different from Mandarin. Yes it has a few words that we commonly used, that I thought to be unique, but it turns out all of the characters and words exist in standard Chinese dictionary.
That's because you never learned to write your language, because people don't consider it worth writing. You would have hammered mandarin characters into the right shape, because - presumably - that was the only thing your family was literate in. Of course it turned out the characters matched fairly well.
Again, that's like me finding out that "bonjour" in French actually literally translates to "Good day" in English - doesn't mean they are the same language.
I think you also agree that both Taiwanese and people from mainland China CAN read Hong Kong newspapers, just not as fluently.
Sure. I'm an English speaker that doesn't speak French or Dutch, but I can follow a French or Dutch newspaper well enough, if not all the details. Are French and Dutch just dialects of English? Goede Dag is just Good Day after all...
And yeah, most Chinese are bi-lingual by default. Now I know I can speak tons of northern Chinese languages. That's a big upgrade!
We all learn classical Chinese at school, and that must be a completely different language. Wait, are "classical Chinese" a single language? Should we count each of those spoken in different dynasty and different regions all as different language? Oh man, I can't even count how many languages I can speak
But hundreds of millions of other people in China natively speak hundreds of other mutually unintelligible Chinese languages. Most of them are (at least) bilingual.
Here is a grossly simplified map showing major language groups: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_sinitic_languages_...
For that reason, we define them as dialects not languages. We can "speak" other dialects but we can certainly "read" and understand them.
If you find that definition unsatisfying, sure you can call them different languages. We just call them dialects and that's not going to change.
Sure, if you want to speak Chinglish, keep calling them dialects. If you want to speak English, listen to what people here are telling you.
We all learn classical Chinese at school, and that must be a completely different language.
Of course it's a different language. It's not completely different. Languages can be related to each other. Old English is a different language than English. If English was written in Logograms instead of a phonetic alphabet, many of us could probably read Beowulf the same many of you can read the works of 老子.
Again, if I had the Chinese mindset, there would be a language called "Indo European" which would have various dialects like "Persian" and "Russian" and "Icelandic". There would also be "Standard Indo-European" - aka, English. It makes no sense.
If you don't like the translation form 方言 to dialect, should I just call it fangyan or 方言? Or is there a more precise linguistic term for that?
Our definition for "Language" is also different then. Should we call it "Yuyan" instead?
I'd translate "方言" to "dialect" when it's mutually understandable, and "language" when it's not. So Singapore Hokkien and Taiwan Hokkien are both dialects of the Hokkien language. But I'd translate 方言 to "language" when talking about Mandarin and Hokkien. They're languages not dialects in English because you cannot have a conversation - but they are part of the same language family.
The statements "Bureaucratese is not mutually intelligible with Occitan" and "Mandarin is not mutually intelligible with Cantonese" are both true, but we could just say "French is not mutually intelligible with Occitan" and "Chinese in not mutually intelligible with Cantonese".
I don’t have any problem if you want to talk about Parisian French (or pick your preferred other name for it), Castilian Spanish, etc.
Parisian French was pushed onto the people within the borders of the French nation-state by force, by a brutal authoritarian monarchy. Quoting Wikipedia,
‘The goals of the Public School System were made especially clear to the French speaking teachers sent to teach students in regions such as Occitania and Brittany; “And remember, Gents: you were given your position in order to kill the Breton language” were instructions given from a French official to teachers in the French department of Finistère (western Brittany).’
The French state continues to repress minority languages inside its borders. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_France
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mandarin#Etymology_1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Portugal_relatio...
First of all, "Mandarin" is spoken not only in China mainland, but also the standard in Singapore and Taiwan. It was a creation by the Republic of China (which later became Taiwan government) back in 1923, long before the current Chinese government came into power.
Children use Mandarin in school because they have to learn it to be able to communicate with people coming from other parts of China, which would have become a huge disadvantage to themselves. (I can't imagine how I would communicate with other people in college otherwise) It doesn't mean people will forget how to speak their own dialect. In fact, people from the same region almost always speak their own dialects.
Regional / minority cultures are generally protected by the government. The minority are almost always over-represented in all kinds of national events. Being a minority in China means you can get tons of advantage (lower score required to enter good colleges, financial aid, etc.)
Singapore is a cosmopolitan port city, there are several Chinese languages spoken there, and Mandarin was not the dominant one until recently. There are also many other languages spoken in Singapore, and from what I understand English is the primary language used for official business. Taiwan was not natively Mandarin speaking but speaks it now because it was taken over (from the Japanese) by the fleeing Mandarin-speaking KMT after they were beaten militarily by the Communists during the Chinese Civil War. Both Singapore and Taiwan were ruled for decades by authoritarian governments. I’m not sure about Singapore but in Taiwan other Chinese languages were forcefully suppressed.
Plenty of other parts of the world manage to communicate across regional/national borders without restricting people’s ability to produce/distribute local media in their native languages.
There are many countries where students learn several languages in school (including their native regional language and a national language) from an early age.
(Disclaimer again: I’m not an expert in the history, politics, or comparative linguistics of China. I recommend Wikipedia as a better first summary, if you are curious to learn about these subjects.)
Singapore was much more successful in suppressing Hokkien than Taiwan was.
From the article:
The initial goal of the campaign was for all young Chinese to stop speaking dialects in five years, and to establish Mandarin as the language of choice in public places within 10 years.
> Hokkien is still spoken by many Singaporean.
Again, the article shows that in 1980 81.4% of Chinese Singaporeans spoke a Chinese language at home that wasn't Mandarin. In 2015 it's 16.1%.
Yes, there are much less Singaporeans speaking their dialects at home. I've actually met several Singaporeans saying that want to speak their dialects as much as possible as they feel it's endangered. However, what are the alternatives? Singaporean Chinese doesn't speak the same dialect, and it's a small city. How do they communicate with each other in school, at work, and at home after marrying someone speaking a different dialect? They can speak English, in fact they do that as well, or they can speak Mandarin if they're communicating with another Chinese speaker. Either way, the chance they'll be able to speak their own dialects will diminish eventually.
In addition, most dialects are no where close to being endangered, as they're widely used in China. We speak in Mandarin with people that doesn't speak the same dialect, but at the same time, it'd also be weird if we are from the same place, speak the same dialect and yet decide to speak in Mandarin.
Hard to do that when lots of people speak Hokkien, Cantonese etc.
If you cannot, I found an English article for you: http://www.alittledynasty.com/history-of-mandarin-chinese.ht...
To summarize, Mandarin is not created out of nothing for sure, but the concept of "Mandarin Chinese" (or rather, Standard Chinese) started with an effort of newly established Republic of China in 1913, to develop a standard phonetic system and to use as the national language in China. They later published the standard around 1920s, which is essentially a modified version of phonetic system used in Beijing. The dialect now spoken in Beijing is very close to Mandarin, but not exactly the same.
I grew up in China and lived in Singapore for a long time. I can tell you for sure, that the different dialects spoken by Chinese should not be confused with completely different languages. First of all they share the same writing system, the words and syntax we use in various dialects are mostly the same. (Some dialects use a few words differently from others, but that's not surprising at all considering UK english and US english are not exactly the same)
I speak a southern dialect myself which sounds very different from Mandarin. But there is a somewhat systematic mapping from the dialect to Mandarin, so it was really not much an effort to learn Mandarin.
I can imagine there must have been some efforts there to promote the standard in the very beginning, maybe even "forcefully suppressing" other dialects are needed at some point, but considering the huge benefit, it undoubted is the best invention happened in the history of Chinese language.
In the same way that Hindi has been the native language of northern India for thousands of years (which is to say that while the Mandarin of today has connections to earlier forms of Chinese, it is hardly a monolithic, unchanging remnant of thousands of years ago).
That's also not how standard French formed. Standardized French is Parisian French, so just the 'dialect' of the politically-important centre. Not too dissimilar to Latin (which was originally narrowly the dialect of Rome) in that.
Whatever the propaganda, China still contains a number of non-mutually intelligible (though related) languages, but of course Mandarin enjoys much prominence and has an enormous number of speakers.
Language areas aren't made more complex by additional phonological complexity. The question you've asked seems to be "Does phonological complexity cause more language diversity". When put this way, there doesn't seem to be any causal mechanism that could do it. For instance, one might say: Well, English has a lot of vowels. People in California might simplify them one way, whereas people in Texas might simplify them in another way so that they can't understand each other well: therefore, you get additional linguistic diversity. But this requires the Texans and the Californians to be isolated from each other which isn't what people mean when they say "India is a very linguistically diverse country".
If we try it the other way "Does language diversity cause more phonological complexity", languages tend towards each other in case of diversity (because a person who speaks both Chinese and English will sometimes adopt features of one language into the other). This can sometimes lead to the propagation of more sounds (for instance, languages pretty much only use clicks if they're in contact with other languages that use clicks). And sometimes it can lead the elimination of them. I'm not sure of any particular research about this question, but my guess is on average it would tend towards the average, but if you took English and put it in India it wouldn't be too long before English in India sounds a lot more Indian.
> five of the most widely used scripts in India—Devanagari, Gujarati, Gurumukhi, Tamil, and Latin. Those five scripts support seven or eight of India’s most widely used languages, together spoken by hundreds of millions of people across the Indian subcontinent.
this list of scripts actually does not cover (for example) Bengali and Telugu, which together have more speakers than the population of the United States.
I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now). The information suddenly marketable to or directly consumable by anyone at any given place will significantly increase.
Settling on a "common" or "business" language, though, is entirely possible, and has been done many times in history. No language ever encompassed the whole world, and if one language has it's English, right now. Latin, Arabic, Mandarin, French, English, Spanish... The world has seen its share of common languages used within certain spheres of influence.
unus duo tres quattor quinque six septem octo novem decem ...
Ĉar diverseco estas la bazo de ĉia belo kaj ĉia kreemo. Sin diverseco, vivo estus sensignifa.
> I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now).
Certe, mi konsentas -- sed nur aldone al vian unikan lokan lingvon. Kaj ne la Anglan, mi petas!
You can see some chinese uptake here: http://esperanto.china.org.cn/
Esperanto is very european in its appearance (both grammar and vocab). This seems to have helped it to gain a userbase, which allows others to adopt it who don't share its background. The regularity of the language helps people even if they have to learn a lot of weird roots and struggle to get the very latinate relative clause system (a lot of English speakers struggle with that too though, because agreement is moribund).
Esperanto havas parolantojn en Cxini, Japanio, Koreio, Indonezio kaj Tajlando. Nedube ankauw aliaj sed cxi tiuj estas tiuj de kiuj mi renkontis esperantistojn, aw en mia lando aw en ilia.
Jene vi povas vidi ion de la cxina uzigxo: http://esperanto.china.org.cn/
Esperanto estas tre ewropa law sia formo (kaj gramatike kaj vorte). Sxajne tio helpis gxin obteni fruajn uzantojn, kiuj instigas ekuzi gxin aliajn kiu ne kunhavas gxian historion. La reguleco de la lingvo helpas homojn ecx se ili devas lerni multajn strangajn radikojn kaj penas kompreni la tre latinan relativan fraz-sistemon (multaj angla-parolantoj devas peni per tiu ankaw, cxar konsento estas mortonta).
What's really made it a worthwhile investment is that it's given me a better understanding of language itself. All languages have idiosyncrasies, including Esperanto -- but Esperanto's idiosyncrasies are unusually consistent, making it really easy to map things onto. So I often find it easier to comprehend some weird construct in (say) Hindi or Japanese by mapping it onto straightforward Esperanto, rather than trying to map it onto an English construct that's probably even weirder.
Plus it's just such an easy win. I can order off a menu and find my way around town in a fair handful of languages, but haven't really gotten much further than that. But I can easily read just about anything in Esperanto, with 1/10th the effort that I've put into any other language. Which is just kinda gratifying to be able to do.
Good grief.
The existence of diversity is generally a sign of freedom and self-sufficiency: that the people in question were/are free to retain and develop/enrich their own culture, and yet function successfully (enough) in interaction with the broader society, without too much pressure to give up their ways. (See: “melting pot” and “salad bowl”.) Monocultures, monolingualism, monotheism, etc., do have certain advantages too of course, but I hope some can see why diversity is valuable too.
People are all different and why should they not choose to communicate/eat/enjoy themselves as they wish, with all the advantages and disadvantages of their choices?
(Plus in the case of languages there are things which can be said in some and really can't be said in others. My wife, child and I would typically speak multiple languages, sometimes even in the same sentence, in order to convey the nuance of what we wanted to say. Hell, even in English there are things said in discipline-specific jargons that aren't really communicable any other way).
English profanity feels unsatisfying/watered-down. I suspect overuse in pop-culture has worn away most of the taboo factor, making it less cathartic.
Gods no. You'll have to pry my other two languages from my cold, dead tongue. Just the ability to have private conversations in public feels like a superpower. The amazing puns you can make up is also a huge benefit - I can amuse myself all the time.
Plus, you know, cultural diversity, accessing millennia of literature and history etc. But that's the boring stuff /s
If the above statement sounds wrong, it's because __it is__
We should let other cultures and languages to thrive by themselves; as this is the primary reason of evolution of our business language too. If multiple languages would not suddenly exist, our business language will stop borrowing from other languages and would cease to advance by itself.
Did you intend for that to come across as condescending?
Egads, that's terrible company to keep. Moving on now...
The same here (granted, I'm not a "true" Westerner, as I live in Eastern Europe, but that's also West of India). Adding to the conversation, I have the same issue of trying to comprehend the linguistic craziness that the Caucasus area represents. I mean, as a language buff I'm always amazed whenever I look at this language-map of the area (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Caucasus...) and at the language families included in there.
I am a native Indian, born, raised and living there (I mean in India). I find it hard to process this claim. I am pretty sure there are about 10 languages in any fairly diverse region of the country, but beyond that what we find are mostly dialects of various languages.
I am not sure if you are a 'western mind' (as you self identify in a later post) of Indian descent and whether you made that claim based on reading about Indian languages or by interacting with locals and asking them if they spoke languages or dialects. You see, almost all Indian languages (AFAIK) lack words to distinguish the concept of language and dialect. For academics sake, linguists do use some words but they haven't trickled down to general public. The tendency is to use the word 'bhasha' (or its variations such as bhashe, basai etc), which just means 'language', for both language and dialect, and even for such ideas as register and slang. So, any claim made by the general public about they speaking a different 'bhashe' must be evaluated properly and not taken at face value.
I think me means dialects. Which many times can sound very different. During my first semester engineering we had a electronics lecturer who came from North Karnataka. They speak a fairly different dialect of Kannada. When I heard her talking for the first time, I was quite startled to see that some thing like that would also mean Kannada. In Bangalore we have our typical street slang Kannada, heavily overloaded with English words.
Same is true of Urdu as well. Even the Dakhani Accent has so many varieties, some times it could sound strange hearing some one speak Urdu in Bangalore, then Tumkur and then Mysore(All districts close to each other).
As you might already know, the case with Kannada is more complex. Firstly, it has high amount of diglossia. Even with all the unnecessary, flowery Sanskrit loan words removed, the spoken form is greatly different from the written form. Next, the spoken language has many many regional variants, as with most languages in the world. Further, the spoken language varies according to social groups aka caste within the regions. One could even attempt to find variations based on economic status, aka rich to poor scale, but as an amateur linguist I don't find anything particularly noteworthy to hold such a classification, and, if anything, the variation is mostly confined to the tone of speech (not same as being tonal) and a bit of inflectional oddities rather than vocabulary. In modern times, the rich tend to use more English words which muddles the matter further. Beyond all this, there are about half a dozen languages that are identified as child languages of Kannada that are mostly associated with tribal groups living in forests and mountains. I guess this kind of diversity is expected of a language which is in continuous use for nearly two millennia.
For those intrigued and interested by this, I can't give any references on the internet beyond the wikipedia page because Kannada and Karnataka are severely underrated and underrepresented in Indian historical scene. Any work of worth written in English belong to the colonial times, with 1930s being the latest. The information in this post comes from knowledge acquired by reading books published, in Kannada, by language departments of universities of the state and the literary organization, and others are from personal experiences.
Apparently if your language isn't used for economic, science or to say activities that advance the state of world affairs, your language stagnates. For example, you would run out of words to describe something like a Lorry/Truck. So you start naming it on the basis of number of wheels. Like for example you would call Auto Rickshaw as ತ್ರಿ ಚಕ್ರ ವಾಹನ. The literal translation comes down to three wheeled vehicle. But it sounds strange to say it that way. So you just say 'Auto', a loaned word from english.
So you end up borrowing a lot of words from other languages if the worldly state of affairs aren't getting invented in your language.
And yeah, the other part is spot on. Kannadigas aren't very assertive of their identity. As a language Kannada is >2000 years old. There are countries on earth today which didn't have a written language back then. And then of course with such a long history you also get a lot of literature.
It doesn't get more specific than that. He/she means languages
Anyhow, for Saurashtra, I really did mean "language" and not "dialect". Honestly it's not a typical example of India, but is fun to use for dramatic effect. You know those 500 princely states that existed before unification? 200 of them were in Saurashtra (which is tiny). Politically, it was basically the India of India.
The linguistics seem to reflect that. At one point I recall finding myself in a tiny village somewhere near Dwarka where the residents spoke something completely baffling to me, with not a shred of English or Hindi or Gujarati in the mix. I was completely out of luck communicating with the locals, and had to rely on passing bus drivers for orientation. Later I read a book which said that there were a handful of tiny little Dravidian isolate languages scattered around Saurashtra; I must have stumbled across one of those. The claim of "50 languages" comes from that book, whatever it was. Feels about right, based on personal experience, but I can't really defend the claim beyond that.
(Also I should re-iterate that this was almost 20 years ago, and I very much doubt that there are any places so isolated today.)
1: Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India: 122 major languages and 1599 minor languages counted in the 2001 census.
Do you remember the title or author of the book by any chance?
This is fascinating. Because there is a pocket of Brahui (a Dravidian language) speakers in Pakistan.
My family has their own language that is spoken by 2-3 villages max. 80 languages in a region is perfectly believable .
> " kos kos par badle paani,chaar kos par baani, par ek hai jo nahi badalta vo hai Hindustani"
Rough Translation:
> Taste of water changes every 2 miles, language changes every 4 miles, but Indian still don't change.
Literal translation doesn't work here (also one of the shortcomings of tools like Google Translate)
Just nitpicking, but the distinction is entirely political. In China, people speak Chinese dialects, that are much more diverse than the difference between the Danish language and the Swedish language.
Since China wants to look united, these are "dialects", while Denmark and Sweden wants to be separate sovereign nations they want to have distinct languages, so Danish and Swedish are not some Scandinavian dialects.
Looking at the repo for these Indian fonts you can see that they use FontLab Studio[2] for the work. Browsing the homepage reveals how complicated and involved font crafting is -- let alone the design!
[1] Metafont: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafont
[2] FontLab Studio: https://www.fontlab.com/font-editor/fontlab-studio/
CJK scripts have traditionally used Ming, Song, and Gothic (sans-serif) typefaces.
I also believe that google's text to speech is more 'easy' for Hindi than for English. There is rarely an ambiguity in Hindi text-to-speech than in English text-to-speech. For instance, in English it would write the pun equivalent text "Crypto current seas", and later correct it to "cryptocurrencies" once it has more context, but this is rarely needed in Hindi.
1. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2017/04/Indi...
well, I will not go there! But the absence of Telugu font in talking about Indian fonts is eerily disconcerting.
It was just a mistake. Given the topic, it's possible that that was written by someone who's not a native speaker - but whose writing is otherwise very good. (And arguably better than that showoff sentence!)
As you noted, a native American English speaker would write "...a language whose reach..." And that's that.
RIP John Clarke:
I call it Governmental failure of either educating the masses with regards to learning Hindi or them being unable to cater to the local needs (not printing enough forms in the local language). This was in turn exploited by the regional parties who converted this issue to a language-war of sorts, trying to portray that the Central government is imposing Hindi and diminishing the local language. These "movements" were used mainly for political gain. The reason you don't see this happen in the North is because for most, Hindi is a natural fallback language as the script is similar (Devanagari) to their Mother tongue, unlike in the South.
We are pro-OurLanguage, whatever that language. If that feels anti-Hindi to you, one can't help.
You almost are suggesting to be pro-YourLanguage one has to throw out their their language.
For example, this is hardly "pro-OurLanguage" - http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/karnataka-raks...
Also, as long as there is English, its totally useless to learn Hindi.
Learning English is viewed as a "job" thing -- it's what you do to have a good career. And English isn't used in the same ways as native languages are. A lot of the serious literature, art and politics happens exclusively in languages that are not English and using English in these contexts outs you as the equivalent of the "condescending coastal elite" in the US.
I don't think there's a good solution to CJK web fonts yet. If one existed, I think it would need to involve a font rendering technology where character shapes can be generated from strokes and radicals, instead of the literal shape of every character having to appear separately in the font.
Do you perchance mean "dynamically loaded, on demand"? Because there's no standard for it. Because – as usual – "good enough for Western audiences".
But maybe that's not enough of a benefit unless there's also a way to say "okay you need to use this radical, but a bit narrower, but the strokes need to be the same width and not distorted".
Anyone could during the one-time “new gTLD” scramble, but applications closed for that years ago; no decision on any subsequent round has yet been made, because the review of that first round has not yet been completed.
So, other than establishing a new country and getting a new ccTLD, there's no way to get a new TLD right now.
No, ICANN years ago allowed that for a limited time, and is currently reviewing the results of that to decide if, when, and how to do so again.
blog.google is used pretty often.
Edit: s/can/could (thanks to child commenter).
And when you say “super involved”, keep in mind that part of the required process is to travel back in time to before April 2012, because “The application window for the first application round closed in April 2012. Comprehensive reviews of the program are currently underway to assess its performance in meeting intended objectives. These reviews will inform ongoing discussions with the ICANN community to determine when a second round will take place.” [0]
It might make sense by the logic of domain names, but it doesn't by the logic of return on the investment of scarce resources. cern.org or cern.ch or cern.anything would meet all functional needs just as well and for much less.
Provided they realize there is a greater web beyond facebook and the various trap gardens.