[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Administrivia : Language of Communication on SRH
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: Administrivia : Language of Communication on SRH
-
From: shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Shrisha Rao)
-
Date: 1 Feb 1996 21:30:03 -0700
-
Expires: 29 Feb 1996 23:59:59 GMT
-
Followup-To: soc.religion.hindu
-
Keywords: language
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Sri Krishna Gururaja Seva Samiti
-
References: <4eq44m$gb7@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
-
Reply-To: shrao@nyx.net (Shrisha Rao)
In article <4eq44m$gb7@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
SRH Editor <srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu> wrote:
>Namaskar,
>
>After posting an article which was primarily in Hindi, I have received
>a comment that since this forum is of global nature, we ought to have a
>uniform language for communications, so that most of the readers on the
>net can participate.
With due regards given to the moderator and to the others of that
view, I beg to differ -- uniformity of language should not be
_imposed_.
>I tend to agree with this line on thinking. May I propose the following
>policy, as seek your input before it becomes an official policy?
>
>1. The primary language of communication on SRH will be English
>
>2. Quotations from other languages will be allowed, but the posters are
>urged to submit English translation along with the quotation.
No problem so far. Most postings will continue to be in English, and
it would be as well to request translations.
>3. Posts that are primarily in other languages shall not be accepted.
This is where the rub is. Precisely what is wrong with a Hindi posting
that would cause it to be rejected? What charter provision (or the
spirit behind it) is it violating?
I was happy to see Sourav post in Hindi, and congratulate him for
boldly doing what none of us did in all our combined man-years of
posting to Hindu groups. It is without a doubt that Hindi is
definitely more Hindu than English is, and it would amount to a
rejection of the authentic in favor of the ersatz, if one were to
claim loyalty to Hindu ideals and yet reject Hindi.
Now, I am not one to normally give much credence to the "brown-sahib"
theory that is often dismissive of any and all western influences, and
looks down upon Hindus who speak and use English effectively. However,
to any way prevent the use of the native language of the culture and
impose a false uniformity reeks of such vainglory, and I would protest
it.
It may be noted that many people on this forum, not the least of all
the moderator himself, are known to use Hindi greetings (Namaskar,
Namaste, etc.), suffixes (-ji) and such. What is it about Hindi that
specific parts of it are tolerable, but the whole of it is not? Or are
we too self-conscious and shy of speaking our language boldly, but
because we are also too weak to give up our heritage in full, we stick
to small reminders of it stuck into our immature use of our borrowed
tongue?
It is quite clear to me that the plea of uniformity is flawed at the
root. It is never the case that all postings to a newsgroup are
interesting to all readers. I see as much reason to stop Hindi
postings as to stop postings that, say, discuss Vivekananda -- you
don't like the one, and I have no use for the other; why not let both
of us get a pound of flesh each? On the other hand, as anyone knowing
Hindi will readily appreciate, there are very many great joys to be
had in communicating in Hindi, which is, as I have said, quite
undeniably part of Hindu culture and heritage, and to deprive readers
of these is quite indefensible. It is also quite certain that there
are a great many people who _do_ know and appreciate Hindi, and to
reject Hindi postings that they might like, simply because others do
not like them, is to serve a parochial interest.
One question that may quite legitimately be raised is: where does it
stop? If someone wants to submit in Hindi, then someone else will want
to write in Sanskrit, Tamil, Urdu, or whatever, and such postings may
not even be understandable by the moderator (and by most of the
audience). This is a legitimate concern, but to this end I would
suggest that the moderator request translations if the language is not
known to him; if it is, then there is no need. The translations may be
required by the moderator to decide whether to allow the posting to
pass, but they should not be required on the posting itself.
ataH, meri Ap sab se aur mAnanIya sanchAlak mahoday se nivedan hai ki
Ap is mAdhyam par hindI ke prayog me bAdhA na DAle.n. dhanyavAd.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>Once again, please submit your input on this policy, before it is
>officially adopted. SRH is a democratically run forum, and your input is
>essential for its growth and improvement.
>
>regards,
>
>ajay shah
>Moderator, Soc.Religion.Hindu
