![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
The language infobox should be moved to Modern Standard Hindi. Maquahuitl talk! 08:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
we don't have an infobox template for standard languages. The language infobox should be at the article on the language in the widest sense, not the standard language ( German language not Standard German or German dialects; Hindi, not Standard Hindi or Hindi dialects). dab (𒁳) 11:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
why? we should not "decide" anything, we should merely report all notable opinions. Hindi is "the language" of central north India. What exactly is meant by "the language" is the subject of various opinions and definitions, which we need to place alongside one another. dab (𒁳) 14:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
It is my opinion that this article should be merged with Hindi because most of the information on this article is applicable to the Hindi article. A section on that article could be used to describe "Modern Standard Hindi," which is the standardized version of the language sponsored by the Government of India. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam Talk 06:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Request editors of this article to comment on this message: Talk:Hindustani language#Hindi/Standard Hindi/Khariboli/Urdu etc -- Deepak D'Souza ( talk • contribs) 18:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I assume that the convoluted lead was a result of the long discussion on what to name the article. The choice of "Modern Standard Hindi" seems rather unfortunate, though, since there's no indication that there is any other "Standard Hindi" to disambiguate from. I moved the article and cleaned up the lead since I can't see any indication that the addition of "Modern" is necessary. It's certainly not used in any other article on a standardized form of a language.
Peter Isotalo 06:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
According to this page [1] the first sentence should be "सभी मनुष्यों को गौरव और अधिकारों के मामले में जन्मजात स्वतन्त्रता और समानता प्राप्त है।" Please make the appropriate changes. YoshiroShin ( talk) 20:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I move to delete the George Weber section. These figures do not correspond to the figures in the article, which is itself seriously suspect. The article was written over a decade ago, so using it as a source for current population figures is in itself a bit dubious. It also has very little discussion of sources, no proper definitions and no recognition of the fuzziness involved in some of the terms used - just a bunch of graphs with some dubious statements and strongly stated opinions (e.g., listing regional languages in the Pacific while ignoring larger ones elsewhere, listing scripts by number of languages - a dubious concept - separating some out with no good reason).
The table here seems to claim that Hindi has 350 million native speakers (a defensible figure, but Weber's was 250 million, also defensible) and then claims it has basically no second language speakers (at least when rounded off to the nearest million), which I can say now is WRONG by any standard. Ethnologue tends to lie on the extreme splitter side of the 'splitter-merger' linguistic spectrum, counting slightly different dialects as entirely different languages (so it would only consider actual Khari Bholi speakers), but at least it's relatively consistent - and determining what Central/Central Eastern Indo-Aryan dialects count as Hindi is very subjective. Harsimaja ( talk) 12:43, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
It seems like the number of Hindi language speakers are stuck at 180 million since 1991. It is really ridiculous. And I don't know how that figure was reached at. Even in 1991 India had a population of 820 million and about 40% of them speak Hindi. 40% of 820 million will be 328 million. And this year i.e. 2011 India has 1.21 billion people. So 40% of 1.21 billion will be 484 million. But it seems to me that for Wikipedia the no. of Hindi speakers has not increased since 1991. It means this article on Wikipedia is still 20 years behind the real information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.108.90.92 ( talk) 02:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The file ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Word_Hindi_in_Devanagari.svg' used for the Hindi panel has italicised and a slightly stylised Devanagri font. I propose it be replaced with a standard Unicode Devanagri font, such as in ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marathi_modi_script.PNG'. Sabre ( talk) 07:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Reanalysing Hindi Split-Ergativity as a morphological phenomenon (Stefan Keine). Apparently there's a revision about Hindi's Split Ergativity. I thought it would be nice to share. (cf. The Origin of Ergative Case in Indo-Aryan) Komitsuki ( talk) 16:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Is there any reliable secondary sources that support this neologism called Standard Hindi created on Wikipedia? If so, they may be listed on the references of the article. Else, the name of the article should be changed to the name Hindi. Moreover, the leed is misleading - Hindi is India's official language. There is no such thing as Standard Hindi defined in the Indian Constitution (which defines India's official language). WP cannot change facts. Thanks. Tinpisa ( talk) 16:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Taivo! The new section on demographics that you reverted was a merge from the article List of states and territories of India by number of Hindi speakers that wasnt altogether necessary as a standalone article and could easily be housed here. But i did not understand your edit summary of revert "The India Census counts a different kind of "Hindi" than what we describe here". What different Hindis are you talking about? Even if you are right in whatever you are saying, can't we host this list here in either case? We can always edit and clarify it more. We can also include statistics of Hindi-speaking-population of Nepal, England, Australia, etc. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 17:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Done Moved to
Hindi_languages#Demographics. §§
Dharmadhyaksha§§ {
T/
C}
03:40, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear all
I would respectfully submit that we use the official census figures. I hear you on the issue of standard Hindi versus the broad 'political' definition but like Arabic, the broad definition is not irrelevant. We need to have both sets of numbers. When people come to visit Wikipedia, they need to have both numbers in one page - quick information on ones finger tips. The Spanish spoken by grass roots communities around the world is not entirely standadized either. Dipendra2007 ( talk) 14:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Dear Taivo
I am not sure whether you can say that the Census is politically motivated. Is that the Wikipedia position? If so, its a loaded statement to make. I am not sure whether Ethnologue is that impartial as you claim. Who determines whether Arabic is one language or many dialect groups? Who determines whether Chinese is one language or many dialect groups? How do we proceed? I think Dmitri's suggestion to have both sets of data is a good compromise. The discussion page indicates that this issue has been pending for a while now and not resolved yet. Do we place a tag that the material under this page is disputed? Dipendra2007 ( talk) 14:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Taivo is relying on one data source that is 22 years old - Ethnologue. It is unreliable. This dispute needs to be resolved. WarunaNugawela ( talk) 23:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Taivo - do not talk nonsense! This has been a dispute for a long time. Look at the log of past edits and look at the earlier comments. Focus on the issue - Ethnologue is 22 years old! The Census of India 2001 which you cite gives one number and you give another number while still dishonestly citing that source. The issue of the number of Hindi speakers has been challenged in earlier comments by others and the reversions have been going on for a while if one were to look at the log of edits. Ethnologue is a western anthropological cultural exercise. It is outdated. Is Italian one language? Is Arabic one language? Is Chinese one language? Yours is a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Last point you intolerant person - I ain't Dipendra2007. Prove it or otherwise just hold your peace!!!! Otherwise focus on the issues instead of your gang deliberately underplaying the number of Hindi speakers as part of your own agenda and sidetracking the issue! WarunaNugawela ( talk) 02:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep diverting the issue with your tactics. A sock puppet will be blocked. I have not been blocked and will not be blocked. I ain't Dipendra but that does not matter. You self-proclaimed linguists impose your PoV when this issue has been debated and debated but you refuse to concede. Every other website, including Britannica, provides a different set of numbers that you do. Further, you are dishonest - you cite the Census of India in a footnote but do not provide the number that it provides!!! This is a deliberate, political attempt to under enumerate the number of Hindi speakers without addressing the points raised by others. This has been disputed for a long time - not just in the comments section but in the repeated reverts. Continue lying, Taivo - you ain't a linguist but a political puppeteer. WarunaNugawela ( talk) 04:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
There's little discussion on alphabet in this page: it states Hindi is written in the Devanagari alphabet. I do not think it's as clear cut as that. I was confused recently when asked to add translations in Hindi written in the Roman alphabet to a project I was working on, so I did some research. I gather the choice of alphabet is not as clear cut as this Wikipedia page suggests, and Roman and other alphabets are in use as well. I have been told most Hindi readers can read it in Roman. I'm confused.
Should this page be updated to show this variance of alphabet? Or at least touch on the discussion and indicate why it's a sensitive issue (since I see Wikipedia black-listed the reference I was about to give).
Andy Henson 82.152.115.137 ( talk) 14:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Shwela ( talk) 09:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand why Hindi is a "weird" language. Pardon my ignorance, since I don't have a good knowledge about Persian language, but your two statements: "If you write Hindi in Persian, people will deny that it is Hindi, despite being otherwise identical." and "If English were to be written in Chinese script, there are a lot of English speakers who would claim it is not English" tells me the same thing that if a particular language is written in some other language's format/alphabet, it would probably not be called the same language. I believe if you write English in German (though they share the same script, the rules and grammar are applied differently to both the languages), it will still not be called English.
I noticed that there were a series of reverts between two versions of a sentence:
In their colloquial forms, the two languages are nearly indistinguishable.
and
In their colloquial language the two communities are nearly indistinguishable.
Can the editors ( Foreverknowledge and Kwamikagami) discuss the issue here instead and clarify what they intend the sentence to say ? The former is a claim about the languages (although 'indistinguishable', as opposed to mutually intelligible, may be pushing it too far), while the latter appears to be a (weirdly phrased) claim about the communities. Also, it would be good to have a source for the claims in either form. Abecedare ( talk) 00:41, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
one of my friend told me that hindi haven't fa sound but pha. but I realize fa sound in words fool and fal etc. what's the matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.63.143.29 ( talk) 09:04, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
If you wanted to say "What's that?" in Hindi, You would say, "Vō kyā hai?" (वो क्या है?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HighKingImperiatus ( talk • contribs) 19:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
The image for spelling Hindi at [2] was changed with the caption: "better font, standard spelling". The standard spelling is indeed हिन्दी and not what it is now in the image. The same can be referenced in the article Hindi or the any number of sites: bbc, [हिन्दी site:www.jagran.com dainik jagran (Hindi daily)] dainik jagran (Hindi daily) . Hence I am reverting the image. A new image can be updated for font change, but not for the spelling.-- Cubancigar11 ( talk) 07:47, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
For Hindi's language family, shouldn't Kari Boli be located above Hindustani in the chronology, since Hindustani is based on Kari Boli? In other words, it should be Khari Boli -> Hindustani -> Hindi. -- Foreverknowledge ( talk) 04:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
You kept claiming it's the wrong Hindi then explain why Hindi in List of languages by number of native speakers directly link to this article? Plus where is your evidence to say it's the wrong Hindi? 75.168.189.114 ( talk) 00:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
still i don't understand where you have this from: "As of 2009, the best figure Ethnologue could find for speakers of actual Hindustani Hindi was 180 million in 1991.[1] In the 2001 Indian census, 258 million (258,000,000) people in India reported Hindi to be their native language,[6] which also includes people who identify as native speakers of related languages who consider their speech to be a dialect of Hindi, the Hindi belt." it is as silly as my red hat.... would you correct your numbers, please? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
188.210.83.158 (
talk)
12:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
It depends on the person whether he likes or dislikes a particular language. Statistician job is to report numbers.For example in US Census report [1] American English is counted as English and Mexican Spanish or Spanish Creole is counted as Spanish. The largest numeric increase was for Spanish speakers. The languages that declined in use since 1980 includes Italian, German, Polish etc. Now you can easily guess that pro- Spanish language person will love this census report while others will not like it. Similarly there are lot of people avoiding and are in denial mode to use India Census numbers from 2001. You know 'Senyorita Bade Bade Desho Main...' PradeepBoston ( talk) 17:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
References
1) The page Hindi is getting redirect from Hindi language, Modern Standard Hindi, Hindi. Do you know the difference ? What is your suggestion for putting articles about all 3 topics in same page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PradeepBoston ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
2) The Hindi Language map does not even exist on this page. Hindustani maps and photos are used. Ethnologue https://www.ethnologue.com/map/IN_xx has better map on Hindi.
3) The words "Modern Standard Hindi" only appears only 4 times in the article. The word "Hindi" appears 152 times in the article. Which Hindi are we talking about ?
4) Also see /info/en/?search=Special:WhatLinksHere/Hindi . There are hundreds of Wiki pages which are pointing to Hindi page. There is not much information about it.
5) This page is not general page like Arabic or Chinese language. Any issue in keeping it general high level page on Hindi ?
PradeepBoston ( talk) 20:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Re the above:
There have been many discussions on all of these points. Personally, I really don't like having this article at "Hindi", but my POV was defeated at the last move request. — kwami ( talk) 00:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
PradeepBoston ( talk) 11:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
You may be technically right about Fiji. You should also check why info box says Hindi "or" Manak Hindi, what is modern about Hindustani, Bihari. PradeepBoston ( talk) 02:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry that I am taking avatar and doing changes. When time permits I will send you Academic reference materials on Hindi. Some are already in my sandbox. PradeepBoston ( talk) 12:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Article Chhattisgarhi language says that it is the official language of the state of Chhattisgarh. Since when did Chhattisgarhi become a language when the state itself did not exist before the year 2000? Ethnologue classifies it as a language, so what? I'd rather use the definitions reported by the Government of India in their censuses that they have been doing since 1871, you know because... they KNOW what they're talking about. Ethnologue knows zilch, they literally classify the Hindi dialects of each state of India as it's own language when they clearly have no clue about languages vs. dialects in the subcontinent. Filpro ( talk) 00:37, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
support moving this page to Modern Standard Hindi per Filpro and William, and moving Hindi (disambiguation) here. Support also Filpro's suggestion to move Hindi languages, though I'm not quite sure to where -- perhaps better w a dab like "Hindi (Central Zone)", as otherwise the title would have implications we don't intend. (E.g. "Central Zone Hindi" or "Central Hindi" would imply there is necessarily some other kind of Hindi, but that depends on your definition of Hindi.) — kwami ( talk) 08:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Well the Hindi belt article isn't the primary topic of the "Hindi" article but it is certainly what people look for when they search for Hindi in the sense of a large language/language family and internally consisting of many languages/dialects. Hindi in the broad sense is considered a language family by linguists at the same level as Arabic language and Chinese language.
Articles in question:
Hindi (move from
Hindi (disambiguation)) - A disambiguation page
Hindi language (convert the redirect to an article) - e.g. a group of related and in most cases mutually intelligible language varieties, forming a branch of the Indo-Aryan languages
Modern Standard Hindi (move from Hindi) - The Sanskritized register of Hindustani and one of the official languages of India
Central Zone (move from
Hindi languages) - Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi
Any concerns? Filpro ( talk) 00:22, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
If we try coming to consensus on everything at once we might never get anything done. Can we at least agree on moving this article to MSH? If yes, can we agree on moving the dab page here? If we can accomplish one or both of those, that might make the rest of the conversation easier. I don't like "Central Zone" because it's such an inane title. No indication it's about India or a language. Maybe "Eastern and Western Hindi" or "Hindi (Central Zone)". And agreed that Hindi language needs to remain a rd to "Hindi". "Language" is not a natural dab for a language.
Once we start a RfM, there will be all sorts of objections even if we here are unanimous, which would make a multiple move request difficult to accomplish. I suggest first making a single RfM for Hindi --> MSH. After that's done, a second for Hindi (dab) --> Hindi. And finally a third for Hindi languages --> whatever we agree on. — kwami ( talk) 01:42, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that most of the articles on Hindi and other languages are quoting USA Ethnologue as single source of reference. Ethnologue, a language reference books published by SIL International which is a U.S.-based, worldwide, Christian non-profit organization which also counts Bible published in its referenced data. Here are some examples of such edits:
Similar examples can be found all throughout English wikipedia. PradeepBoston ( talk) 20:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I also see Ethnologue has defined 'Arabic' with many scripts and dialects, 'Chinese' with many scripts and dialects as "macrolanguage" and use it reports its numbers. Do not see any effort by Ethnologue to call Hindi, Standard Hindi and dialects with single Devanagari script as macrolanguage. Hindi speakers are still regional language or Hindustani to them. Divide and conquer British Raj examples are valid here again PradeepBoston ( talk) 15:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Ok...SO I have been invited or been given the impression that this page is about Hindi but what I found is some imaginary thoughts on Hindi without any connection to origin of the language. This is very confusing. I understand that 'Change is rule of Nature' and every thing has its version of Old and New (Modern) but it would look very odd when I create a page on 'China" and start talking about Modern Day China (40 yr), skipping all its 1000s of yrs old history'. Modern day Hindi is more famous in youth and Indian Cinema Industry and is only a small chapter of HINDI, It's not Hindi in itself. It would have been better if we kept the things separated using the basic principal of Article Writing i.e; Stick with the Topic. This page doesn't define the actual Hindi and very sooooon i.e; in first line of article get diverted from the topic. I do understand that it's very difficult for people to give perfect article on One of the Oldest Language and it requires lot of in-depth study of History before writing something on Hindi, but then it's always better to choose the correct title and in this case Title is not correct. JavaToSwift ( talk) 12:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)-- JavaToSwift ( talk) 12:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
The language infobox should be moved to Modern Standard Hindi. Maquahuitl talk! 08:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
we don't have an infobox template for standard languages. The language infobox should be at the article on the language in the widest sense, not the standard language ( German language not Standard German or German dialects; Hindi, not Standard Hindi or Hindi dialects). dab (𒁳) 11:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
why? we should not "decide" anything, we should merely report all notable opinions. Hindi is "the language" of central north India. What exactly is meant by "the language" is the subject of various opinions and definitions, which we need to place alongside one another. dab (𒁳) 14:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
It is my opinion that this article should be merged with Hindi because most of the information on this article is applicable to the Hindi article. A section on that article could be used to describe "Modern Standard Hindi," which is the standardized version of the language sponsored by the Government of India. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam Talk 06:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Request editors of this article to comment on this message: Talk:Hindustani language#Hindi/Standard Hindi/Khariboli/Urdu etc -- Deepak D'Souza ( talk • contribs) 18:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I assume that the convoluted lead was a result of the long discussion on what to name the article. The choice of "Modern Standard Hindi" seems rather unfortunate, though, since there's no indication that there is any other "Standard Hindi" to disambiguate from. I moved the article and cleaned up the lead since I can't see any indication that the addition of "Modern" is necessary. It's certainly not used in any other article on a standardized form of a language.
Peter Isotalo 06:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
According to this page [1] the first sentence should be "सभी मनुष्यों को गौरव और अधिकारों के मामले में जन्मजात स्वतन्त्रता और समानता प्राप्त है।" Please make the appropriate changes. YoshiroShin ( talk) 20:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I move to delete the George Weber section. These figures do not correspond to the figures in the article, which is itself seriously suspect. The article was written over a decade ago, so using it as a source for current population figures is in itself a bit dubious. It also has very little discussion of sources, no proper definitions and no recognition of the fuzziness involved in some of the terms used - just a bunch of graphs with some dubious statements and strongly stated opinions (e.g., listing regional languages in the Pacific while ignoring larger ones elsewhere, listing scripts by number of languages - a dubious concept - separating some out with no good reason).
The table here seems to claim that Hindi has 350 million native speakers (a defensible figure, but Weber's was 250 million, also defensible) and then claims it has basically no second language speakers (at least when rounded off to the nearest million), which I can say now is WRONG by any standard. Ethnologue tends to lie on the extreme splitter side of the 'splitter-merger' linguistic spectrum, counting slightly different dialects as entirely different languages (so it would only consider actual Khari Bholi speakers), but at least it's relatively consistent - and determining what Central/Central Eastern Indo-Aryan dialects count as Hindi is very subjective. Harsimaja ( talk) 12:43, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
It seems like the number of Hindi language speakers are stuck at 180 million since 1991. It is really ridiculous. And I don't know how that figure was reached at. Even in 1991 India had a population of 820 million and about 40% of them speak Hindi. 40% of 820 million will be 328 million. And this year i.e. 2011 India has 1.21 billion people. So 40% of 1.21 billion will be 484 million. But it seems to me that for Wikipedia the no. of Hindi speakers has not increased since 1991. It means this article on Wikipedia is still 20 years behind the real information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.108.90.92 ( talk) 02:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The file ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Word_Hindi_in_Devanagari.svg' used for the Hindi panel has italicised and a slightly stylised Devanagri font. I propose it be replaced with a standard Unicode Devanagri font, such as in ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marathi_modi_script.PNG'. Sabre ( talk) 07:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Reanalysing Hindi Split-Ergativity as a morphological phenomenon (Stefan Keine). Apparently there's a revision about Hindi's Split Ergativity. I thought it would be nice to share. (cf. The Origin of Ergative Case in Indo-Aryan) Komitsuki ( talk) 16:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Is there any reliable secondary sources that support this neologism called Standard Hindi created on Wikipedia? If so, they may be listed on the references of the article. Else, the name of the article should be changed to the name Hindi. Moreover, the leed is misleading - Hindi is India's official language. There is no such thing as Standard Hindi defined in the Indian Constitution (which defines India's official language). WP cannot change facts. Thanks. Tinpisa ( talk) 16:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Taivo! The new section on demographics that you reverted was a merge from the article List of states and territories of India by number of Hindi speakers that wasnt altogether necessary as a standalone article and could easily be housed here. But i did not understand your edit summary of revert "The India Census counts a different kind of "Hindi" than what we describe here". What different Hindis are you talking about? Even if you are right in whatever you are saying, can't we host this list here in either case? We can always edit and clarify it more. We can also include statistics of Hindi-speaking-population of Nepal, England, Australia, etc. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 17:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Done Moved to
Hindi_languages#Demographics. §§
Dharmadhyaksha§§ {
T/
C}
03:40, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear all
I would respectfully submit that we use the official census figures. I hear you on the issue of standard Hindi versus the broad 'political' definition but like Arabic, the broad definition is not irrelevant. We need to have both sets of numbers. When people come to visit Wikipedia, they need to have both numbers in one page - quick information on ones finger tips. The Spanish spoken by grass roots communities around the world is not entirely standadized either. Dipendra2007 ( talk) 14:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Dear Taivo
I am not sure whether you can say that the Census is politically motivated. Is that the Wikipedia position? If so, its a loaded statement to make. I am not sure whether Ethnologue is that impartial as you claim. Who determines whether Arabic is one language or many dialect groups? Who determines whether Chinese is one language or many dialect groups? How do we proceed? I think Dmitri's suggestion to have both sets of data is a good compromise. The discussion page indicates that this issue has been pending for a while now and not resolved yet. Do we place a tag that the material under this page is disputed? Dipendra2007 ( talk) 14:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Taivo is relying on one data source that is 22 years old - Ethnologue. It is unreliable. This dispute needs to be resolved. WarunaNugawela ( talk) 23:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Taivo - do not talk nonsense! This has been a dispute for a long time. Look at the log of past edits and look at the earlier comments. Focus on the issue - Ethnologue is 22 years old! The Census of India 2001 which you cite gives one number and you give another number while still dishonestly citing that source. The issue of the number of Hindi speakers has been challenged in earlier comments by others and the reversions have been going on for a while if one were to look at the log of edits. Ethnologue is a western anthropological cultural exercise. It is outdated. Is Italian one language? Is Arabic one language? Is Chinese one language? Yours is a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Last point you intolerant person - I ain't Dipendra2007. Prove it or otherwise just hold your peace!!!! Otherwise focus on the issues instead of your gang deliberately underplaying the number of Hindi speakers as part of your own agenda and sidetracking the issue! WarunaNugawela ( talk) 02:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep diverting the issue with your tactics. A sock puppet will be blocked. I have not been blocked and will not be blocked. I ain't Dipendra but that does not matter. You self-proclaimed linguists impose your PoV when this issue has been debated and debated but you refuse to concede. Every other website, including Britannica, provides a different set of numbers that you do. Further, you are dishonest - you cite the Census of India in a footnote but do not provide the number that it provides!!! This is a deliberate, political attempt to under enumerate the number of Hindi speakers without addressing the points raised by others. This has been disputed for a long time - not just in the comments section but in the repeated reverts. Continue lying, Taivo - you ain't a linguist but a political puppeteer. WarunaNugawela ( talk) 04:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
There's little discussion on alphabet in this page: it states Hindi is written in the Devanagari alphabet. I do not think it's as clear cut as that. I was confused recently when asked to add translations in Hindi written in the Roman alphabet to a project I was working on, so I did some research. I gather the choice of alphabet is not as clear cut as this Wikipedia page suggests, and Roman and other alphabets are in use as well. I have been told most Hindi readers can read it in Roman. I'm confused.
Should this page be updated to show this variance of alphabet? Or at least touch on the discussion and indicate why it's a sensitive issue (since I see Wikipedia black-listed the reference I was about to give).
Andy Henson 82.152.115.137 ( talk) 14:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Shwela ( talk) 09:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand why Hindi is a "weird" language. Pardon my ignorance, since I don't have a good knowledge about Persian language, but your two statements: "If you write Hindi in Persian, people will deny that it is Hindi, despite being otherwise identical." and "If English were to be written in Chinese script, there are a lot of English speakers who would claim it is not English" tells me the same thing that if a particular language is written in some other language's format/alphabet, it would probably not be called the same language. I believe if you write English in German (though they share the same script, the rules and grammar are applied differently to both the languages), it will still not be called English.
I noticed that there were a series of reverts between two versions of a sentence:
In their colloquial forms, the two languages are nearly indistinguishable.
and
In their colloquial language the two communities are nearly indistinguishable.
Can the editors ( Foreverknowledge and Kwamikagami) discuss the issue here instead and clarify what they intend the sentence to say ? The former is a claim about the languages (although 'indistinguishable', as opposed to mutually intelligible, may be pushing it too far), while the latter appears to be a (weirdly phrased) claim about the communities. Also, it would be good to have a source for the claims in either form. Abecedare ( talk) 00:41, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
one of my friend told me that hindi haven't fa sound but pha. but I realize fa sound in words fool and fal etc. what's the matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.63.143.29 ( talk) 09:04, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
If you wanted to say "What's that?" in Hindi, You would say, "Vō kyā hai?" (वो क्या है?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HighKingImperiatus ( talk • contribs) 19:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
The image for spelling Hindi at [2] was changed with the caption: "better font, standard spelling". The standard spelling is indeed हिन्दी and not what it is now in the image. The same can be referenced in the article Hindi or the any number of sites: bbc, [हिन्दी site:www.jagran.com dainik jagran (Hindi daily)] dainik jagran (Hindi daily) . Hence I am reverting the image. A new image can be updated for font change, but not for the spelling.-- Cubancigar11 ( talk) 07:47, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
For Hindi's language family, shouldn't Kari Boli be located above Hindustani in the chronology, since Hindustani is based on Kari Boli? In other words, it should be Khari Boli -> Hindustani -> Hindi. -- Foreverknowledge ( talk) 04:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
You kept claiming it's the wrong Hindi then explain why Hindi in List of languages by number of native speakers directly link to this article? Plus where is your evidence to say it's the wrong Hindi? 75.168.189.114 ( talk) 00:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
still i don't understand where you have this from: "As of 2009, the best figure Ethnologue could find for speakers of actual Hindustani Hindi was 180 million in 1991.[1] In the 2001 Indian census, 258 million (258,000,000) people in India reported Hindi to be their native language,[6] which also includes people who identify as native speakers of related languages who consider their speech to be a dialect of Hindi, the Hindi belt." it is as silly as my red hat.... would you correct your numbers, please? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
188.210.83.158 (
talk)
12:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
It depends on the person whether he likes or dislikes a particular language. Statistician job is to report numbers.For example in US Census report [1] American English is counted as English and Mexican Spanish or Spanish Creole is counted as Spanish. The largest numeric increase was for Spanish speakers. The languages that declined in use since 1980 includes Italian, German, Polish etc. Now you can easily guess that pro- Spanish language person will love this census report while others will not like it. Similarly there are lot of people avoiding and are in denial mode to use India Census numbers from 2001. You know 'Senyorita Bade Bade Desho Main...' PradeepBoston ( talk) 17:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
References
1) The page Hindi is getting redirect from Hindi language, Modern Standard Hindi, Hindi. Do you know the difference ? What is your suggestion for putting articles about all 3 topics in same page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PradeepBoston ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
2) The Hindi Language map does not even exist on this page. Hindustani maps and photos are used. Ethnologue https://www.ethnologue.com/map/IN_xx has better map on Hindi.
3) The words "Modern Standard Hindi" only appears only 4 times in the article. The word "Hindi" appears 152 times in the article. Which Hindi are we talking about ?
4) Also see /info/en/?search=Special:WhatLinksHere/Hindi . There are hundreds of Wiki pages which are pointing to Hindi page. There is not much information about it.
5) This page is not general page like Arabic or Chinese language. Any issue in keeping it general high level page on Hindi ?
PradeepBoston ( talk) 20:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Re the above:
There have been many discussions on all of these points. Personally, I really don't like having this article at "Hindi", but my POV was defeated at the last move request. — kwami ( talk) 00:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
PradeepBoston ( talk) 11:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
You may be technically right about Fiji. You should also check why info box says Hindi "or" Manak Hindi, what is modern about Hindustani, Bihari. PradeepBoston ( talk) 02:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry that I am taking avatar and doing changes. When time permits I will send you Academic reference materials on Hindi. Some are already in my sandbox. PradeepBoston ( talk) 12:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Article Chhattisgarhi language says that it is the official language of the state of Chhattisgarh. Since when did Chhattisgarhi become a language when the state itself did not exist before the year 2000? Ethnologue classifies it as a language, so what? I'd rather use the definitions reported by the Government of India in their censuses that they have been doing since 1871, you know because... they KNOW what they're talking about. Ethnologue knows zilch, they literally classify the Hindi dialects of each state of India as it's own language when they clearly have no clue about languages vs. dialects in the subcontinent. Filpro ( talk) 00:37, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
support moving this page to Modern Standard Hindi per Filpro and William, and moving Hindi (disambiguation) here. Support also Filpro's suggestion to move Hindi languages, though I'm not quite sure to where -- perhaps better w a dab like "Hindi (Central Zone)", as otherwise the title would have implications we don't intend. (E.g. "Central Zone Hindi" or "Central Hindi" would imply there is necessarily some other kind of Hindi, but that depends on your definition of Hindi.) — kwami ( talk) 08:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Well the Hindi belt article isn't the primary topic of the "Hindi" article but it is certainly what people look for when they search for Hindi in the sense of a large language/language family and internally consisting of many languages/dialects. Hindi in the broad sense is considered a language family by linguists at the same level as Arabic language and Chinese language.
Articles in question:
Hindi (move from
Hindi (disambiguation)) - A disambiguation page
Hindi language (convert the redirect to an article) - e.g. a group of related and in most cases mutually intelligible language varieties, forming a branch of the Indo-Aryan languages
Modern Standard Hindi (move from Hindi) - The Sanskritized register of Hindustani and one of the official languages of India
Central Zone (move from
Hindi languages) - Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi
Any concerns? Filpro ( talk) 00:22, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
If we try coming to consensus on everything at once we might never get anything done. Can we at least agree on moving this article to MSH? If yes, can we agree on moving the dab page here? If we can accomplish one or both of those, that might make the rest of the conversation easier. I don't like "Central Zone" because it's such an inane title. No indication it's about India or a language. Maybe "Eastern and Western Hindi" or "Hindi (Central Zone)". And agreed that Hindi language needs to remain a rd to "Hindi". "Language" is not a natural dab for a language.
Once we start a RfM, there will be all sorts of objections even if we here are unanimous, which would make a multiple move request difficult to accomplish. I suggest first making a single RfM for Hindi --> MSH. After that's done, a second for Hindi (dab) --> Hindi. And finally a third for Hindi languages --> whatever we agree on. — kwami ( talk) 01:42, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that most of the articles on Hindi and other languages are quoting USA Ethnologue as single source of reference. Ethnologue, a language reference books published by SIL International which is a U.S.-based, worldwide, Christian non-profit organization which also counts Bible published in its referenced data. Here are some examples of such edits:
Similar examples can be found all throughout English wikipedia. PradeepBoston ( talk) 20:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I also see Ethnologue has defined 'Arabic' with many scripts and dialects, 'Chinese' with many scripts and dialects as "macrolanguage" and use it reports its numbers. Do not see any effort by Ethnologue to call Hindi, Standard Hindi and dialects with single Devanagari script as macrolanguage. Hindi speakers are still regional language or Hindustani to them. Divide and conquer British Raj examples are valid here again PradeepBoston ( talk) 15:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Ok...SO I have been invited or been given the impression that this page is about Hindi but what I found is some imaginary thoughts on Hindi without any connection to origin of the language. This is very confusing. I understand that 'Change is rule of Nature' and every thing has its version of Old and New (Modern) but it would look very odd when I create a page on 'China" and start talking about Modern Day China (40 yr), skipping all its 1000s of yrs old history'. Modern day Hindi is more famous in youth and Indian Cinema Industry and is only a small chapter of HINDI, It's not Hindi in itself. It would have been better if we kept the things separated using the basic principal of Article Writing i.e; Stick with the Topic. This page doesn't define the actual Hindi and very sooooon i.e; in first line of article get diverted from the topic. I do understand that it's very difficult for people to give perfect article on One of the Oldest Language and it requires lot of in-depth study of History before writing something on Hindi, but then it's always better to choose the correct title and in this case Title is not correct. JavaToSwift ( talk) 12:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)-- JavaToSwift ( talk) 12:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)