alieteraz

Note the frowny face. He's a Pakistani.

https://twitter.com/kamilwaheed/status/481792094135009280

There are two issues. One is that some operating systems (ios) don't offer the full alphabet. As for those that do (Android/Windows), they don't offer the right script. Hope that helps.

BTW. I published this piece in fall of last year. Long before it came on Hacker News, it had been passed around the Pakistani and Indian Twittersphere, and no one there was saying that we should let tech companies off the hook for not offering a) the full alphabet and b) the right script. It was, actually, the Pakistanis and Indians that made this article what it was. When I wrote it, I honestly thought I was just some eccentric who was annoyed for very personal reasons. Even as we speak the piece is being retweeted by professors and students at LUMS, in Lahore, and universities in Islamabad.

What's even more interesting is that as a result of writing this piece my own favoritism towards nastaliq actually LESSENED. But by the time my thinking evolved, the nastaliq purists had made the piece their own.

The "people of Pakistan" are not a monolith. So some of them want Arabization and some do not and some want Westernization and so forth. As for the ugliness of naskh, its not that naskh is ugly, its that the naskh based mutant on digital devices is ugly. Also angular Urdu, generally speaking, is dissonant and hard to read for Urdu speakers. Here is an email I got since last night:

Hey Ali,

I loved your essay on The Death of Urdu Script. Nastaliq was the default script when reading Urdu books in schools. Therefore, I am so used to reading Urdu in Nastaliq that I cannot read properly in Naskh. And because I am a tech entreprenuer who works online, I am forced to read Urdu in Naskh. Therefore, over years I have lost interest in the Urdu language.

If Nastaliq is revived and becomes a common script online, I will be sure to read Urdu more.

The Turkish "huzun" is a lot like saudade.

You should compare Orhan Pamuk's treatment with Fernando Pessoa.

Respectfully, you are ignoring European history where certain languages were pretty much exclusively rendered in certain "scripts." This was also the case -- and still kind of is -- in the subcontinent. Anshuman Pandey has an interesting anecdote about how the British tried to "standardize" a script in the early 20th century, only to discover that everyone wrote in different scripts and didn't want to change. In the end, the British tried to force everyone to write in Roman letters, but that failed too.

You write: "All of them come from Arabic (not just the letters, the scripts) as well, and as an Arabic speaker I find that attitude strange. I could be reading too much into it."

I think that's where our disconnect lies and I do think you're reading too much into it. Urdu is not a child of Arabic. The word itself is Turkish, and the old story about Urdu's genesis is that it amalgamated during the military conquests of Babar, a Central Asian Turk who was funded by the Ottomans but operated independently. A great percentage of Urdu was Turkish (I once heard upto 40% of the words are Turkish), and it contains many Sanskrit words as well. This notion that Urdu is a "Muslim" language, and because of that, it has some special relationship or descent from Arabic, is more of a 20th century phenomenon having to do with Pakistan's affiliation with the Arab world as a result of becoming an Islamic Republic. That's what I think. You are welcome to try and persuade me that Urdu is some kind of Arabic-lite. But in my experience except for a very small minority of very recently Arabized Pakistanis, I have never heard of that view. What I have seen more frequently, however, is resentment against the idea that Urdu is Arabic's baby. Its kind of like how the Anglicans would resent being declared Children of Catholicism. Sure, without revolting against the Church there would not Anglicanism, but that doesn't mean that an Anglican would like to be told, "you came from Catholicism."

I will give you an example. I once had an Arab yell at me for pronouncing Eteraz with a zay ending. He tried to show me that since in Arabic Eteraz ends with a dawd, and since a dawd is a hard sound, I should pronounce it Eterawd. I gently reminded him that for me it comes from Urdu and Persian and I will pronounce it with a Z. That may irk an Arabic purist. But only if he thinks that all languages written in Arabic-script should follow Arabic's rules, which makes no sense. By that logic, Indians should demand that all people who count with a zero in their system should pronounce their numbers in Sanskrit.

I did not intend to write this much in response to that one sentence, but your point of view is something I've experienced frequently enough that I felt inclined to respond longer. It is not just Arabs who say things like this, too. As I mentioned it now includes Pakistanis themselves, who consider themselves "of Arab culture." An example of these Pakistanis are kids in Lahore, Pakistan, who have a license plate tag that reads, "al-Bakistan." They want to Arabize. In you they would have an ally, I imagine :).

I appreciate you looking into my other work. If you get a chance to check out the short story collection, you will find a pre-Islamic story set in Mecca there. There is also a story set in an imaginary state called Islamistan, and there I adhere to Arabic rules of transliteration instead of Urdu or Persian i.e. Dhulfaqar instead of Zulfikar, etc.

You are correct about the history. Unfortunately the Abbasid empire came to an end in 1258 AD and Urdu wasn't even around then.

I take your point that naskh has been wide-spread. And it is true that it is even in the Indian sub-continent. Sindhi, for example, is a naskh based language. Punjabi, which my parents spoke, on the other hand, prefers nastaliq, and regionally the two places are adjacet. That doesn't mean that those people didn't historically play around with scripts. They did.

However, my piece is entirely about what is going on today. Sure you can find Ottoman era signs in Egypt and the Levant that display Arabic in nastasliq (my readers sent me plenty such pictures), but by and large Arabic today is written in naskh and almost never in nastaliq. Take a look at some of the fonts that the Omani government is playing around with. They are not nastaliq. This is the political aspect I briefly touched upon in the article. I hope you will get a chance to look into the Arabization aspects of the political debates raging in that part of the world. I make brief mention of it by bringing up the fight over "Khuda Hafiz" or "Allah Hafiz."

Meanwhile, the past two or three generations of Urdu readers and writers grew up associating nastaliq and Urdu almost exclusively with each other (thus the jarring effect associated with having to read Urdu in something else). I have plenty of emails testifying to this from people from my parents generation and some people of mine.

In short, no one is really talking about ancient Arab history here, as fascinating as that would be.

Great point about German language. I have come across that again and again. And you're right, there ARE Urdu speaking youth now who are basically just as comfortable in naskh as they are in nastaliq, if not more so. This was a revelation to me and it added a wrinkle to my thinking. But I go back to my point, that we can't fully adjudge if nastaliq is meant to die off until we make at least a good faith effort to get it onto the devices.

Languages do evolve and die. English itself is changing all the time. Same goes for Urdu. The question here is whether the changes are organic or is there simple oversight going on. My view is that the problem is of oversight, and of disregarding the Urdu speaking and writing user. If the world's most popular operating systems were designed in Pakistan or Iran and they were not offering enough English language letters as a default on the devices, I think we would be plenty upset.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if Apple and Android make a nastaliq font part of the directory of fonts that go into their devices from the get go, there wouldn't be a problem.

Such fonts have already been designed. The issue now is to find Android and iOS developers who can make them default in the operating systems.

When I talked to Microsoft they said that on the smaller devices every last bit of memory was precious so they didn't want to stick extra megabytes or however big a font is. I think that Apple's cheapening out is worse than Android's, because at least Android offers the entire Urdu alphabet (though in naskh). Apple doesn't even offer the Urdu alphabet, requiring Urdu users to have to make do with 12 less letters.

This is Ali Eteraz. Thank you for recognizing this piece. It was a lot of fun to write. I've actually been to a Ycombinator event. Twice I think. A couple of your alumnus managed to talk me into downloading stuff or getting on email lists that, well, I didn't always use (though they did seem promising!). I am a writer based in the Bay Area and I really enjoy getting to learn about interesting technological developments and human stories within that. So definitely hit me up whenever you're congregating or plotting something interesting. My website is alieteraz.com or I am at @eteraz or FB.

Ali Eteraz

ps - I later got to meet Michael K. at the Unicode conference in Santa Clara, along with the Microsoft Windows team. The Windows Phone people, who I also really wanted to talk to because this is a mobile problem too, did not want to talk to me because they had a new phone coming out.