South Asia fascinates me. On average, how many languages does the average Desi local know?

It just means someone from the land (the land presumingly being South Asia).
I hate the term though. It’s so soy and only normie females and soyboys use it. Just say south Asian instead.
Yes there’s no issue. Indians just have a weird accent to Pakistanis and they don’t use some of the grammatical constructs and Arabic/Persian loanwords Pakistanis use.
Never knew that, interesting.

Hindi and Urdu are mutually intelligible. Grammar is the same, as is much of the vocabulary. The main difference is that the Hindi language has undergone a process of Sanskritization, erasing or replacing many words derived from Farsi, Arabic, etc.

(please correct me if my history is wrong)

Also, the alphabets are completely different. Hindi uses the Devanagari script, whereas Urdu is written with an Arabic-derived alphabet. The latter's rendition is more similar to Farsi/Persian and includes characters which aren't native to or otherwise don't exist in Arabic.

Basically just means "of this/my country," specifically in relation to India and Indian people. Doesn't really make sense to say "desi" if you aren't an Indian or inside India.

>Hindi proficiency is still wide spread in South India

Retard Alert

According the national survey only less than 10 percent of south is proficient in hindi

>The thing with Karachi and Mumbai is slowly becoming a phenomenon although gradually I do see a shift happening from Hindi/Urdu to English in these major cities.

What other cities in South Asia are like that? I can think of Hyderabad (Urdu speaking city surrounded by Telugu speakers), Colombo (which is a hodgepodge of different stuff), and maybe Islamabad (Punjabi/Urdu in Pathan/Pushtun territory)

Here's a white guy speaking Hindi in Pakistan.

youtu.be/ZStY73q0arc

Everyone seemed to understand him.

"Widespread" doesn't mean predominant or extant among the majority of the population. Many people will say that English-language proficiency is "widespread" in India, even though the majority of Indians aren't anywhere near conversational.

Ten-percent isn't an insignificant count.

Thank you for the quality response, though: I'd expect nothing more from Jow Forums.

Karl Rock is a fucking dick. Dude just gets subscribers and views by sucking Indian cock and pretending like the region is the best in the entire world.

>Think about what you're asking. Mumbai is not only the largest city in Maharashtra, but it's the largest in India (although the NCR as a whole has a higher population). It's an economic powerhouse--people migrate from across the region and country to live, work and party there. Unlike Delhi, which predominately attracts Punjabi and Hindi Belt migrants, Mumbai gets a more eclectic mix.

Yeah, that seems interesting to me living in the USA because that kind of thing doesn't exist here, or really in most Western countries because of language standardization. The closest analogue I can think of is Miami or Los Angeles being mostly Spanish speaking while everything around it is English speaking.

This is more or less correct but Indians also say say some weird stuff like “teri” and “jai hind”. I have no idea what stuff like that means. (I know teri means your but idk if it correlates to tum or tu)

stfu

>Afghanistan
>South Asia
kys

Even the us government considers Afghanistan part of South Asia and it’s under south Asian policy departments.
Stay delusional, my desi friend.

Attached: 6B50BBAA-C921-4ED0-8C9E-CEC63FF88DA9.png (1125x2436, 3.94M)

Tera/teri is informal, tumhaare/tumhaare is less informal, aapke/aapki is formal.

There's an argument to made either way, although Afghanistan should be more appropriately considered a transition zone between the (NA-)West Asia and South Asia.

The Himalayas and Hindu Kush mountains are the borders of South Asia. They were formed with the Indian subcontinent smashing into Asia. Any other claim is political nonsense

If you're only delineating between regions based on geological features, then yes, I agree with you.

I don't give a shit what you fat mongrels think

You will always be pajeet.
Unless your tajik, then you’re persian, but I doubt that.

I would say Pushtuns/Pathans are more South Asian influenced, but everyone else is more in the Persian orbit.

Why did Gujurati and Punjabi develop their own alphabets instead of adopting Sanskrit?

I regularly watch pakistani news and can confirm this.
In fact, I find 'Pakistani' easier to comprehend than 80% of dialects of hindi back home. Of course there are some different dialects in Urdu, the one they use in Baluchistan is slightly harder to understand and the one they use in Punjab is basically the same as the dialect they speak in Delhi

My Pakistani friend has told me he can't understand Hindi for shit. Is he just retarded?

Yes, it means he failed to learn Urdu in school.

Indeed. In my college in America, all Pakistanis get along with Indians and language is perhaps our biggest bonding factor. People who are raised in Pakistan are used to our informal tone but those raised in America have a very 'pure' Urdu dialect as they mostly only converse with their parents in it and are unable to comprehend the slangs that develop among the youth

I thought it comes from DESIgnated shitting streets?

Yeah he grew up in Canada, and I doubt he ever took a formal Urdu class. He just told me that spoken Hindi sounds way too rough for him to understand.

Sometimes the accents can also be challenging if you're not used to them. For instance, I can't always understand the Hindi predominant in parts of the Himalayas as well as I can in the North.

Why learn a useless language? Hindi offers 0 benefits that english doesn't apart from retarded national pride.

I would think moving to a different city in India. South India south of the state Mumbai is in seems like a different world.

I think all the Muslims in those states speak Urdu though, so that's how Hindi is practical.

What made you interested in South Asia, Colombia bro?

I live in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley. Is there any reason why there are so many South Indians here?

How do you say Bollywood after Bombay was renamed?

Easiest way to get a decent work permit is by getting a six figure job after completing a masters degree in the US, since such jobs are mostly in tech and tech is big in the bay area you see such indians. South Indians are relatively richer and perform better academically so they are better represented in US tech

Yeah there's a weird mix of South Asians where I live - lot of South Indians, but also a huge Punjabi element and some people from the Hindi/Urdu belt but not that many.

Why doesn't everyone there just adopt Hindi/Urdu as the main language? Except for South India I get, but the North Indian languages are close enough to each other that it could theoretically be standardized.

From the U.S. but in Colombia; also will be back in India in exactly one month. Alreafy been to India about a dozen times, trying to center most of my graduate research on a certain set of issues specific to part of India.

TBQH I didn't know anything about India before I went the first time. Just watched a Bollywood movie, thought "this place looks cool" and decided to go. Didn't really like India the first time, but TBQH had a strange compulsion to go back and had a significantly better time.

Sorry for two TBQH, trying to simultaneously write and shit in a McDonald's bathroom

Where did you go when you were in India? And do Indians there have an obsession with biryani like the ones here do?

I speak 5 languages - English, Konkani, Hindi, Marathi and (some, broken) Portuguese.

Bangalore is 80%+ non-Kannada in the Kannada heartland. Can't think of any other examples. Mostly to do with what said.

Hindi is extremely useful in most of India as English proficiency is something you can't take for granted.

Sanskrit was written in the Old Brahmi script, which evolved over time into Devanagari (i.e. Hindi/modern Sanskrit), Bengali, Gujarati, Gurmukhi (Punjabi script), etc. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts

Punjabis are also fairly wealthy. As are Gujaratis (the ubiquitous Patels).

Regional pride. Honestly, trying to enforce Hindi is already a source of a lot of division. Nobody wants their languages to die (even though dialects have been massively standardized over the last couple of centuries) like how the Brits and Irish let their indigenous languages die (RIP Cornish/Manx, Irish up next). This is also not a problem unique to India - see Belgium for a smaller-scale example of the same problem. theguardian.com/world/2010/may/09/belgium-flanders-wallonia-french-dutch

Delhi, Punjab, Kashmir, Himachal, Uttarkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Goa, Telangana, Andhra, West Bengal, Sikkim, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, etc. Still have to see the whole south and rest of the Northeast, though.

And yeah, you get biryani everywhere. A lot of my Bengali friends go crazy for it, although I've never been a huge fan.

Also Karnataka, but I've just passed through

Karachi is apparently the most Afghan city outside of Afghanistan, and they’ve been the reason there are so many ethnic riots

Yeah south Asians have told me you can judge how good a restaurant is by the quality of biryani. Looks difficult as fuck to make but to westerners, it’s just fried rice.

In your travels would you say there’s more difference across people who speak different languages or is religion still the major marker? I get the impression the ethnic component is much more important but I could be wrong

Pakistani people are actually closer to Persians than to Indians.

It’s ethnic group dependent. I’d say only Baluchis and to a smaller extent, Pashtun/Pathans are.

Punjabis, Sindhi and Muhajirs are basically Indian Muslims are are firmly in the south Asian cultural zone

dalkhor pls

Punjabis on the west coast of North America are more or less monied blue collar people. In Northern California, they make up many of the truckers and large landowners. I know a few who work in factories but are more or less in management positions

Gujarati I heard are into finance and banking. I know a one or two but I don’t think they’re that big here

You can't reduce difference to a single component. It's often a coincidence of religious, ethnic and socio-economic variables.

Never been to America, myself, but that checks out. Most wealthy Punjabis are either landowning farmers or industrialists, and Gujaratis are predominantly into finance and banking (and the diamond trade - Antwerp has been practically taken over by Gujaratis).

Are people in the Hindi-Urdu belt just the "typical Indian" then?

They fit the cliched image most people have of India and Indians.

And probably like 60% of the population too. But the other 40% is still around 500 million people, and they're pretty different from each other. Not to mention how varied Hindi/Urdu speakers are.

South India should be its own separate entity. Everything about it is different than the north.

>DESIgnated shitting streets

Attached: sfadsfasfdad.jpg (278x181, 9K)

Apparently Bangalore is still 46.99% Kannada speaking, but yeah there are a lot of non-Kannada speakers there

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalore#Languages

>Kannada is the official language of Bangalore but the city is multi-cultural. According to census 2011, Kannada spoken by 46%, Tamil spoken by 13.99%, Telugu spoken by 13.89%, Urdu spoken by 12%, Hindi spoken by 5.4%, Malayalam spoken by 2.8%, Marathi spoken by 1.8%, Konkani spoken by 0.67%, Bengali spoken by 0.64%, Oriya spoken by 0.52%, Tulu spoken by 0.49%, Gujarati spoken by 0.47%

Mumbai is a bit different. Everyone developed a new language to reflect all the migrations it seems, which is mostly Hindi-Urdu with a lot of Marathi in it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Hindi

Not so much, Tamils and Gujaratis are more similar to each other than they are to Assamese.

>South India should be its own separate entity. Everything about it is different than the north.
that time has long sailed past, my friend

Bangladesh was created in 1971. No such thing as too late. As an outsider, I can admit that I'm wrong, but the Dravidian speaking world is a different culture than the Indo-European North Indian world.

Yeah, everything east of Bihar seems to be different. Apparently Bengali and Assamese have absolutely no intelligibility with Hindi. Is that the case?

More Indians speak Urdu than Pakis. It's language with it's base in Uttar Pradesh, it's not synonymous with Islam

...

The "North Indian" world and the "South Indian" world are separate cultures, sure. Bengal, Orissa, Goa, the North-east cultures, and Jharkhand are also separate cultures to a large extent. India is a highly multicultural nation, not in the western "diverse" sense, but in that it encompasses multiple cultural regions. "South Indian" culture is also not a fungible entity - Malayalis are similar to Goans in as many ways as they are to Tamils.
As to your other point, Bengali is quite similar to Hindi, really. Fairly mutually intelligible. Assamese isn't.

I don't mean to say every Indian Muslim speaks Urdu, but more often than not, even in South India, Indian Muslims are Urdu speakers. I would assume Hindu speakers of Urdu call their language "Hindi" and Muslim speakers of Hindi call their language "Urdu". I might be 100% wrong though.

Yeah that's what makes it so fascinating. There's a lot of different cultural zones that makes nation building really hard, which is surprising has India has survived as an entity.

Thanks for that wiki link, great laugh. Shoutout to whoever translated "abe sāle" as "hello friend, listen"
Several of the terms there are mainstreamed Hindi now, e.g. suṭṭā, śāṇā, jhol, bindaas. Probably because of Bollywood.

West and East Pakistan had problems, many of which are not present in India's domestic environment. West and East Pakistan were separated by the 7th largest country in the world. West Pakistan took all the money as that was where the main hub was. Delhi, Maharashtra (sp?) and Tamil Nadu are examples of big states in different parts of India. Most of the infra spending was in West Pakistan. In India, the South is more developed and the South knows that. India also helped East Pakistan during weather calamities like cyclones/hurricanes etc while Bengali students were murdered on the reg in Pakistan. Main similarity between W/E Pakistan and N/S India is the problem of languages. But unlike in the 60s when there were a lot of secessionist movements and protests, a lot of people in India only know India as it is now and not as a creation of the british empire. Even the North East is calm now. Protests, if any, are usually for a separate region within the states and not as a separate nation state.

Most importantly, the North and South aren't cultural identities. There is no "North" culture and there is no "South" culture. I also don't understand what people mean by Indo-European. It's a language group. Not a type of culture. But yeah, anything can happen but as long as parts of India don't end up raping other ethnicities and committing genocide against them, I don't think India is in any trouble in regards to Balkanization. That ship has sailed.

The only other thing aside Bollywood and the linguistic diversity I know about Mumbai is pav bhaji

youtube.com/watch?v=rSLiOqJ2egU

yeah I didn't understand how Pakistan with both its east and west wings were a sustainable entity at all. Never mind all the ethnic division and languages, administering it when a hostile country is smack in the middle of it, with the eastern wing being almost wholly surrounded by said nation sounds like a pain.

I think I'm conceptualizing nation states in the way we know them in Europe, but in Asia where there are so many intermediate groups in every country, its not quite as easy to do. India has done a good job of making all these native groups feel like they're part of the same nation.

There is a definite Hindi-Urdu dominance to the whole subcontinent though that I don't begrudge if groups want to opt out of that.

yes, nation states are a recent thing, relatively speaking, when compared to civilizations. If we take Chinese and Indian civilizations, they were always (and still are, which is why they are sometimes referred to as civilizational states instead of nation states) full of different ethnicities. Indian civilization, in this case, is the amalgamation of various kingdoms in South Asia. Hell, during the civilizational era, there wasn't a strict concept of borders on maps. You kept the territories you won through war. War was a constant. This is not the case anymore. Borders are respected for the most part. We are living in the most peaceful moment of human history.
As modern nations, both China and India had had troubles in the 50s, 60s , 70s and 80s etc. Both relied on military intervention to establish control in some form or the other. China with Tibet, Inner Mongolia and now Xinjiang. India with Hyderabad, Goa, Sikkim (wasn't as rosy as we think) and militarization of the North East and Kashmir.
I will admit, I don't know how countries in Africa can't do the same thing. Nigeria (ignoring the whole BP and Shell thing) is dying from within from all the ethnic and religious divide. Congo. Mali. How did things get so bad there but China and India made it out relatively fine.
There was always going to be a dominant language. For India, it's Hindi as it's the most spoken. Lots of people have Hindi as their mother tongue or second language. I don't agree with Hindi being pushed on other states (I'm from the North and can't speak Hindi for shit), especially when studies show that students learn best in their native languages but a part of me does understand the argument of having a national language. English would be easiest but a part of me wouldn't like having English as the national language. Any "Indian" language will do, really. I'll learn Khasi if I have to.

Two questions:

1) the hell you doing in Mexico?
2) where are you from in India?

What’s interesting is Pakistan was created for all the South asian Muslims to live in, but India has nearly as many Muslims as Pakistan.

why is the south more devloped than the south, are they /abomasterrace/ or what?

Parents moved here. So I joined them for some time, chilling and learning spanish.
Punjab (surprise, surprise). Well, idk. I was born in Delhi but parents are Punjabi. Not sure what that makes me.

There’s a lot of Punjabi Mexican types in California, but they interacted in california back in the early 1900s

I thought Punjabi and Hindi were almost completely intelligible?

South India has a bigger presence of regional parties. Regardless of their ideologies and stuff, regional parties tend to do well on the developmental and infrastructural part. This translated into a higher literacy rate which also had an effect on poverty. Iirc, kerala is extreme poverty free.
More foreign remittances, especially from the middle east.
Better waste management as well.
With that said, certain northern states like Punjab, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand are just as good. The cow belt has a shit ton of people. Why? The Ganges belt. It's is harder to develop a region with more people than region with fewer people. The states that people consider the north like Delhi, Bihar, UP, Rajasthan etc were the most affected by colonization, both mughals and the british

I honestly couldn't tell you, senpai. I don't know Punjabi either. When I hear Punjabi, I sometimes understand what is happening, mostly through context and sometimes it's completely different to me. When I lived in India, I relied on English and my 5th grade Hindi.
I was under the impression that people from South Asia in America was a recent thing. It was mostly the Chinese and Japanese besides Mexicans in American in 1900s?

So English is your first language? Where did you grow up?

And here - link to Punjabi mexicans
homegrown.co.in/article/800282/who-were-the-punjabi-mexicans-of-california-why-are-they-fading-away

There were some South Asians that came to the West Coast in the early 20th century but by and large, yes they are more recent

Mutual intelligibility is not the only factor in determining if something is a lamguage/the same language or not.

Turkish and Azeri are partly intelligible, but they're not considered the same language. So are the Romance languages with Latin. It's comparable to people. If they're physically separate and have their own relationships with the outside world, they should be considered individual.

Yeah, that's why it begs to wonder: are Hindi and Urdu the same language or different because they do have a different relationships to others in the outside world

Is India more of a rice eating or bread eating country?

I move(d) every 3 years so. Can't really say I grew up in a specific place.
China and India account for around 50% of the rice eaten in the world. Per capita, that list is mostly SEA and Bangladesh.
Roti/Chapati and Naan among others are a type of flatbread. So...both?

As someone else said, Hindi and Urdu can be considered dialects or variations of Hindustani. But they're often treated as separate languages for a variety of reasons, many of which have to do with ethno-politics and religion.

Yeah I think most countries that eat rice also eat bread but there’s a definite preference

East Asians definitely are more rice than bread eating
Southeast Asians aside from the Philippines and Vietnam’s European imports are almost exclusive rice eating
South Asia, might be 50/50

Much of the Middle East is also part of the ricosphere. Ethiopia is known for its bread (injera?) so probably not Africa, but I don't know.

Definitely though I think of Biryani when I think of Indian cuisine though

Biryani is used very often in Iran and Iraq, not to mention other countries in SA.

I may be completely off the mark here but I think South India eats more rice than North India due to their climate being better for growing rice. Like, a lot of rice.
Regardless, on the whole, more wheat is being consumed instead and rice consumption is falling. Seems to be the case throughout Asia.

In the Gulf Arab states, that might be because of the migrant workers from South Asia. Chicken Kabsa looks like biryani though.

I think asia’s tastes are starting to westernize so they want more wheat based goods. Though any bread made out of rice flour is delicious

This is accurate, to the best of my knowledge.

IIRC, there's also a slight correlation between wheat and rice consumption, which may partially explain why Punjabis tend to be taller than South Indians.

pic
I'm a manlet though. Fuck, where did it all go wrong?

Attached: rice .png (640x415, 334K)

What’s your favorite Indian dish?

How are muslim Punjabis pumping out 4 kids each, and Indian Punjabis are on 1.8 average?

Most Sikh families I know don’t have very many kids nowadays

I hear Pakis and Indians use the word Desi here all the time. What’s wrong with it?

...