![]() | 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 2 | Archive 3 |
I can see a common thread in the discussion about which word should be considered to be included in "Indian English". Well, I have certain reservations. For example, I feel uncomfortable to consider "yaar" as adopted in English. Use of a particluar word like "yaar" by 50% does not justify. In fact, it should be categorized as an incorrect English. And later on when foreigners start using it, it will be a valid candidate to be considered as an English word of Indian origin.
The category of incorrect English (contributed by Indians) would include Primus a brand name of a stove used as if it is equivalent to stove. If you ask Indians above 40, they would be knowing that in India (and in particular in western part) people did not know the word stove. Instead they use the word primus only. Now with the new generation and wide-spread use of LPG, the word primus is not used as the carosene stove is not used. Let me also add that just like this Xerox is a brandname of a photocopying machine derived from the name of the company. But now throughout the globe to xerox is used as a verb interchangeably with to photocopy. So, it should be and is accepted as an English word.
Dinesh Karia -- Karia 18:46, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I am a European who frequents some online discussion forums where many participants are from Asia and in particular from India. A very common and somewhat confusing idiom I see over and over is the word "doubt" used roughly to mean "question" or "problem". Is this peculiar to Indian English, or does it trace to a translation from some particular language of India (e.g. Hindi English)? I gleefully note one occurrence elsewhere on this page as of today (although by the time somebody reads this, it might have been edited out).-- era ( Talk | History) 06:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
No mention of the Indian numbering system? What about lakh, crore, et all? They're all everyday words in Indian English.... -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 10:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a separate topic for the variety of English known as Anglo-Indian (not to be confused with the people known as Anglo-Indian)? It seems to have been spoken by the English in India since the days of Queen Elizabeth (when the Mughal Empire ruled) and by anyone who did business with the English. Entire dictionaries have been written about it. Many of its words became part of general English and were incorporated into the OED (e.g., "ruttee"). Once India and Pakistan gained independence, it evolved so rapidly (in two different directions) that it became something very different. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 16:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
My Indian colleagues use the word less instead of few or little, e.g. in phrases like "Two man-months are too less to implement this feature." or "We are very less people here this week."
In comparisons, they usually say lesser. AFAICT all of my (south-)Indian colleagues use it that way. I find it quite remarkable, but I never saw it mentioned anywhere else (not in this article, either). I don't know if it can be considered a feature of Indian English. Is it? -- 史慧开 ( talk) 09:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I have just read this article for the first time and admit to no knowledge of Indian English except for dealing with Indian contract IT staff from Bangalore.
However, the 'Divergent usage' element seems to contain a considerable percentage of items, which as described here, are perfectly normal 'British' English usage and I'm at a loss to see why they are listed as divergent. These include the usage of:
I would suggest that the section is therefore, as written, not fit for purpose. At a minimum it should be described as differences from American/International English. DickyP ( talk) 19:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest that this section be tabularised and for those words/phrases for which an equivalent Contemporary/American/International English word/phrase exists, it should be provided. User:shantnup —Preceding undated comment added 06:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC).
In Mathematics section I found a strange *operator* 'zar', which I have removed. 'Zar' is not a word, but a result of 's' occurring before 'are' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.187.136 ( talk) 09:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I have modified the page removing all the stuff which is not taught by any english teacher in any school in India. Slangs spoken by college kids are not part of Indian english but hinglish and should be part of that page. If anyone has any objections to my editing, lets have a debate over it. apurv1980 14:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
One of the first things I noticed about English as spoken in India after arriving there was the use of "is [not] there" to mean what an American English speaker would more normally express as "we [do not] have". Go into a store and ask for milk and the answer could easily be "Milk is not there." Rtmyers ( talk) 03:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
English medium schools in India do not train their students in using the verbs (have, has, had). So, most of the English medium students use "there/not there" instead of "have/has/had". Even my bother did use the sentence "3G connection is there in my phone" instead of the sentence "My phone has 3G connection". The first sentence is grammatically wrong and the second one is right.
That's the problem with lack of proficiency in English. It is not solely related to the regional dialect. Even in India, a hardware shop's owner can display the board containing the sentence "Floppies are not available" instead of using the sentence "Floppies are not there". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.253.210 ( talk) 05:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Terms or words like co-brother, cousin brother etc doesn't exist in English. It is not right thing to promote such words. Those words are used by those people who have insufficient knowledge in English.
Children of parents' siblings are just called as cousins. There is no term called 'cousin brother' in English. In Telugu language, maternal aunt's daughter is called as 'akka' and paternal aunt's daughter is called as 'vadina'. While translating Telugu words to English, they translate the word 'akka' as 'cousin sister' and 'vadina' as 'cousin'. In English speaking societies, people do not maintain such differences in Kinship Terminology. Social approval for close-kin marriages is different matter here. But phrases such as 'cousin sister' etc are not understood by them who speak English as their native tongue. So, Indians should not use such phrases while translating Telugu words to English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.79.184.18 ( talk) 09:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
The practice of addressing unrelated people with kinship terms is solely related to regional culture and it has nothing to do with language. Even Odiya speakers address unrelated women as mousi (aunt). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.250.114 ( talk) 10:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Indians do not address every one with kinship terms. It is not possible to address bus driver or train TTE as uncle regardless the age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.225.98 ( talk) 11:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't even address my neighbours using kinship terms. Such practice is followed by those people who still believe old values.
Hard to believe that 11% of Indians speak English as a first language and that the overall percentage of Indians that know English is 30-40% (when India's literacy rate itself is about half). I will remove the second part for now. Could we have a reference if it is to come back? Cribananda 07:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
No Indian literacy rate is 66% (2001 census) and they DO have 110 million speakers. 86.16.175.223 18:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the most reliable soucrce as far as I could gather (Britannica) and the percentage comes to around 3-4%. This was of course, in 1995, but I doubt if the numbers would have changed much. http://alt-usage-english.org/Distribution_English_speakers.shtml
- Cribananda 07:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I've been researching this for the List of countries by English speaking population article. Here's what I've found: the proportion of Indians bilingual in English was reported here as 8.00%. The number answering the question on languages spoken was 838,583,988 [1], so some 67,100,000 were bilingual in English. The number of Indians with English as a mother tongue is 178,598 (see first link), but so far I can't find a figure for how many of them are monolingual. (This would let us calculate the total number of English speakers in India, although it would not be much more than the bilingual figure.) These numbers all come from the 1991 Census of India, which excluded Jammu and Kashmir. -- Avenue 01:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Avenue, the percentage you quote is higher than the one on my link, nevertheless, it is still way lesser than the 10-20% quoted initially on the page. It is very difficult to determine how many speakers of English there are in a country like India simply because it is difficult to define the level of expertise required to call someone an English speaker. Depending on the definition, I can totally see how your numbers and mine can both be correct, but 10-20% does seem stretching it too far. I have no objections to the article reading "4-10%" - Cribananda 02:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Go to Mumbai/Banglore and you will be surprised to find the percentage of people using English as their first langauge.-- Darrendeng 06:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I request you to travel in rural zones of India. You can even find school teachers who are unable to speak English with proper grammar. Even my English teacher did use Malayalam grammar to speak English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 14:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
My question is, why do speakers of Indian English often type in all capital letters? ( Example) I patrol Recent Edits and notice it all the time. Is this acceptable English for India-related Wikipedia articles, or should I be reverting it?- Gilliam ( talk) 13:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Capital letters should be used only for these following purposes:
It is unnecessary and also grammatically wrong to use all capital letters in a word or a sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.129.2 ( talk) 10:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I have seen many Indians who use "but" before a sentence. Example: But, I will drink milk today though I woke up late.
It's grammatically wrong. The conjunction "but" must be used only between two sentences. It should not be used before a sentence. You can use "however" in such context. Example: However, Timothy may go to Sydney on a plane since he missed the train.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.196.199.198 ( talk) 00:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Under the section “Phonology”#“Consonants”, it says, “Standard Hindi and most other vernaculars (except Punjabi, Marathi & Bengali) do not differentiate between /v/ (voiced labiodental fricative) and /w/ (voiced labiovelar approximant).” This contradicts the articles Punjabi, Marathi and Bengali, which all say that said languages do not distinguish /v/ and /w/. Error of information?-- Solomonfromfinland ( talk) 15:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
"V" is voiced labiodental in Hindi. "W" is not found in Modern Hindi. Please read the book Modern Hindi Grammar by Omkar N. Kaul.
There is no dialect called Indian English. Indian universities teach Standard British English, and on Internet Indians read North American English. However, most of the Indians use either school slang or college slang to speak English.
Most of the Indians claim that Indian English is similar to British English. It's not true. The syntax of Indian English is similar to Hindi. To turn off the light, a native English speaker says "Switch off the light" but an Indian English speaker says "Close the light" that is translation of "batti band karo" in Hindi. The syntax "Close the light" sounds odd to a native English speaker. I can cite so many examples. "Rain is falling" instead of "It's raining", "You are selfish no" that is translation of "tum kanjoos ho na" from Hindi, "Chalk piece" that is translation of "sudda mukka" from Telugu and so many sentences that sound odd are heard in English medium schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.79.127.34 ( talk) 02:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Never compare British English with Indian English. The grammar of Modern English was developed by British poets like Geoffrey Chaucer but Indian English is either an ungrammatical provincial or a slang. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.14.18.109 ( talk) 09:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Most of the Indians aren't proficient in speaking English. So they make mistakes while speaking in English. There is nothing such as 'Indian English' in sense. Even the people of southern Orissa include some Odiya words while speaking in Telugu. Can we name such language 'Orissa Telugu'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.254.219 ( talk) 02:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
If any transformed or malformed form of a language is called a dialect, even Odiya can be called a dialect of Hindi. The shop that sells foreign made liquor is called 'bidesi modo dokaano' in Odiya and it is called 'videsi saraab ki dukaan' in Hindi. The difference in grammar, phonology and word formation is clearly evident in this context. Indian English can be called a different language because words like co-brother and unseason etc are not understood by many of the English speakers. Such division cannot be called a dialect in sense.
Some words used by Indians can be understood by them who speak English as their native language. For example: Private court (kangaroo court or unauthorised court that is organised by a vigilante gang that takes law in to their hands) and bus stand (bus terminal) etc. But words like co-brother and unseason etc are not understood by most of the English speakers.
The difference in grammar structure is the main factor that leads the Indians to speak incorrect English. English grammar is more complexed than the grammar of Indian languages. For example: Translate the Telugu sentence "ఇక్కడ కూర్చోవడానికి చోటు లేదు" to English. In Telugu, the sentence has four words. You need seven words to translate it to English. "There is no room here to sit" is the sentence formed after translation. Indians need to be trained well in syntax to speak correct English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.102.165 ( talk) 03:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I speak three languages. In Andhra and Orissa, I speak Telugu and in Chattisgarh, I speak Hindi. English is my third language. English is not even a second language for many Indians. However, I check the grammar before I speak English. I don't intend to kill the spirit of a language with grammatical errors. I was informed that many English medium students in Tamil Nadu speak English with Tamil grammar and their English cannot be understood by other Indians. I was shocked by this news. Everyone should learn English but speak with the correct syntax.
Indian English speakers think that correct grammar is not necessary to speak English. They are wrong. People may fail to understand your language if you speak with grammatical errors. e.g. Every noun must be followed by a pronoun in the consequent sentence. This rule also applies for Telugu and other Indian languages. "He got a call from home and he went there". Here the noun "home" is used in the sentence before conjunction and the pronoun "there" in the second one. If we miss the pronoun "there" and say "he went', people may think that he went to somewhere else but not to the place where he got the call from.
I added these but then thought twice about it and decided to post them here first. My boss and 5 coworkers use Indian English and these are two things I've noticed they've said. I have a few more that I can't think of right now. Do they seem okay to add?
easytoplease ( talk) 01:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
It's a problem related to morphology. In Hindi, the double conjunction "kyoo kee" is used to specify a reason. In English, only a single conjunction is used in such context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.164.240 ( talk) 03:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Most of the Indians speak incorrect English. An English website that operates from India had omitted the necessary conjunctions in a sentence that contains three verbs related to each other. If news papers and websites use the non-standard/sub-standard language, it is not difficult to imagine the English proficiency of a low educated man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.198.208 ( talk) 22:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
"Since" should not be used to indicate the duration of time. You can say "I have been here since 1983" but you should not say "I have been here since 30 years". "Since" can be used to indicate the starting point but not the span of anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.15.27.138 ( talk) 03:11, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Indian English users do not follow the difference between "since" and "for". "Since" means "from that point" or "from the starting point". It is semantically and grammatically incorrect to use "since" to indicate duration.
These are some more odds I have noticed.
I often edit to cleanup new pages on subjects related to India. I often run into a series of oddities in their English:
Are these from Indian English or is this simply a translation artifact?-- Auric 21:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, this is an artifact of translation done by some professionals who aren't trained in English grammar. Indian languages have simple tenses but English speakers often use perfect tenses. Therefore Indians have some difficulty in learning English tenses. In Indian languages, prepositions are used in a different way that doesn't match the rules of English grammar and syntax. For example: Translate the Telugu sentence "Nenu padella numchi samudra teeram daggara umtunnanu" to English. The translation in standard English would be "I have been residing near the beach for ten years", but in Indian English the translation would be "I am residing near the beach since ten years". The second translation sounds odd to native English speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.77.171.96 ( talk) 08:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Any website that invites contributors from the public would face troubles with Indian English users. A website had invited the users to submit their stories for publication. Indian English users used redundancies like 'reply back', 'return back' etc in their stories. They even used words like "prepone" that are not found in British English and American English vocabularies. It had been a difficult task for the editors to correct the grammar used by Indian English users. It's not a wonder if Wikipedia's editors have the same trouble with Indian English users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.146.96 ( talk) 10:10, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Even I did notice Indians using odd tenses while speaking English. Example: "I am absent yesterday". They use the same syntax for present tense and past tense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.238.5 ( talk) 11:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
They use the wrong syntax even for future tense. They can even say "I will absent tomorrow". Most of the Indian English medium schools do not train their students in grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 13:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a question "Why do Indian English speakers miss 'a's and 'the's while speaking English?". 90% of the educated Indians aren't well trained in English even in the English medium schools. None of the Indian languages contain definite article and indefinite articles. They use the grammar of their local languages while speaking English. So, they miss "a"s and "the"s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 13:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Generally "the" or "a" is used to indicate a common noun. Example: The cow is black. Here cow is a common noun and black is an adjective. You need to fix "the" before the word cow. These prefixes need not be applied to a proper noun. Example: In the phrase "United States of America" the word America is a proper noun (a fixed name of a thing). You should also use "the" or "a" while using a proper noun as a common noun. Example: The Hitler of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.129.2 ( talk) 09:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
However, in Telugu language, demonstrative adjectives and cardinal adjectives are sometimes used to direct a common noun in specific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.14.48.187 ( talk) 02:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.193.120 ( talk)
This article seems to be about the way Indians, in general, speak English, and not about native Indian English speakers. As a native English speaker from India, I find this article inaccurate, and frankly, quite offensive. I might be part of a extremely small minority of Indians who consider English their first language, but shouldn't this article be about "proper" Indian English? Even the lines that are cited (especially by "JC Wells", a 1982 publication) seem to be about how Indians incorrectly pronounce and speak English. So I'm beginning to wonder if this article is about how Indians stereotypically speak English, or about the Indian dialect of English. Azzurro2882 ( talk) 03:47, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
This article itself is a joke. The whole article must be deleted. Errors related to syntax, phonology and morphology done by Indian English speakers are classified as Indian dialect of English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.253.210 ( talk) 06:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Even some of the Anglo-Indians speak incorrect English if they learn the language in the school. My neighbours are Anglo-Indians and even they do pronounce "birth day" as "birt day". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.64.78.194 ( talk) 06:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I am an editor of technical articles written by people in India. People outside of India need to know what a fresher or a snap, when used in the manner that only the people of India use them, is. Also, the people of India need to know what words such as those are only used in India. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I still have never gotten an explanation of what they mean by "different-different" and other words duplicated with a hyphen to separate the duplications. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
One trait I often notice in Indian speakers of English - that I don't see mentioned in the article - is a tendency to use the subjunctive much more often than I would expect from a speaker of NA or RP. (e.g., "We would run some tests tonight and let you know the result" or "I would be out of the office next week" when there is no implied condition or hypothetical). Have others noticed this trait? And, if so, is anyone in a position to comment on whether it reflects grammatical forms found in Indian languages, or to comment on whether it represents a consistent distinction that happens to be drawn in a different place than NA/RP but that still has a bright line between situations that call for 'will' versus 'would'? Willhsmit ( talk) 22:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't see why incorrect Indian English grammar needs to be mentioned in an encyclopaedia. The 'Grammar Quirks' section could might as well be renamed "commonly used incorrect English used by Indians." I think it should be deleted. The "Interjections" section, while less inappropriate than the "Quirks" section, also does not belong to an encyclopaedia, in my opinion. Azzurro2882 ( talk) 16:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
1. If people from UK and USA learn Indian national/regional language, they can't have the same accent like the Indians.
2.The expected pronunciation of English language can't be based on the pronunciation of U.K. or U.S.A. people. We can't call it standard because, it is not defined before origination of language. But it is evolved over the years. This evolution is different in India.
3. English language differs in it's script and pronunciation of it. This could be the main reason behind the very different accents of English all over the world.
4. Over the years, no. of people in the world who are speaking so called Indian_English are more than who are having English as their native language.But it doesn't mean that then based on majority Indian_English will be considered as a standard because majority people are using it. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
203.91.201.54 (
talk)
13:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
W.r.t. to fourth point, its clear that problem lies when writing "कल " in English. If you are using devnagari script,"कल" can not be read in multiple ways. But if you write "Kal",it can have multiple pronunciations. Word written in most of Indian script, have unique pronunciation. If a word is written "पकड़", it should be read as Pakad only. But in english if a word is written as "pakada" it can be read as pakad,pakada etc.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AbhijeetDh ( talk • contribs) 05:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion at least, it is wrong to use "no." instead of "number" unless there is a limited amount of space. Also, "who are having English" should be "who have English" or "with English". Also, "majority Indian_English" should be "majority of Indian_English" and "standard because majority people" should be "standard because the majority of people". Yes, it is really scary to think that the English language should be used in the uncorrected manner just because the majority uses it that way. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Many, probably most, of the external links are broken. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Long ago, I added some external links and subsequently those links were deleted by Indian English users. Indian English is not a real dialect. Many Indians use English with grammatical errors and claim it Indian English. If we expose the facts about Indian English, these people get frustrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.251.162 ( talk) 09:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
The given link of Jason Baldridge's article is missing. I found his article here [2].
It seems to me (A native British English speaker) that many of the quoted examples of Indian idioms are also common in British English. The article therefore (in its present state) would be useful to people wanting to understand Indian English, especially Americans, but misleading to a scholar looking for reliable source material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.249.187 ( talk) 17:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I also found that:
I am British and used to say 'bunk off', not really 'a class' we say 'a lesson' more than a class. 'Club' is used like 'club together and buy something'. I say 'coaching classes' or 'tutorials' but NEVER 'Cram school'. It feels grammatically wrong, like it should be 'cramming school'. I said called the dining room a 'mess' on a ship. Railway station is used more formally than train station. I found that we do use some of these statements and the alternatives seemed a bit American. In the first examples I say amount, and I only ever say rubber and flat, not eraser and apartment. I would only say apartment when referring to a holiday apartment. Sweetie candykim ( talk) 11:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I am an American and I think that the word "amount" when used as described might be unusual at most. I think it would at least be understandable. Also, it is my understanding that a flat is a type of apartment. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm British as well, but over 60 and there has been a "drift" of some terms in BrE and even American English in recent years. For example "Sitting at the Railway Station, got a ticket for my destination..." was quite normal American usage. Also it's still common with my age group to say "he's done a bunk", meaning absconded or fled, that would not be used by younger people. "Flat" is also used somewhat in North America, for example to describe the large suburbs of "French Flats" in Montreal and some other Canadian cities, being charactaristic rows of two storey walk-up apartments or flats with their own staircase opening to the street. -- MichaelGG ( talk) 02:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I think there is a need to discuss the origin of Indian English. The language of the rulers and the ruled has not been the same in India for the past 2000 years. In ancient India, Sanskrit was the language of ruling classes and Prakrit was the language of the ruled. In the middle ages, Persian was the language of the ruling classes and now so is English. I visited a town in Maharashtra. There are no English sign boards in that town except on banks, police station and railway station. The language used for official purposes is not often used for colloqial use. This is the current position of English use in India. Indian English speakers often use redundancies like "revert back" and "reply back" but official records used in government offices do not have such words. Indian English is a colloqial language but not a standard dialect. Therefore I was surprised when I was informed that there is a dialect called "Standard Indian English". In B.A. English syllabus, we have lessons about British English and American English. We have no lessons on Indian English because a colloquial language is not attributed importance by any university. However, we need to know "why Indian English users commit grammatical errors". An American English speaker can understand British English because there are few grammatical differences between American and British Englishes, but he cannot understand Indian English which is highly influenced by the grammar of the mother tongue of the speaker. Praveen-vizag ( talk) 11:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
It is not possible to standardise Indian English. Indians have Hindi as lingua franca. Since 1947, India has been socially and culturally not connected with the Great Britain. Therefore, Indians need not rely much on English for inter-ethnic communication.
I have removed the long lists of unsourced expressions of Indian English. This article is not the List of expressions of Indian English; rather, it is about the history, syntax, and phonology of the dialect. Eight years ago, when I arrived on Wikipedia, books Indian English were few and far between. But now, as I have demonstrated above, a number of reliable studies exist.
Random long lists, in any case, serve no purpose in an encyclopedia article. Examples can be added judiciously in the relevant sections of an expanded Indian English article in order to illustrate notable (syntactical or lexical) features of the dialect. But that requires a grammatical description of those features first. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
I think the sentence "My all friends are like this only" is a syntactic error. It is not just related to expression. Praveen-vizag ( talk) 15:11, 29 March 2014 (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 2 | Archive 3 |
I can see a common thread in the discussion about which word should be considered to be included in "Indian English". Well, I have certain reservations. For example, I feel uncomfortable to consider "yaar" as adopted in English. Use of a particluar word like "yaar" by 50% does not justify. In fact, it should be categorized as an incorrect English. And later on when foreigners start using it, it will be a valid candidate to be considered as an English word of Indian origin.
The category of incorrect English (contributed by Indians) would include Primus a brand name of a stove used as if it is equivalent to stove. If you ask Indians above 40, they would be knowing that in India (and in particular in western part) people did not know the word stove. Instead they use the word primus only. Now with the new generation and wide-spread use of LPG, the word primus is not used as the carosene stove is not used. Let me also add that just like this Xerox is a brandname of a photocopying machine derived from the name of the company. But now throughout the globe to xerox is used as a verb interchangeably with to photocopy. So, it should be and is accepted as an English word.
Dinesh Karia -- Karia 18:46, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I am a European who frequents some online discussion forums where many participants are from Asia and in particular from India. A very common and somewhat confusing idiom I see over and over is the word "doubt" used roughly to mean "question" or "problem". Is this peculiar to Indian English, or does it trace to a translation from some particular language of India (e.g. Hindi English)? I gleefully note one occurrence elsewhere on this page as of today (although by the time somebody reads this, it might have been edited out).-- era ( Talk | History) 06:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
No mention of the Indian numbering system? What about lakh, crore, et all? They're all everyday words in Indian English.... -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 10:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a separate topic for the variety of English known as Anglo-Indian (not to be confused with the people known as Anglo-Indian)? It seems to have been spoken by the English in India since the days of Queen Elizabeth (when the Mughal Empire ruled) and by anyone who did business with the English. Entire dictionaries have been written about it. Many of its words became part of general English and were incorporated into the OED (e.g., "ruttee"). Once India and Pakistan gained independence, it evolved so rapidly (in two different directions) that it became something very different. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 16:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
My Indian colleagues use the word less instead of few or little, e.g. in phrases like "Two man-months are too less to implement this feature." or "We are very less people here this week."
In comparisons, they usually say lesser. AFAICT all of my (south-)Indian colleagues use it that way. I find it quite remarkable, but I never saw it mentioned anywhere else (not in this article, either). I don't know if it can be considered a feature of Indian English. Is it? -- 史慧开 ( talk) 09:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I have just read this article for the first time and admit to no knowledge of Indian English except for dealing with Indian contract IT staff from Bangalore.
However, the 'Divergent usage' element seems to contain a considerable percentage of items, which as described here, are perfectly normal 'British' English usage and I'm at a loss to see why they are listed as divergent. These include the usage of:
I would suggest that the section is therefore, as written, not fit for purpose. At a minimum it should be described as differences from American/International English. DickyP ( talk) 19:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest that this section be tabularised and for those words/phrases for which an equivalent Contemporary/American/International English word/phrase exists, it should be provided. User:shantnup —Preceding undated comment added 06:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC).
In Mathematics section I found a strange *operator* 'zar', which I have removed. 'Zar' is not a word, but a result of 's' occurring before 'are' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.187.136 ( talk) 09:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I have modified the page removing all the stuff which is not taught by any english teacher in any school in India. Slangs spoken by college kids are not part of Indian english but hinglish and should be part of that page. If anyone has any objections to my editing, lets have a debate over it. apurv1980 14:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
One of the first things I noticed about English as spoken in India after arriving there was the use of "is [not] there" to mean what an American English speaker would more normally express as "we [do not] have". Go into a store and ask for milk and the answer could easily be "Milk is not there." Rtmyers ( talk) 03:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
English medium schools in India do not train their students in using the verbs (have, has, had). So, most of the English medium students use "there/not there" instead of "have/has/had". Even my bother did use the sentence "3G connection is there in my phone" instead of the sentence "My phone has 3G connection". The first sentence is grammatically wrong and the second one is right.
That's the problem with lack of proficiency in English. It is not solely related to the regional dialect. Even in India, a hardware shop's owner can display the board containing the sentence "Floppies are not available" instead of using the sentence "Floppies are not there". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.253.210 ( talk) 05:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Terms or words like co-brother, cousin brother etc doesn't exist in English. It is not right thing to promote such words. Those words are used by those people who have insufficient knowledge in English.
Children of parents' siblings are just called as cousins. There is no term called 'cousin brother' in English. In Telugu language, maternal aunt's daughter is called as 'akka' and paternal aunt's daughter is called as 'vadina'. While translating Telugu words to English, they translate the word 'akka' as 'cousin sister' and 'vadina' as 'cousin'. In English speaking societies, people do not maintain such differences in Kinship Terminology. Social approval for close-kin marriages is different matter here. But phrases such as 'cousin sister' etc are not understood by them who speak English as their native tongue. So, Indians should not use such phrases while translating Telugu words to English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.79.184.18 ( talk) 09:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
The practice of addressing unrelated people with kinship terms is solely related to regional culture and it has nothing to do with language. Even Odiya speakers address unrelated women as mousi (aunt). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.250.114 ( talk) 10:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Indians do not address every one with kinship terms. It is not possible to address bus driver or train TTE as uncle regardless the age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.225.98 ( talk) 11:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't even address my neighbours using kinship terms. Such practice is followed by those people who still believe old values.
Hard to believe that 11% of Indians speak English as a first language and that the overall percentage of Indians that know English is 30-40% (when India's literacy rate itself is about half). I will remove the second part for now. Could we have a reference if it is to come back? Cribananda 07:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
No Indian literacy rate is 66% (2001 census) and they DO have 110 million speakers. 86.16.175.223 18:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the most reliable soucrce as far as I could gather (Britannica) and the percentage comes to around 3-4%. This was of course, in 1995, but I doubt if the numbers would have changed much. http://alt-usage-english.org/Distribution_English_speakers.shtml
- Cribananda 07:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I've been researching this for the List of countries by English speaking population article. Here's what I've found: the proportion of Indians bilingual in English was reported here as 8.00%. The number answering the question on languages spoken was 838,583,988 [1], so some 67,100,000 were bilingual in English. The number of Indians with English as a mother tongue is 178,598 (see first link), but so far I can't find a figure for how many of them are monolingual. (This would let us calculate the total number of English speakers in India, although it would not be much more than the bilingual figure.) These numbers all come from the 1991 Census of India, which excluded Jammu and Kashmir. -- Avenue 01:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Avenue, the percentage you quote is higher than the one on my link, nevertheless, it is still way lesser than the 10-20% quoted initially on the page. It is very difficult to determine how many speakers of English there are in a country like India simply because it is difficult to define the level of expertise required to call someone an English speaker. Depending on the definition, I can totally see how your numbers and mine can both be correct, but 10-20% does seem stretching it too far. I have no objections to the article reading "4-10%" - Cribananda 02:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Go to Mumbai/Banglore and you will be surprised to find the percentage of people using English as their first langauge.-- Darrendeng 06:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I request you to travel in rural zones of India. You can even find school teachers who are unable to speak English with proper grammar. Even my English teacher did use Malayalam grammar to speak English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 14:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
My question is, why do speakers of Indian English often type in all capital letters? ( Example) I patrol Recent Edits and notice it all the time. Is this acceptable English for India-related Wikipedia articles, or should I be reverting it?- Gilliam ( talk) 13:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Capital letters should be used only for these following purposes:
It is unnecessary and also grammatically wrong to use all capital letters in a word or a sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.129.2 ( talk) 10:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I have seen many Indians who use "but" before a sentence. Example: But, I will drink milk today though I woke up late.
It's grammatically wrong. The conjunction "but" must be used only between two sentences. It should not be used before a sentence. You can use "however" in such context. Example: However, Timothy may go to Sydney on a plane since he missed the train.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.196.199.198 ( talk) 00:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Under the section “Phonology”#“Consonants”, it says, “Standard Hindi and most other vernaculars (except Punjabi, Marathi & Bengali) do not differentiate between /v/ (voiced labiodental fricative) and /w/ (voiced labiovelar approximant).” This contradicts the articles Punjabi, Marathi and Bengali, which all say that said languages do not distinguish /v/ and /w/. Error of information?-- Solomonfromfinland ( talk) 15:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
"V" is voiced labiodental in Hindi. "W" is not found in Modern Hindi. Please read the book Modern Hindi Grammar by Omkar N. Kaul.
There is no dialect called Indian English. Indian universities teach Standard British English, and on Internet Indians read North American English. However, most of the Indians use either school slang or college slang to speak English.
Most of the Indians claim that Indian English is similar to British English. It's not true. The syntax of Indian English is similar to Hindi. To turn off the light, a native English speaker says "Switch off the light" but an Indian English speaker says "Close the light" that is translation of "batti band karo" in Hindi. The syntax "Close the light" sounds odd to a native English speaker. I can cite so many examples. "Rain is falling" instead of "It's raining", "You are selfish no" that is translation of "tum kanjoos ho na" from Hindi, "Chalk piece" that is translation of "sudda mukka" from Telugu and so many sentences that sound odd are heard in English medium schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.79.127.34 ( talk) 02:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Never compare British English with Indian English. The grammar of Modern English was developed by British poets like Geoffrey Chaucer but Indian English is either an ungrammatical provincial or a slang. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.14.18.109 ( talk) 09:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Most of the Indians aren't proficient in speaking English. So they make mistakes while speaking in English. There is nothing such as 'Indian English' in sense. Even the people of southern Orissa include some Odiya words while speaking in Telugu. Can we name such language 'Orissa Telugu'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.254.219 ( talk) 02:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
If any transformed or malformed form of a language is called a dialect, even Odiya can be called a dialect of Hindi. The shop that sells foreign made liquor is called 'bidesi modo dokaano' in Odiya and it is called 'videsi saraab ki dukaan' in Hindi. The difference in grammar, phonology and word formation is clearly evident in this context. Indian English can be called a different language because words like co-brother and unseason etc are not understood by many of the English speakers. Such division cannot be called a dialect in sense.
Some words used by Indians can be understood by them who speak English as their native language. For example: Private court (kangaroo court or unauthorised court that is organised by a vigilante gang that takes law in to their hands) and bus stand (bus terminal) etc. But words like co-brother and unseason etc are not understood by most of the English speakers.
The difference in grammar structure is the main factor that leads the Indians to speak incorrect English. English grammar is more complexed than the grammar of Indian languages. For example: Translate the Telugu sentence "ఇక్కడ కూర్చోవడానికి చోటు లేదు" to English. In Telugu, the sentence has four words. You need seven words to translate it to English. "There is no room here to sit" is the sentence formed after translation. Indians need to be trained well in syntax to speak correct English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.102.165 ( talk) 03:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I speak three languages. In Andhra and Orissa, I speak Telugu and in Chattisgarh, I speak Hindi. English is my third language. English is not even a second language for many Indians. However, I check the grammar before I speak English. I don't intend to kill the spirit of a language with grammatical errors. I was informed that many English medium students in Tamil Nadu speak English with Tamil grammar and their English cannot be understood by other Indians. I was shocked by this news. Everyone should learn English but speak with the correct syntax.
Indian English speakers think that correct grammar is not necessary to speak English. They are wrong. People may fail to understand your language if you speak with grammatical errors. e.g. Every noun must be followed by a pronoun in the consequent sentence. This rule also applies for Telugu and other Indian languages. "He got a call from home and he went there". Here the noun "home" is used in the sentence before conjunction and the pronoun "there" in the second one. If we miss the pronoun "there" and say "he went', people may think that he went to somewhere else but not to the place where he got the call from.
I added these but then thought twice about it and decided to post them here first. My boss and 5 coworkers use Indian English and these are two things I've noticed they've said. I have a few more that I can't think of right now. Do they seem okay to add?
easytoplease ( talk) 01:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
It's a problem related to morphology. In Hindi, the double conjunction "kyoo kee" is used to specify a reason. In English, only a single conjunction is used in such context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.164.240 ( talk) 03:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Most of the Indians speak incorrect English. An English website that operates from India had omitted the necessary conjunctions in a sentence that contains three verbs related to each other. If news papers and websites use the non-standard/sub-standard language, it is not difficult to imagine the English proficiency of a low educated man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.198.208 ( talk) 22:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
"Since" should not be used to indicate the duration of time. You can say "I have been here since 1983" but you should not say "I have been here since 30 years". "Since" can be used to indicate the starting point but not the span of anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.15.27.138 ( talk) 03:11, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Indian English users do not follow the difference between "since" and "for". "Since" means "from that point" or "from the starting point". It is semantically and grammatically incorrect to use "since" to indicate duration.
These are some more odds I have noticed.
I often edit to cleanup new pages on subjects related to India. I often run into a series of oddities in their English:
Are these from Indian English or is this simply a translation artifact?-- Auric 21:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, this is an artifact of translation done by some professionals who aren't trained in English grammar. Indian languages have simple tenses but English speakers often use perfect tenses. Therefore Indians have some difficulty in learning English tenses. In Indian languages, prepositions are used in a different way that doesn't match the rules of English grammar and syntax. For example: Translate the Telugu sentence "Nenu padella numchi samudra teeram daggara umtunnanu" to English. The translation in standard English would be "I have been residing near the beach for ten years", but in Indian English the translation would be "I am residing near the beach since ten years". The second translation sounds odd to native English speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.77.171.96 ( talk) 08:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Any website that invites contributors from the public would face troubles with Indian English users. A website had invited the users to submit their stories for publication. Indian English users used redundancies like 'reply back', 'return back' etc in their stories. They even used words like "prepone" that are not found in British English and American English vocabularies. It had been a difficult task for the editors to correct the grammar used by Indian English users. It's not a wonder if Wikipedia's editors have the same trouble with Indian English users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.146.96 ( talk) 10:10, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Even I did notice Indians using odd tenses while speaking English. Example: "I am absent yesterday". They use the same syntax for present tense and past tense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.238.5 ( talk) 11:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
They use the wrong syntax even for future tense. They can even say "I will absent tomorrow". Most of the Indian English medium schools do not train their students in grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 13:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a question "Why do Indian English speakers miss 'a's and 'the's while speaking English?". 90% of the educated Indians aren't well trained in English even in the English medium schools. None of the Indian languages contain definite article and indefinite articles. They use the grammar of their local languages while speaking English. So, they miss "a"s and "the"s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.206.17.1 ( talk) 13:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Generally "the" or "a" is used to indicate a common noun. Example: The cow is black. Here cow is a common noun and black is an adjective. You need to fix "the" before the word cow. These prefixes need not be applied to a proper noun. Example: In the phrase "United States of America" the word America is a proper noun (a fixed name of a thing). You should also use "the" or "a" while using a proper noun as a common noun. Example: The Hitler of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.129.2 ( talk) 09:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
However, in Telugu language, demonstrative adjectives and cardinal adjectives are sometimes used to direct a common noun in specific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.14.48.187 ( talk) 02:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.78.193.120 ( talk)
This article seems to be about the way Indians, in general, speak English, and not about native Indian English speakers. As a native English speaker from India, I find this article inaccurate, and frankly, quite offensive. I might be part of a extremely small minority of Indians who consider English their first language, but shouldn't this article be about "proper" Indian English? Even the lines that are cited (especially by "JC Wells", a 1982 publication) seem to be about how Indians incorrectly pronounce and speak English. So I'm beginning to wonder if this article is about how Indians stereotypically speak English, or about the Indian dialect of English. Azzurro2882 ( talk) 03:47, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
This article itself is a joke. The whole article must be deleted. Errors related to syntax, phonology and morphology done by Indian English speakers are classified as Indian dialect of English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.253.210 ( talk) 06:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Even some of the Anglo-Indians speak incorrect English if they learn the language in the school. My neighbours are Anglo-Indians and even they do pronounce "birth day" as "birt day". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.64.78.194 ( talk) 06:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I am an editor of technical articles written by people in India. People outside of India need to know what a fresher or a snap, when used in the manner that only the people of India use them, is. Also, the people of India need to know what words such as those are only used in India. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I still have never gotten an explanation of what they mean by "different-different" and other words duplicated with a hyphen to separate the duplications. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
One trait I often notice in Indian speakers of English - that I don't see mentioned in the article - is a tendency to use the subjunctive much more often than I would expect from a speaker of NA or RP. (e.g., "We would run some tests tonight and let you know the result" or "I would be out of the office next week" when there is no implied condition or hypothetical). Have others noticed this trait? And, if so, is anyone in a position to comment on whether it reflects grammatical forms found in Indian languages, or to comment on whether it represents a consistent distinction that happens to be drawn in a different place than NA/RP but that still has a bright line between situations that call for 'will' versus 'would'? Willhsmit ( talk) 22:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't see why incorrect Indian English grammar needs to be mentioned in an encyclopaedia. The 'Grammar Quirks' section could might as well be renamed "commonly used incorrect English used by Indians." I think it should be deleted. The "Interjections" section, while less inappropriate than the "Quirks" section, also does not belong to an encyclopaedia, in my opinion. Azzurro2882 ( talk) 16:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
1. If people from UK and USA learn Indian national/regional language, they can't have the same accent like the Indians.
2.The expected pronunciation of English language can't be based on the pronunciation of U.K. or U.S.A. people. We can't call it standard because, it is not defined before origination of language. But it is evolved over the years. This evolution is different in India.
3. English language differs in it's script and pronunciation of it. This could be the main reason behind the very different accents of English all over the world.
4. Over the years, no. of people in the world who are speaking so called Indian_English are more than who are having English as their native language.But it doesn't mean that then based on majority Indian_English will be considered as a standard because majority people are using it. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
203.91.201.54 (
talk)
13:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
W.r.t. to fourth point, its clear that problem lies when writing "कल " in English. If you are using devnagari script,"कल" can not be read in multiple ways. But if you write "Kal",it can have multiple pronunciations. Word written in most of Indian script, have unique pronunciation. If a word is written "पकड़", it should be read as Pakad only. But in english if a word is written as "pakada" it can be read as pakad,pakada etc.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AbhijeetDh ( talk • contribs) 05:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion at least, it is wrong to use "no." instead of "number" unless there is a limited amount of space. Also, "who are having English" should be "who have English" or "with English". Also, "majority Indian_English" should be "majority of Indian_English" and "standard because majority people" should be "standard because the majority of people". Yes, it is really scary to think that the English language should be used in the uncorrected manner just because the majority uses it that way. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Many, probably most, of the external links are broken. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Long ago, I added some external links and subsequently those links were deleted by Indian English users. Indian English is not a real dialect. Many Indians use English with grammatical errors and claim it Indian English. If we expose the facts about Indian English, these people get frustrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.251.162 ( talk) 09:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
The given link of Jason Baldridge's article is missing. I found his article here [2].
It seems to me (A native British English speaker) that many of the quoted examples of Indian idioms are also common in British English. The article therefore (in its present state) would be useful to people wanting to understand Indian English, especially Americans, but misleading to a scholar looking for reliable source material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.249.187 ( talk) 17:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I also found that:
I am British and used to say 'bunk off', not really 'a class' we say 'a lesson' more than a class. 'Club' is used like 'club together and buy something'. I say 'coaching classes' or 'tutorials' but NEVER 'Cram school'. It feels grammatically wrong, like it should be 'cramming school'. I said called the dining room a 'mess' on a ship. Railway station is used more formally than train station. I found that we do use some of these statements and the alternatives seemed a bit American. In the first examples I say amount, and I only ever say rubber and flat, not eraser and apartment. I would only say apartment when referring to a holiday apartment. Sweetie candykim ( talk) 11:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I am an American and I think that the word "amount" when used as described might be unusual at most. I think it would at least be understandable. Also, it is my understanding that a flat is a type of apartment. Sam Tomato ( talk) 18:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm British as well, but over 60 and there has been a "drift" of some terms in BrE and even American English in recent years. For example "Sitting at the Railway Station, got a ticket for my destination..." was quite normal American usage. Also it's still common with my age group to say "he's done a bunk", meaning absconded or fled, that would not be used by younger people. "Flat" is also used somewhat in North America, for example to describe the large suburbs of "French Flats" in Montreal and some other Canadian cities, being charactaristic rows of two storey walk-up apartments or flats with their own staircase opening to the street. -- MichaelGG ( talk) 02:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I think there is a need to discuss the origin of Indian English. The language of the rulers and the ruled has not been the same in India for the past 2000 years. In ancient India, Sanskrit was the language of ruling classes and Prakrit was the language of the ruled. In the middle ages, Persian was the language of the ruling classes and now so is English. I visited a town in Maharashtra. There are no English sign boards in that town except on banks, police station and railway station. The language used for official purposes is not often used for colloqial use. This is the current position of English use in India. Indian English speakers often use redundancies like "revert back" and "reply back" but official records used in government offices do not have such words. Indian English is a colloqial language but not a standard dialect. Therefore I was surprised when I was informed that there is a dialect called "Standard Indian English". In B.A. English syllabus, we have lessons about British English and American English. We have no lessons on Indian English because a colloquial language is not attributed importance by any university. However, we need to know "why Indian English users commit grammatical errors". An American English speaker can understand British English because there are few grammatical differences between American and British Englishes, but he cannot understand Indian English which is highly influenced by the grammar of the mother tongue of the speaker. Praveen-vizag ( talk) 11:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
It is not possible to standardise Indian English. Indians have Hindi as lingua franca. Since 1947, India has been socially and culturally not connected with the Great Britain. Therefore, Indians need not rely much on English for inter-ethnic communication.
I have removed the long lists of unsourced expressions of Indian English. This article is not the List of expressions of Indian English; rather, it is about the history, syntax, and phonology of the dialect. Eight years ago, when I arrived on Wikipedia, books Indian English were few and far between. But now, as I have demonstrated above, a number of reliable studies exist.
Random long lists, in any case, serve no purpose in an encyclopedia article. Examples can be added judiciously in the relevant sections of an expanded Indian English article in order to illustrate notable (syntactical or lexical) features of the dialect. But that requires a grammatical description of those features first. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
I think the sentence "My all friends are like this only" is a syntactic error. It is not just related to expression. Praveen-vizag ( talk) 15:11, 29 March 2014 (UTC)