Introduction: A conspectus’ in a house divided

By Amrit Rai

Purpose of essay: The present study is, in the first place, a research into the earliest origins of
Hindi/Hindavi and, secondly, a sociolinguistic inquiry into the causes that led at some point in
time, to its division into two separate languages High Hindi and high Urdu.

The word 'Hindi' is also used in a general sense, as noted by Grierson: It is a Persian, not an
Indian word, and properly signifies a native of India, as distinguished from a 'Hindu' or non-
Musalman Indian.

Amir Khusrau (AD 1236-1324) uses the word 'Hindi' in the specific sense of the language, and
that, naturally, the language of North-Western India with which the Muslims first came in contact
in the Punjab and then in Delhi.

According to Amir Khusrau:

the Hindi word is in no way inferior to the Persian. With the exception of Arabic, which is ahead
of all languages. The expressive power of Hindi language is no less than that of any other.

The fact that Hindi and Hindavi are one and the same is established when the author mentions
how Amir Khusrau and another poet call the same language by two names.

It would seem that this use of the word Hindavi is much the same as Gilchrist's 'Hinduwee':
Hinduwee I have treated as the exclusive property of the Hindoos alone and have therefore
constantly applied it to the old language of India, which prevailed before the Moosulman
invasion and in fact now constitutes among them the basis or groundwork of the Hindoostanee,
a comparatively recent superstructure composed of Arabic and Pasian.

I advisedly say 'much the same' because Gilchrist's basic characterization of the language as
'the old language of india which prevailed before the Moosulman invasion is acceptable, but
with some important reservations. First, it doesn't seem right to describe Hinduwee or Hindavi
as 'the exclusive property of the Hindoos alone'. Some of the greatest poets of Hindi-Hindavi are
Muslims. Secondly, to refer to Hinduwee as 'the old language of India which prevailed before
the Moosulman invasion' seems to imply that the development of Hinduwee or Hindavi came to
a stop after the 'Moosulman invasion'. This was not so. As we go along and trace the
development of this language we shall see that it had a natural and quite uninterrupted growth
until several centuries after the Muslim invasion.

Gyan Chand’s opinions:

Their recognition as two separate languages under the Constitution need not deter linguists
from questioning the scientific validity of their separation. Because, enumerating Urdu and Hindi
as two languages in the Indian constitution, is a political move, not a linguistic reality.

Arguments that say Urdu and Hindi are the same language:
 1. Urdu writing have more Arabic and Persian words and Hindi writing have more words of
Sanskrit origins ; but can this feature, the individual words, change a language into some
other language? If that is so, then what we call Urdu literature is itself a literature of more
than one language.
2. Basic vocabulary of Hindi is same as that of Urdu.
3. Difference of script cannot divide a Language into two. Malaysia and Indonesia have one
language, called Malay. In Malaysia it is written in the Arabic script and in Indonesia in
the Roman script; despite this they are not two languages. If, before Partition, Panjabi
Muslims wrote Punjabi in the Urdu script, the Sikhs in Gurumukhi, and Hindus in
Devanagari, this did not mean that they wrote three languages.

The eminent Indian linguist Ghatage urges the serious student of languages to exercise 'the
necessary caution and reservations· in respect of setting up families of languages· and goes on
to say: The resemblances must not be mere chance similarities but exact phonemic
correspondences which may recur in a large number of items and thus show a regularity.

The similarities due to a common origin pertain not only to the items of the vocabulary or words
of a purely lexical nature but permeate the whole of its grammar.
The similarities among the languages of a common origin are bound to and do become greater
and greater as we look into their earlier forms, while the reverse is the case with those due to
common symbiosis.

Argument against Hindi and Urdu being the same language:

WB YATES felt that Urdu and Hindi differ as the former is principally derived from the Arabic or
Persian, and the latter from Sanskrit. He felt that they could never be considered the same as
Urdu is used mainly by Muslim population of the country while Hindiapplied only to Hindus in the
upper provinces.

4. Hindi-Urdu are not two separate language; they are basically one and the same. Their
pronouns, verbs, and basic vocabulary are the same. There are no two other languages
in the world whose pronouns and verbs are one hundred percent the same. Russian
and Ukrainian are much akin to each other but even they are not so closely alike.
5. The two languages have the same relationship as two ships, of which the out-works of
the one may be formed of oak, and those of the other of teak; but of which the internal
construction, rigging, size, etc. are the same.

In other words, when did Hindi and Urdu split or start splitting? May we understand the split as a
natural course of its development, governed by the internal dynamics of the growth of a
language, or as the result of extraneous, divisive forces not really intrinsic to the language and
its growth? This is a highly pertinent question because if the answer is the former the inquiry
becomes one of merely academic, philological interest; but if the latter, the findings may have
some contemporary social import, and an understanding of the past may hold some light for us
today.

However, before we embark on substantive linguistic research on this subject it seems

advisable to first look for the 'extraneous divisive force’ in the British colonial policy of divide
and rule. This is particularly necessary because of a general feeling among protagonists of both
Hindi and Urdu, from their respective angles, that the divisive process started with Fort William
College, where Sir John Gilchrist, the bete noire of the Hindi world, set up Urdu (in the name of
'Hindoostanee') against Hindi (Bhakha) and took due care that they ran on two parallel, mutually
exclusive lines.

Hindustanee: John Gilchrist noted that Hindustani had three styles: the High or Persian style,
the middle or genuine Hindustani style and the vulgar or the Hinduwee style. The first style was
pedantic and drew on Arabic and Persian for its vocabulary, the second had a mixed vocabulary
of words derived from Sanskrit and Prakrit as well as Arabic and Persian, and the third was the
vulgar rustic style of Hinduwee. Gilchrist favoured the middle style and wanted it to be adopted
as the standard.

Ghazal
By Amir Khusrau
Translated from original Persian and Braj

Amir Khusrau was born in Patiyali (Uttar Pradesh). Khwaja Nizamuddin Auloya, his perception,
gave him the title of Turkullah (Soldier of God) and he was also called Tuti-I-Hind, parrot of
Hind. With him, the seeds of lndo-Persian culture were sown in India. 'I am an Indian Turk and
can answer you in Hindi', he wrote in the preface to his divan, Ghurrat-ul-Kamali. In his famous
Persian masnavi (narrative poem) Nuh Siphir, Khusrau celebrates the diversity of languages
spoken in 'Hind', its flora and fauna and seasons. While he is famous for his Persian verse, he is
also considered to be one of the earliest poets of Hindavi.

Read from book.

Lajwanti
By Rajinder Singh Bedi
Translated from original Urdu

Transition of name in Sundar Lal’s mind from Laju to Lajwanti.

Women themselves had patriarchal sentiments ingrained in them. They thought that physical
abuse was a part of every married life. They accepted it and normalised it. Toxic culture.
Treatment of women as ‘goods’.

Rajinder Singh Bedi’s Lajwanti suggests the everyday agency exercised by abducted women
stands outside the modernists conceptions of choice and it also illustrates how subjects contest
power in its discursive form and how their desires discontents transform or explode discursive
systems.

Relate this with unit on women speak: silence and lack of agency

“the plant is popularly named lajwanti because its curling action has
been seen as indicative of shyness or shame, hence the root ‘laaj’
which refers to shame”

The reference to Lajwanti’s curling action has an added connotation: the narrative reports that
“in the past he himself maltreated his Lajwanti often enough and he had not infrequently
thrashed her, even without the slightest pretext or provocation”. The recoiling action of Lajwanti
could also be analogous to Lajwanti’s response to her treatment by Sunder lal.

The community looks down at the abducted women as polluted the ambivalent interpretation of
lajwanti’s curling action may be out of shyness, fear and or shame. This resonates with the
community’s ambiguous response to the recovered women.

women like Lajwanti when returned to the domestic sphere of their own community, were often
seen as polluted, having come in contact with the ‘other’ community. The folksong in this
respect can be also construed as referring to the consequences of having one’s honour defiled.
It resonates with the response of many people in the community who rejected the women once
they returned.

As the passage reveals, the abducted women naturally shrivelled up in the face of their
pollution. The recovery of these women to their community only evoked aspersions on their
chastity and honour, which of course was formulated by the patriarchal codes. The code
expected women’s sexuality outside the domestic sphere to be passive.

The pre- partition attitude of Sunder Lal was entirely different compared to his post- partition
state of mind. His relation with lajwanti in the pre-partition days was characterised by a
consistent physical harassment . He played power politics in the domestic sphere on his wife.
But the redeeming factor is his sense of guilt and shame that occupies him after Lajo’s
abduction. He thinks of those bad days in which he put his wife into physical abuse.

Sunder Lal remonstrates at his deeds, which can be interpreted as an intersection between his
view of the abducted women as passive victims of sectarian riots and his own sense of
emasculation in letting out the abduction happen on his wife. He is ashamed to the extent that
he feels Lajo will not wish to return to him for his previous treatment of her.

The narrative says: “Sunderlal shivered with a strange fear and felt warmed by the holy fire of
his love”. It shows that he has mixed emotions he is excited but then he’s not sure whether he
himself would be able to accept Lajwanti back.
The narrator comments: “She and none but she knew Sunder Lal, knew that Sunder Lal had
always maltreated her. Now that she was back after having lived with another man, she dared
not imagine what he would do to her”.

On the other hand, Sunder Lal’s reception of Lajo becomes hostile as soon as he sees her to be
healthy and nourished. He is torn between negative thoughts that she may not have been as
much of a victim of the other man. He is thus caught between conflicting thoughts.

The condition of Lajo is described as ‘inebriated with an unknown joy’ at hearing the words
‘Devi’ come out of Sunder Lal’s mouth. But this joy, this time in Lajo proves temporary. She
realises that Sunder Lal accepted her in exchange for her silence. She tries throughout the
course of the narrative to share her gruesome experience of her abduction in order to wash
away her sins through tears, but Sunder Lal always shrank away from hearing her story.

The plight of Lajo encounters a new twist that despite her acceptance and new freedom she is
put behind a strange apprehension. This kind of silence forced on lajo can be considered as a
different form of abuse: emotional abuse.

Not only does Sunder Lal encourage silence in Lajwanti, but he also addresses her as Devi or
goddess, in order to erase the everyday experience she encountered with the other community.
But it turns out to be the wrong strategy as it only ends up with Lajwanti feeling more conscious
and alienated.

Lajwanti is constructed as lacking the ability to act in her own self- interest. The narrative further
suggests that Lajwanti’s reintegration into the community and nation state require her to
surrender her identity as a woman who can question her husband
and negotiate the terms of her patriarchal patronage. The narrative states:

Link with women’s speak Sita and the younger daughter

The narrative thus suggests that Lajwanthi’s consciousness suffers quietly, witnessing her
transformation into a Devi, a goddess and venerated by her husband. She is no longer lajo to
him. She becomes Lajwanti, ironically, the touch-me-not plant, who will shrivel and curl up from
both the civil and domestic spheres. Lajwanthi loses her old identity and her new identity only
venerates her to a Devi, which is no good for her.

Idea:
Sundar Lal is the one that shrivels and shies away from discussing the gruesome experiences
of his wife. Therefore he is also an example of Lajwanti.

Hindi
By Raghuvir Sahay
Translated from original Hindi

From book