The rising muslim population of India!
Javed
momin wrote:
>
> Dumb fuck,
>
> If you like half-dicks so much, go and cut your dick in half and say
> with pride..."Sat sariy Mohammad". Than go and screw your ape sisters
> and start in-breeding to produce some monkey brats with pink hairy
> ass
>
> No need to, Go to the mirror and count the hairs on your face and than
> on your ass. Since both will count the same so offer your face to
> next half-dick retard faggot. He will meet his Allah and you your
> Khalistan.
>
> > That is all I was trying to point out. Is this simple enough for you?
>
> Simple enough for the Khali-Sthan's.
Hello all:
Who are all these people who are devoid of decency? The way people are
talking bad things about Islam in Society Culture Indian makes me feel
worried. Is it because these people have little knowledge about Islam
or they are like Shiv Sena who take pleasure in creating riots in the
name of religion and politics?
I hope this kind of people are not welcome by any educated and
peace-loving Indian. And please visit soc.culture.bangladesh to find
out how differently we speak about issues of hindu concern. So, show
respect to other religions if you are not going to follow it.
Mohammad Javed Khan
"I am a Bangladeshi; Bangla is my language, Bangladesh is my home."
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
: Mohammad Javed Khan
: "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangla is my language, Bangaldesh is my home."
Well, did you ever stop to wonder that in your jingoistic frenzy you are
being deceitful in that after declaring the above, you write in English
and make the US your home. Shouldn't you tone down the rhetoric a little
bit till you get back home and write in Bangla? BTW, you should also
boast of the fine Bangla name that you have if you want to go the whole
hog (pardon the pun.)
Atanu
Please change the domain name to edu in my address when replying.
Udayan Chattopadhyay
In article <5oc50e$l...@agate.berkeley.edu>, at...@are.berkeley.eud says...
>
>
>: Mohammad Javed Khan
>: "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangla is my language, Bangaldesh is my home."
>
> Well, did you ever stop to wonder that in your jingoistic frenzy you are
> being deceitful in that after declaring the above, you write in English
> and make the US your home. Shouldn't you tone down the rhetoric a little
> bit till you get back home and write in Bangla? BTW, you should also
> boast of the fine Bangla name that you have if you want to go the whole
> hog (pardon the pun.)
Nothing "deceitful" in someone writing in a language other than their
declared preferred I think.
And WHAT might I ask is a "fine Bangla name"?
>
>Atanu
>
Udayan
Mohammad Javed Khan
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
>
> The world is fragmented into narrow nationalistic holes. From these holes
> narrow-minded pathetic jingoistic cries can be heard. These lead to the
> frenzies that leave a few million of these sorry bastards dead once in a
> while. A brief look into the history books reveals that first it was
> a division based on religion. Two Pakistans and one India. Then it was
> language and a few million more dead and one Bangladesh, one Pakistan and
> one India. This "I am better than you because I am <national>" crap is
> insidious. It kills and maims and continues to keep the population in
> misery and in poverty. Until the recognition dawns on people that
> nationalism does not work and must be replaced by an awareness of the
> interdependence on all people, this part of the world will be the garbage
> dump of the world.
>
> I don't have neither the time nor the inclination to provide the
> education to such pathetic lowlife. However, I will give a few pointers
> here. First, none of us can claim to have made it on our own. We have
> borrowed from others. And this borrowing is across time and space. What I
> claim to be mine is only something that was someone else's and I have
> acquired it. Therefore, I should not crow too hard about how great it is
> that I have that thing. The dig about "Javed Khan" being a fine Bangla
> name was meant to illustrate that. That there is nothing Bangla about
> that name - it is Arabic. If that person is so hell-bent on his
> Bangla-hood, why does he have to have a borrowed Arabic name? See what I
> mean?
I have to have a Bangla name to be a Bangali? Quite an idea. Most of
the Banglalis have names which are not bangali (Arabic, Turkish, Farshi,
Urdu, etc.). This does not mean that those majorities are not pure
Bangalis. The idea of having an arabic or turkish or urdu or farsi name
is to be different than the hindus. This practice has been done for
long. That does not give any one any right to call the muslim Bangalis
(who happen to be the majority) not pure.
Tell you what Atanu. Go and make your West Bengal the most developed
state in india (so that you can compare her with Gujrat, Maharastra,
Karnataka and TAmil nadu). Make an indian PM who is a Bangali. Then
come and poke your painful comments to Bangalis from Bangladesh. YOur
west bengal still is one of the poorest states in india!!! Go and solve
it or have a solution and cut your habit of running after muslim
bangalis.
Mohammad Javed Khan
>It should have occurred to him that we cannot afford the hubris
> when we have very little to show that is original and self-made.
>
> An old Texan saying goes: If you see a turtle on top of a ten-foot pole,
> you sure as heck know that she didn't get there by herself.
>
> We all owe it to others for all that we achieve and it is important to
> acknowlege that debt and tone down that crowing from the roof tops of how
> great we really are.
>
> To borrow an expression from the people here, put a lid on it, Mr.
> Mohammed Javed Khan.
>
> --
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Udayan Chattopadhyay <Uch...@btinternet.com> wrote:
: >
: > Well, did you ever stop to wonder that in your jingoistic frenzy you are
: > being deceitful in that after declaring the above, you write in English
: > and make the US your home. Shouldn't you tone down the rhetoric a little
: > bit till you get back home and write in Bangla? BTW, you should also
: > boast of the fine Bangla name that you have if you want to go the whole
: > hog (pardon the pun.)
: Nothing "deceitful" in someone writing in a language other than their
: declared preferred I think.
: And WHAT might I ask is a "fine Bangla name"?
: Udayan
The world is fragmented into narrow nationalistic holes. From these holes
narrow-minded pathetic jingoistic cries can be heard. These lead to the
frenzies that leave a few million of these sorry bastards dead once in a
while. A brief look into the history books reveals that first it was
a division based on religion. Two Pakistans and one India. Then it was
language and a few million more dead and one Bangladesh, one Pakistan and
one India. This "I am better than you because I am <national>" crap is
insidious. It kills and maims and continues to keep the population in
misery and in poverty. Until the recognition dawns on people that
nationalism does not work and must be replaced by an awareness of the
interdependence on all people, this part of the world will be the garbage
dump of the world.
I don't have neither the time nor the inclination to provide the
education to such pathetic lowlife. However, I will give a few pointers
here. First, none of us can claim to have made it on our own. We have
borrowed from others. And this borrowing is across time and space. What I
claim to be mine is only something that was someone else's and I have
acquired it. Therefore, I should not crow too hard about how great it is
that I have that thing. The dig about "Javed Khan" being a fine Bangla
name was meant to illustrate that. That there is nothing Bangla about
that name - it is Arabic. If that person is so hell-bent on his
Bangla-hood, why does he have to have a borrowed Arabic name? See what I
mean? It should have occurred to him that we cannot afford the hubris
Mohammad Javed Khan
Atanu:
scb is not your father's property that you could ask me to stop writing
to even though I have made several constructive comments.
You seem to be very uncooperative when some one has a better idea than
you or when some one disagrees with you. You must learn how to live
with disagreements in the newsgroups. You must learn that disagreements
are natural!!
Do not think you can get away by calling any one stupids!! It only
shows your shallowness and inefficiency. If you want to be effective,
do good arguments. And if anyone disagrees, donot ask that person to
leave just for that.
You have characteristics no different than some of those West Bengali
nettors. We bangladeshis donot expect much from you guys. Do not get
blinded by some of the jargons now being spread around in the net!!
Think. Cheers.
Mohammad Javed Khan
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> Mohammed J Khan:
>
> As I wrote to you before, please put a lid on your pathetic narrow-minded
> jingoistic crap. You are too stupid to follow a simple argument. Grow up
> and then when you can follow an argument (even a simple one), just try
> reading. I am afraid writing anything remotely coherent is beyond your
> feeble intelligence. You give the poor Bangladeshis a bad name. And not
> only that, you insist on spewing the results of your retraded attempts at
> writing on multiple newsgroups. You are an idiot. Keep the results of your
> idiocy in soc.culture.bangladesh. There is absolutely no reason for you to
> display your ignorant ramblings on other groups as soc.culture.indian or
> soc.culture.bengali. There are enough stupid morons on these and so you
> should specialize in your home newsgroup. They would appreciate it better
> and you can unload all the filth you wish over there.
>
> Consider yourself flamed and have the good grace to stick your tail between
> your legs and for the greater good, remove your disgusting presence from
> the usenet. Stupid religious fanatics have little to recommend themselves
> to others - but you take the whole frigging cake when it comes to having a
> parochial mentality. Others no doubt have told you directly how badly you
> stink. Please try to understand and perhaps you will take pity on decent
> folks and go slink underneath the rock you call home.
>
> Please, please, pretlly please. Allah kay naam pay!! Bahut ho gaya. Ab bus
> karo. Phuttas ki goli khaao yaar. Dafah ho jaa. Go away. Vamoose.
> Disappear. Or maybe you understand Bangla - chole jao, on-ek hoi gacche,
> a-bar aapni jaan.
>
> You have done sufficient damage to the reputation of the Bangadeshis.
> Enough already. You must be Bangladesh's reply to our very own Jai Maharaj.
> I swear I will try to put a leash on Jai Maharaj. But please don't do this
> to Bangladeshis any more. I concede that Bangladesh can create a bigger
> asshole than India can. Now that we know it, can you please go away?
Mohammad Javed Khan
afku wrote:
>
> at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> > In soc.culture.bengali Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
>
> > : "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangla is my language, Bangaldesh is my home."
>
> > being deceitful in that after declaring the above, you write in English
> > and make the US your home. Shouldn't you tone down the rhetoric a little
> > bit till you get back home and write in Bangla? BTW, you should also
> > boast of the fine Bangla name that you have if you want to go the whole
> > hog (pardon the pun.)
>
> body is using is English . So rightfully javed writes in English. He gives his identity and
> that doesn't mean that he can't write in English. For your information in Bangladesh,
> English is the second widely used language. So get cool man. Get life.
>
> Faiz Kabir
Nice reply Faiz Bhai. I wonder why some people take disagreement to be
antagonism. By the way, have a nice day.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Udayan Chattopadhyay
In article <5omk3j$q...@agate.berkeley.edu>, at...@are.berkeley.eud says...
>>
>? A brief look into the history books reveals that first it was
> a division based on religion. Two Pakistans and one India. Then it was
> language and a few million more dead and one Bangladesh, one Pakistan and
> one India.
Isn't this rather a tragic simplification?
> The dig about "Javed Khan" being a fine Bangla
> name was meant to illustrate that. That there is nothing Bangla about
> that name - it is Arabic. If that person is so hell-bent on his
> Bangla-hood, why does he have to have a borrowed Arabic name? See what I
> mean? It should have occurred to him that we cannot afford the hubris
> when we have very little to show that is original and self-made.
>Atanu
>
Only so much as "English" names such as Christopher, Abraham etc are Greek,
Hebrew etc. Doesn't stop the Christophers and Abrahams taking pride in
their language, culture etc.
I appreciate the points you are making about jingoism, but surely the name
issue should not be brought into the discussion.
My surname is Sanskrit in origin (I believe) - should I change it if I wish
to call myself a Bengali?
Udayan
Mohammad Javed Khan
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> In soc.culture.bengali Mohammad Javed Khan <mak...@mtu.edu> wrote:
> : Atanu:
>
> : scb is not your father's property that you could ask me to stop writing
> : to even though I have made several constructive comments.
>
> point out. But neither are the public streets - yet I will be equally
> compelled to ask you to avoid shitting on public streets. So therefore I
> am asking you to please stop posting shit on the usenet. Only as a public
> service, mind you.
And in case you do not know there is no board who oversees the kind of
articles people write descently on scb. Internet is free.
Javed
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Udayan Chattopadhyay <Uch...@btinternet.com> wrote:
: My surname is Sanskrit in origin (I believe) - should I change it if I wish
: to call myself a Bengali?
Well, only if you are laboring under the delusion that being Bangali
somehow makes you better than the rest and that you need to proclaim it
loudly. Then you should pretend that Bengali has not borrowed anything, has
originated everything of any value and so on. If you feel so, then you will
have to change your name to a Bengali name.
--
Javed
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> In soc.culture.bengali Udayan Chattopadhyay <Uch...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> : My surname is Sanskrit in origin (I believe) - should I change it if I wish
> : to call myself a Bengali?
>
> Well, only if you are laboring under the delusion that being Bangali
> somehow makes you better than the rest and that you need to proclaim it
> loudly.
Who is crowing about being bangali? I thought you are hitting me for
having a non-Bangali name which is actually the majority of the Bangalis
(most of the Bangalis are muslims) doing.
Javed
Udayan Chattopadhyay
In article <5os1np$o...@agate.berkeley.edu>, at...@are.berkeley.eud says...
>
>In soc.culture.bengali Udayan Chattopadhyay <Uch...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>: My surname is Sanskrit in origin (I believe) - should I change it if I
wish
>: to call myself a Bengali?
>
>Well, only if you are laboring under the delusion that being Bangali
>somehow makes you better than the rest and that you need to proclaim it
>originated everything of any value and so on. If you feel so, then you will
>have to change your name to a Bengali name.
>--
Which brings me back to my original question: what is a "Bengali" name ...
kind of rhetorical circles - perhaps we won't agree on this one.
I do agree that jingoism and nationalism at the expense of others is
dangerous and not to be encouraged.
Uday Reddy
Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
>
> I have to have a Bangla name to be a Bangali? Quite an idea. Most of
> the Banglalis have names which are not bangali (Arabic, Turkish, Farshi,
> Urdu, etc.). This does not mean that those majorities are not pure
> Bangalis. The idea of having an arabic or turkish or urdu or farsi name
> is to be different than the hindus. This practice has been done for
> long. That does not give any one any right to call the muslim Bangalis
> (who happen to be the majority) not pure.
Actually, now that the topic has come up, why do Bangalis use Arabic,
Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
Hindus?
As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> Most Bengalis are _not_ muslims. Most Bengalis are Hindu. Bangladeshis
> are muslims. One of these days, as soon as you have some time away from
> making as ass of yourself on soc.culture.bengali, do check an atlas and
> notice that Bengal is in India and people of Bengal are Bengalis. Notice
> a country called Bangladesh and those people are Bangladeshis and they
> are muslims. They have Arabic names and they got their asses kicked by
> the Pakistanis. They put fatwas on writers who write things that are
> uncomfortable to Bangladeshis. Try to understand that there is a
> distinction between Bengalis and Bangladeshis. The culture, the
> worldview, the history, the speech and whatever are all different between
> the two. Bengalis are Indians. Bangladeshis are not Indians (thank god
> for small mercies.)
I don't see the point you are making. West Bengal is in India and East
Bengal is Bangladesh. Both are Bengals and their people are Bengalis.
If you find something objectionable in Javed Khan's posts, please
counter those things. On the othe rhand, your posts are racist and
communalist, and smack of the very sentiments that accuse Javed Khan of.
Uday Reddy
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
: I don't see the point you are making. West Bengal is in India and East
: Bengal is Bangladesh. Both are Bengals and their people are Bengalis.
If East Bengal is Bangladesh, then India is Pakistan and Bangladesh is
Pakistan and since East Bengal is Pakistan, East Bengalis are Pakistanis
and so Indians are Pakistanis or is that Pakistanis are Indians.
Doesn't make any sense, does it? Calling Bangladeshis bengali because it
used to be East Bengal would mean that Bangladeshis should be called
Pakistanis since they used to be East Pakistan and further Pakistanis
should be called Indians since they used to be India before the division.
at...@are.berkeley.eud
: >
: > Most Bengalis are _not_ muslims. Most Bengalis are Hindu. Bangladeshis
: > are muslims. One of these days, as soon as you have some time away from
: > making as ass of yourself on soc.culture.bengali, do check an atlas and
: > a country called Bangladesh and those people are Bangladeshis and they
: > are muslims. They have Arabic names and they got their asses kicked by
: > the Pakistanis. They put fatwas on writers who write things that are
: > uncomfortable to Bangladeshis. Try to understand that there is a
: > distinction between Bengalis and Bangladeshis. The culture, the
: > worldview, the history, the speech and whatever are all different between
: > the two. Bengalis are Indians. Bangladeshis are not Indians (thank god
: > for small mercies.)
: If you find something objectionable in Javed Khan's posts, please
: counter those things. On the othe rhand, your posts are racist and
: communalist, and smack of the very sentiments that accuse Javed Khan of.
Care to back up that accusation? Of the statements of mine which you
quoted in your followup, care to indicate which statements are not facts?
Where, do you feel, have I taken liberties with the truth?
Where have I written about races? I have been talking of the distinction
between the Bengalis and the Bangladeshis. Sure that is a communal
distinction. Recognize that distinction and be happy that you are not
living in Bangladesh. With a name like Uday Reddy, you'd not be a happy
camper there. Or do you disagree with the last statement? You'd be much
safer in a world with my kind than the kind of Javed Khan. Want to
disagree with that last statement?
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Javed <mak...@mtu.edu> wrote:
: Who is crowing about being bangali? I thought you are hitting me for
: having a non-Bangali name which is actually the majority of the Bangalis
: (most of the Bangalis are muslims) doing.
Most Bengalis are _not_ muslims. Most Bengalis are Hindu. Bangladeshis
are muslims. One of these days, as soon as you have some time away from
making as ass of yourself on soc.culture.bengali, do check an atlas and
notice that Bengal is in India and people of Bengal are Bengalis. Notice
a country called Bangladesh and those people are Bangladeshis and they
are muslims. They have Arabic names and they got their asses kicked by
the Pakistanis. They put fatwas on writers who write things that are
uncomfortable to Bangladeshis. Try to understand that there is a
distinction between Bengalis and Bangladeshis. The culture, the
worldview, the history, the speech and whatever are all different between
the two. Bengalis are Indians. Bangladeshis are not Indians (thank god
for small mercies.)
End of free lesson. Will you shut up or do you just enjoy being abused on
soc.culture.bengali so much that you continue to post your drivel on it?
Sunil Gokhale
>In soc.culture.bengali Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
: Actually, now that the topic has come up, why do Bangalis use Arabic,
: Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
: it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
: descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
: Hindus?
: As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
: perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
I don't know whether Goa should be considered part of 'South India',
but if it is, then most Goan Christians I have come across or read
about do not have the 'perfectly Indian names' (by that I think you
mean Pre-Christian or Pre-Muslim period names).
Similarly, most Kerala Christians have a 'non-Indian' name either as
their first name or a last name.
As a counter-counter point :-) many Muslim Indonesians, Cambodians etc.
have 'Indian' names either in original or in corrupt form. All this is
part of cultural imperialism, whether it happens consciously or
otherwise.
Soumitra Bose
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
> >
> > I have to have a Bangla name to be a Bangali? Quite an idea. Most of
> > the Banglalis have names which are not bangali (Arabic, Turkish, Farshi,
> > Urdu, etc.). This does not mean that those majorities are not pure
> > Bangalis. The idea of having an arabic or turkish or urdu or farsi name
> > is to be different than the hindus. This practice has been done for
> > long. That does not give any one any right to call the muslim Bangalis
> > (who happen to be the majority) not pure.
>
> Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
> it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
> descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
> Hindus?
>
> As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
> perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
>
I guess Uday , you are not aware of the rising trend among the
BAngladeshee muslims (among Wbengalee muslims this trend is even more
growing and this was there even before independence -like NAzrul ISlam's
deceased son was called Krishna Rahman ) is to use perfect bengalee
secular names . MAny use them as an added name.But a new trend is to use
only bengalee names with an arabic root to denote their islamic identity
..In west bengal there are two strong trends , one is to use nice
mytholocial names which are not religious (actually buddhist names are
more popular among hindus in bengal like Tothagota, Sugoto
,Saugoto,Bodhisottva, Shakyoshubro,Amitava , etc ) , the other trend is
to use nick names (a unique bengalee thing , names which do not mean
anything but sounds nice like noton , tutul, tumpa, tun, gible, bhombol,
bu, chupe, boto, etc) .
Among bengalee muslims this trend of using a bengalee name and an arabic
family name is gaining ground at a faster rate ....
But nothing like the name of the heroine of Abul Bashar -Sayeda
Akashleena . I have a friend called Sangshaptak Ahmed . My buddy from my
school was Shomyosnato Udayshankar Rodriguez nick named "Udo" .
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
: If you find something objectionable in Javed Khan's posts, please
: counter those things. On the othe rhand, your posts are racist and
: communalist, and smack of the very sentiments that accuse Javed Khan of.
Mr. Reddy:
This is called racism.
> "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangali is my race, Bangla is my language,
> Bangladesh is my home."
Further, the idiot who wrote that does not even know that bangali is not a
race. The only race that he belongs to is a race of retarded idiots.
Soumitra Bose
> : Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
> : it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
> : descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
> : Hindus?
>
> : As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
> : perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
>
> Fareshi, Urdu" etc. names. Case in point, yours truly. But Bangladeshis
> have those names.
>
> Bengalis are from Bengal which is a part of India and so Bengalis are
> Indians. That, fortunately, cannot be said about Bangladeshis. They are
> not Indians and therefore not Bengalis. :-)
> --
> Atanu
>
> Please change the domain name to edu in my address when replying.
I really laugh at this , how the same kind of logic was once put by some
bangladeshees , "We are not bengalees , we are bangladeshees " they used
this same logic against some of our logic(including that of mine ) ...
"You extend your left hand backwards and then extend your right hand the
same way , ultimately they touch the same spot , they unite "
Raghu Seshadri
Uday Reddy (re...@cs.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: Actually, now that the topic has come up, why do Bangalis use Arabic,
: Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
: it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
: descent?
No. Over 95% were native hindu/buddhists.
: Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
: Hindus?
You said it. The reason IS just that - to be different.
This reason is quite understandable. It is as difficult
to separate Arabia from Islam as it would be to separate
India from Hinduism. So when someone becomes Muslim,
he also takes on the artifacts of Arab culture to
a large extent. One goes with the other.
You can see this sort of thing among non-Indians
who become hindu as well - all the Hare Krishnas
adopt Indian names.
: As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
: perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
The Church in India has deliberately encouraged
this Indianization, to the extent that Christian
women even sport the dot on the forehead.
Before this policy was adopted, Christians too
invariably adopted European names.
RS
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
: Actually, now that the topic has come up, why do Bangalis use Arabic,
: Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
: it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
: descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
: Hindus?
: As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
: perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
Well, now that you mention it, Bengalis rarely have "Arabic, Turkish,
Mohammad Javed Khan
Sunil Gokhale wrote:
>
>
> As a counter-counter point :-) many Muslim Indonesians, Cambodians etc.
> have 'Indian' names either in original or in corrupt form. All this is
> part of cultural imperialism, whether it happens consciously or
> otherwise.
The Javanese language (people of Java) has influenced Indonessian
language (a deviant form of Malay language) significantly. Both Malay
and Javanese have great Indian influence. Indonessians keep Javanese or
Malay names because these languages are spoken predominantly by the
muslims. Following are some samples:
Widjojo (pronounced Vijayo) ===== means victorious
Soumitro ======= Soumitra
Ratna======= Ratna
Putra======Son
Subroto
So, it goes back to my idea. Muslims have different names becaues it is
traditional to keep names in langauges which are spoken by muslims. It
is more like tradition.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
>
> Actually, now that the topic has come up, why do Bangalis use Arabic,
> Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
> it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
> descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
> Hindus?
Good point Uday. Traditionally muslims keep Turkish, Arabic, Urdu names
to set them apart from the others: these names distinguishes them as
muslims. But as you know name is nothing, it is the deeds that is more
important. This naming has traditionally been done in all the muslim
countries and among all the muslims. This, however, has never incited
the muslims not to mingle with non-muslims. The society has not been
hurt by this kind of behavior.
>
> As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
> perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
Even Christians in Lebanon have Arabic Name (Former Labanonise President
Amin Jamael was a christian).
Javed Khan
>
> Uday Reddy
Mohammad Javed Khan
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
>
> Well, now that you mention it, Bengalis rarely have "Arabic, Turkish,
> Fareshi, Urdu" etc. names. Case in point, yours truly. But Bangladeshis
> have those names.
Bangalis don't?
>
> Bengalis are from Bengal which is a part of India and so Bengalis are
> Indians. That, fortunately, cannot be said about Bangladeshis. They are
> not Indians and therefore not Bengalis. :-)
You have no clue as to who is a Bangali. Bangali are the group of
people who speak Bangali who used to live in bengal. Then Bangal got
divide and we have WEst bengal and bangladesh. Bangalis are the
majority of Bangladesh's population and the majority of West Bengal's
population.
Our race is Bangali while our nationality is Bangladeshi. We are
citizens of Bangladesh Atanu. You think that Bangladeshis are not
Bangalis? So, if any WB person is living in the U.S. or in Maharastra
that person will no longer be a Bangali (according to you)? How about
the Germans? Germans who live in the U.S. still call them Germans.
Malay are the people who speak Malay language. They constitute 7% of
Indonessia's population and 16% of Singapore's population while they are
the majority of Malaysia's populaiton (60%). No one is going to say
that Singaporean Malays who speak Malay are not Malays. It is the
language that makes one Bangali not staying in West Bengal.
The world has nearly 200 million Bangalis (who speak Bangla). Of them
130 million live in Bangladesh. 125 million + Bangalis are muslims who
have Arabic, or Turkish or Farsi names. So, your argument does not
stand. Visit Bangladesh and you will find out how proud we are to be
Bangalis. And Bangladeshis are citizens of Bangladesh.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
> : counter those things. On the othe rhand, your posts are racist and
> : communalist, and smack of the very sentiments that accuse Javed Khan of.
>
> Mr. Reddy:
>
> This is called racism.
>
> > "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangali is my race, Bangla is my language,
> > Bangladesh is my home."
>
> Further, the idiot who wrote that does not even know that bangali is not a
> race. The only race that he belongs to is a race of retarded idiots.
Your above statement is racism. Mine was to let all know that I am not
a Pakistani nor an Indian. It was meant for information not to show
racist attitudes.
Javed
Mohammad Javed Khan
Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
>
> I really laugh at this , how the same kind of logic was once put by some
> bangladeshees , "We are not bengalees , we are bangladeshees " they used
> this same logic against some of our logic(including that of mine ) ...
>
> "You extend your left hand backwards and then extend your right hand the
> same way , ultimately they touch the same spot , they unite "
Soumitra : All the Bangladeshis (except tribal people and some of the
biharis) are Bangalis while not all the Bangalis are Bangladeshis.
Bangladeshis are people of Bangladesh. Bangalis are people who speak
Bangla language (not people who live in West Bengal). Thanks.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Supratik Das
On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
> So, it goes back to my idea. Muslims have different names becaues it is
> traditional to keep names in langauges which are spoken by muslims. It
> is more like tradition.
But Bangladeshis speak Bengali. Shouldn't they have Bengali names instead
of Arabic or Persian ones?
Mohammad Javed Khan
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> In soc.culture.bengali Javed <mak...@mtu.edu> wrote:
>
> : Who is crowing about being bangali? I thought you are hitting me for
> : having a non-Bangali name which is actually the majority of the Bangalis
> : (most of the Bangalis are muslims) doing.
>
> Most Bengalis are _not_ muslims. Most Bengalis are Hindu. Bangladeshis
> are muslims. One of these days, as soon as you have some time away from
> making as ass of yourself on soc.culture.bengali, do check an atlas and
> notice that Bengal is in India and people of Bengal are Bengalis. Notice
> a country called Bangladesh and those people are Bangladeshis and they
> are muslims. They have Arabic names and they got their asses kicked by
> the Pakistanis. They put fatwas on writers who write things that are
> uncomfortable to Bangladeshis. Try to understand that there is a
> distinction between Bengalis and Bangladeshis. The culture, the
> worldview, the history, the speech and whatever are all different between
> the two. Bengalis are Indians. Bangladeshis are not Indians (thank god
> for small mercies.)
You have no idea of what you are talking about. Bangalis are people who
speak bangla language (not people who are staying in West Bengal). Most
of the Bangalis are found in Bangladesh. While rest are found in West
Bengal. In Delhi and Bombay also Bangalis can be found.
Bangladeshis are people who are citizens of Bangladesh. So, all
bangladeshis with the exception of some tribal people and some biharis
are Banglalis but not all the Bangalis are Bangladeshis.
Mohammad Javed Khan
>
> End of free lesson. Will you shut up or do you just enjoy being abused on
> soc.culture.bengali so much that you continue to post your drivel on it?
Mohammad Javed Khan
> : Bengal is Bangladesh. Both are Bengals and their people are Bengalis.
>
> If East Bengal is Bangladesh, then India is Pakistan and Bangladesh is
> Pakistan and since East Bengal is Pakistan, East Bengalis are Pakistanis
> and so Indians are Pakistanis or is that Pakistanis are Indians.
>
> Doesn't make any sense, does it? Calling Bangladeshis bengali because it
> used to be East Bengal would mean that Bangladeshis should be called
> Pakistanis since they used to be East Pakistan and further Pakistanis
> should be called Indians since they used to be India before the division.
Bangladeshi are Bangalis becaue they speak bangla language. Get it?
Mohammad Javed Khan
Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
>
> I guess Uday , you are not aware of the rising trend among the
> BAngladeshee muslims (among Wbengalee muslims this trend is even more
> growing and this was there even before independence -like NAzrul ISlam's
> deceased son was called Krishna Rahman ) is to use perfect bengalee
> secular names .
Keeping a Bangali name is a secular trend and Keeping an Arabic name is
not? Impressive !!!
>MAny use them as an added name.But a new trend is to use
> only bengalee names with an arabic root to denote their islamic identity
> ..In west bengal there are two strong trends , one is to use nice
> mytholocial names which are not religious (actually buddhist names are
> more popular among hindus in bengal like Tothagota, Sugoto
> ,Saugoto,Bodhisottva, Shakyoshubro,Amitava , etc ) , the other trend is
> to use nick names (a unique bengalee thing , names which do not mean
> anything but sounds nice like noton , tutul, tumpa, tun, gible, bhombol,
> bu, chupe, boto, etc) .
> Among bengalee muslims this trend of using a bengalee name and an arabic
> family name is gaining ground at a faster rate ....
>
> But nothing like the name of the heroine of Abul Bashar -Sayeda
> Akashleena . I have a friend called Sangshaptak Ahmed . My buddy from my
> school was Shomyosnato Udayshankar Rodriguez nick named "Udo" .
The trend in Bangladesh is to have a muslim name and a Bangali nick name
like myself. My real name is Mohammad Javed Khan while my nick name is
Suman.
Mohammamd Javed Khan (Suman) how does that sound?
Uday Reddy
Raghu Seshadri wrote:
>
> This reason is quite understandable. It is as difficult
> to separate Arabia from Islam as it would be to separate
> India from Hinduism. So when someone becomes Muslim,
> he also takes on the artifacts of Arab culture to
> a large extent. One goes with the other.
>
> You can see this sort of thing among non-Indians
> who become hindu as well - all the Hare Krishnas
> adopt Indian names.
That is a good point. I think of Hare Krishnas as a counterculture, and
counterculturists are always big on external symbols of difference.
Should we think of Indian Muslims as a counterculture too? Maybe they
are.
> The Church in India has deliberately encouraged
> this Indianization, to the extent that Christian
> women even sport the dot on the forehead.
> Before this policy was adopted, Christians too
> invariably adopted European names.
Good to know!
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
at...@are.berkeley.eud wrote:
>
> : I don't see the point you are making. West Bengal is in India and East
> : Bengal is Bangladesh. Both are Bengals and their people are Bengalis.
>
> If East Bengal is Bangladesh, then India is Pakistan and Bangladesh is
> Pakistan and since East Bengal is Pakistan, East Bengalis are Pakistanis
> and so Indians are Pakistanis or is that Pakistanis are Indians.
You have totally lost me here.
> Doesn't make any sense, does it? Calling Bangladeshis bengali because it
> used to be East Bengal would mean that Bangladeshis should be called
> Pakistanis since they used to be East Pakistan and further Pakistanis
> should be called Indians since they used to be India before the division.
As has been pointed out, Bangladeshis are Bengalis because they speak
Bengali. They are ethnically Bengali while they belong to another
nation. There is no conflict between the two.
Just because we have dropped "West" from "West Bengal" for covenience,
it doesn't mean that we have made an any exclusive claim to the Bengali
ethnicity.
Uday Reddy
Pundalik Prabhu
On Friday, 27 June 1997 Pundalik Prabhu wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Uday Reddy wrote:
> Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
> >
> > I have to have a Bangla name to be a Bangali? Quite an idea. Most of
> > the Banglalis have names which are not bangali (Arabic, Turkish, Farshi,
> > Urdu, etc.). This does not mean that those majorities are not pure
> > Bangalis. The idea of having an arabic or turkish or urdu or farsi name
> > is to be different than the hindus. This practice has been done for
> > long. That does not give any one any right to call the muslim Bangalis
> > (who happen to be the majority) not pure.
>
> Turkish, Farshi, Urdu etc. names? If they are of such and such descent,
> it is quite understandable. But, are all Bangali Muslims of foreign
> descent? Why do they have to have names that sound differently from
> Hindus?
>
> perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
>
It always puzzled me as to why Muslims in India and surrounding countries
gave their children only Arabic, Turkish or Persian names, for centuries.
Is there a need to bleach and purge every traces of former Buddhistic or
Hindu heritage, culture and history to prepare for a New Born Muslim? But
this appears not the case in Indonesia where many Indonesian Muslims still
carry Hindu Sanskrit names with Muslim additives. Sukarno Putri,
Sukarno (Su_karna), Fatmavati (Padmavati) are examples. The national Airline
is named after the mythological bird Garuda, ie personal executive carrier
of God Vishnu.
Nobody seem to know for sure why is it different there, but not here.
Pundalik Prabhu,
Uday Reddy
Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
>
> Good point Uday. Traditionally muslims keep Turkish, Arabic, Urdu names
> to set them apart from the others: these names distinguishes them as
> muslims. But as you know name is nothing, it is the deeds that is more
> important. This naming has traditionally been done in all the muslim
> countries and among all the muslims. This, however, has never incited
> the muslims not to mingle with non-muslims. The society has not been
> hurt by this kind of behavior.
I guess I am drawing a distinction between ethnicity and faith. I don't
see why one has to mix up the two. I think you know what I mean.
Whether the society has not been hurt by this kind of behavior is hard
to say. Maybe not so much in Bangladesh where the Muslims are in a
majority. But, in India, where also foreign ethnicity is faked by
Muslims, it has probably generated the feeling among the Hindus that all
Muslims were of foreign origin. Not a healthy thing.
Regarding the point that this kind of naming has been done in all the
Muslim countries, you have pointed out yourself that it is not done in
Indonesia. I am glad to know, from Soumitra's post, that there is a
trend to revert to Bengali names.
> > As a counterpoint, for instance, Christians in South India have
> > perfectly Indian names. Most Muslims don't.
>
> Even Christians in Lebanon have Arabic Name (Former Labanonise President
> Amin Jamael was a christian).
Then I suppose you are agreeing with me that Christians tend not to fake
ethnicity.
Uday Reddy
Udayan Chattopadhyay
Surely it's only racist if he uses what he considers his race as an
indicator of superiority over others? I don't think Javed has done that in
the signiature.
In article <5ouv2k$p...@agate.berkeley.edu>, at...@are.berkeley.eud says...
>
>In soc.culture.bengali Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>: If you find something objectionable in Javed Khan's posts, please
>: counter those things. On the othe rhand, your posts are racist and
>: communalist, and smack of the very sentiments that accuse Javed Khan of.
>
> Mr. Reddy:
>
> This is called racism.
>
> > "I am a Bangladeshi; Bangali is my race, Bangla is my language,
> > Bangladesh is my home."
>
> Further, the idiot who wrote that does not even know that bangali is not a
> race. The only race that he belongs to is a race of retarded idiots.
Abhijit Mitra
at...@are.berkeley.eud writes:
> Bengalis are from Bengal which is a part of India and so Bengalis are
> Indians. That, fortunately, cannot be said about Bangladeshis. They are
> not Indians and therefore not Bengalis. :-)
>--
>Atanu
Now thats just wrong. 'Bengali', as I understand the term, means people who
speak Bangla. Therefore this includes both West Bengalis and Bangladeshis.
Don't let the fact that they're in 2 different nations confuse you.
Mohammad Javed Khan
No. In your context can I say that WB people speak Bangla language and
so should they not belong to Bangladesh? Same reply to this.. No.
Tradition have big influence on culture. However, tradition which
creates more problem should be modified; our name poses no disturbance.
Javed
at...@are.berkeley.eud
In soc.culture.bengali Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
: On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
: > So, it goes back to my idea. Muslims have different names becaues it is
: > traditional to keep names in langauges which are spoken by muslims. It
: > is more like tradition.
: But Bangladeshis speak Bengali. Shouldn't they have Bengali names instead
: of Arabic or Persian ones?
Ah, the convoluted twisted illogic of Javed Khan. "languages spoken by
muslims" I suppose refers to Arabic. Bengaladeshis speak Arabic
and therefore they have Arabic names. Now it is absolutely clear why
Bangladeshis have Arabic names.
Seriously, MJ Khan, have you ever been told that you cannot reason
logically? I bet you have. So why don't you believe those people and do
something to correct this deficiency? And if you cannot, then please do
consider not displaying your handicap to all and sundry by posting to the
usenet. Waste of bandwidth and all that.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Pundalik Prabhu wrote:
>
> It always puzzled me as to why Muslims in India and surrounding countries
> gave their children only Arabic, Turkish or Persian names, for centuries.
> Is there a need to bleach and purge every traces of former Buddhistic or
> Hindu heritage, culture and history to prepare for a New Born Muslim? But
> this appears not the case in Indonesia where many Indonesian Muslims still
> carry Hindu Sanskrit names with Muslim additives. Sukarno Putri,
> Sukarno (Su_karna), Fatmavati (Padmavati) are examples. The national Airline
> is named after the mythological bird Garuda, ie personal executive carrier
> of God Vishnu.
>
> Nobody seem to know for sure why is it different there, but not here.
>
> Pundalik Prabhu,
Pundalik:
I hate to say that you are wrong. Indonesian Language (also known as
Bhasa Indonesia) is a deviated form of Malay Language (state language of
Malaysia and Brunei and the National language of Singapore).
In 1928 the politicians of indonesia decided to make Malay the national
language of the dutch colony Indonesia. Why? Malay was the lingua
franca of the archipelago and was very easy to speak and write. It uses
english alphabets.
In indonesia 45% of the people speak Javanese language while only 7%
speak Malay as mother tongue. Others speak Sundanese, Madurese, Batak,
and others.
Over last 70 years Indonesian language has accepted many words from
Javanese and Sundanese and Madurese language which makes is a little
different from Original Malay (as Malays in Malaysia do not have much
Javanese or Madurese exposures).
Both Malay and Javanese and Madurese have huge indian influence. Many
of the words in Javanese can be found in ancient sanskrit. So those
indianized indonesian names are actually Javanese names.
People do not mind having these names is not because they are tolerant
or anything. THE REASON IS JAVANESE AND MALAY ARE SPOKEN BY THE MUSLIMS
(95% +) AND SO PEOPLE PREFER TO USE THOSE NAME. SAME LOGIC BEHIND
HAVING TURKISH NAME FOR THE TURKS AND FARSI NAME FOR THE IRANIANS.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
Atanu: I have no intention of arguing with you. YOu are neither
reading my posts nor are you willing to. From the reply of other
nettors on this thread you will find our who is making a fool out of
himself: you or me.
From some of your previous posts I have lost my intention of even
replying to your posts. So long.
Cheers.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
>
> I guess I am drawing a distinction between ethnicity and faith. I don't
> see why one has to mix up the two. I think you know what I mean.
>
> Whether the society has not been hurt by this kind of behavior is hard
> to say. Maybe not so much in Bangladesh where the Muslims are in a
> majority. But, in India, where also foreign ethnicity is faked by
> Muslims, it has probably generated the feeling among the Hindus that all
> Muslims were of foreign origin. Not a healthy thing.
People tend to follow their culture. Will it be good for Bangladeshis
to force the Chakmas in the hilly areas to accept Bangali culture? NO.
Will it be good for any indian politicians to force hindus to accept
salughtering cows? No. Force is not the answer. Should muslims hate
hindus for taking cows very sentimentally? No. Muslims and hindus
should leave each other's sentimental values to each other. So is true
for naming. It is our tradition to keep names in the languages like
Turkish, arabic and farsi. Nothing un-healthy about it.
>
> Regarding the point that this kind of naming has been done in all the
> Muslim countries, you have pointed out yourself that it is not done in
> Indonesia. I am glad to know, from Soumitra's post, that there is a
> trend to revert to Bengali names.
Soumitra is taking satisfaction in that. She is not correct. I am from
Bangladesh and there is no trend that I know of like that. However,
people prefer to keep bangla nick names. Please read my post in this
thread about indonesian names. The logic is same: having names which
distinguishes muslims from non-muslims.
>
>
> Then I suppose you are agreeing with me that Christians tend not to fake
> ethnicity.
>
No, I am not agreeing either. I have not seen all the christians so
that I could make such a generalization. Also, you never know what is
inside a person. A person might want others to believe something while
he/she cherishes totally different ideas in his/her heart.
Mohammad Javed Khan
> Uday Reddy
Soumitra Bose
Where did I say that keeping an Arabic name does not mean that a person
is secular ????????????
Yes , it is true keeping a secular name is a sign of more secular action
though ..
NAmes , are totally personal , I get amused when i see many bengalees on
both sides of the border , think they should have european names , a big
number among these , try to think in european terms , mostly in english
and got themselves groomed in european language institutions (while very
well staying in bengal), most of them do still dream under their colonial
culture (trying to become a part of the master) .But heated discussions
and problem do not come up against names like Robin,Sissy,Lizi etc , but
it comes in case of Arabic,Sanskritized or Bengalee names . BEngalees are
more senstitive than others in sub-continent in giving names , be that as
it may , names are personal , giving names do of course show a trait of
tradition flowing in the family , but what is the problem here ????
I personally like Farsi names like "Shabnam", Shiraj,"Shama" (this is
different from Shyama -which i really like too), along with nice bengalee
names. As for me I would like secular names rather than names given
because of religious reasons , but that again is my personal view-point .
Religious people in some cases (very few though) loose some basic sense
of proportion when they put religious names like "RamaniRomon",
"Hanuman","Annakali", "HAridas Pal", "gopibollov" etc, there are some
arabic names too which do not mean much and some cases do not mean nice
too.
Anyway , one of the few bengalees I found who writes the nick name
withing parenthesis. We in Wbengal were used to do this , when I came
across bangladeshees I find they put the nick name at the end and telling
the whole name ,this probably came from a long muslin tradition in India
, Like the Gorakhpuris ,and others including our revered MAulana Abul
Kalam Azad. Anyway , there is no harm in this traditon , just that we
were not used to it and the last name being important in Wbengal and also
it takes more space to put down the identity .
In South india they put as many names as they please to please different
forces and gods .customs are customs, does not really say anything anyway
..
I ,with all the fibres of my beings and emotions , deplore , in no
uncertain terms , any effort to create any kind of divisions within
Bengalees because of the present political and territorial separation.
Any person who speaks in BAngla and consider oneself as a part and parcel
of bangla civilisation in any degree is a bengalee .
Mohammad Javed Khan
Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
>
> Where did I say that keeping an Arabic name does not mean that a person
> is secular ????????????
You did not say that but you did talk about keeping a Bangali secular
name. What is a Bangali secular name? Hindus in Bangladesh have
traditionally been having Bangla/Sanskrit-derived names. So, if a
muslim in Bangladesh keeps a Bangla name, he/she is supposed to possess
a secular name? What do you even mean by a secular Bangla name is
totally unclear to me.
>
> Yes , it is true keeping a secular name is a sign of more secular action
And may I ask what is a secular name? If anyone believes that Muslim
names for hindus and hindu names for muslims are signs of secularism
among the people, I would not pay any heed. Names are totally personal
choice.
> though ..
>
> NAmes , are totally personal ,
I agree with this.
>I get amused when i see many bengalees on
> both sides of the border , think they should have european names , a big
> number among these , try to think in european terms , mostly in english
> and got themselves groomed in european language institutions (while very
> well staying in bengal), most of them do still dream under their colonial
> culture (trying to become a part of the master) .
I would like to ask you not to feel amused. This is totally personal
and if anyone wants to be educated in European schools, have European
schools you should not think that they are trying to become a part of
the master. They can do whatever they want (as long as it is not
violating anyone's rights), they can get education whereever they want
from and they can bear whatever names they like. YOur thinking is not
very catholic: instead they are very narrow-minded. A person who is
living in Bengal does not have to be educated in Bangla to serve his/her
nation well.
As a matter of fact, some of my relatives who have received english
education (with Arabic-farsi names though), have had lots of foreign
exposures are serving Bangladesh as good as any other Bangla-educated
Bangladeshis. And those relatives of mine can interact with the
Americans like Americans and with Bangladeshis like Bangladeshis. And
no one in my family ever felt that those relatives of mine were trying
to become part of the English-Masters of ours.
As a matter of fact, last year I read an article about the Chairman of
Louis-Dreyfus Corporation. In that article they asked how come he (a
french, educated in the U.S.) is so efficient? The reply was when he
was in Franch, he thought like a French, he talked like a French and he
mingled with French like a French. And when he was in the U.S., he did
the same like an American. As Bangladesh is going to embrace a more
open economy, we will see more and more Bangladeshis are going to be
educated in American Institutions with strong foundation in Bangla and
amazingly high ability to think in English. We should learn from the
Hong Kong and Singapore experience and should not call those people as
"trying to be part of the master who enslaved us for more 150 years."
Uday Reddy
Pundalik Prabhu wrote:
> It always puzzled me as to why Muslims in India and surrounding countries
> gave their children only Arabic, Turkish or Persian names, for centuries.
> Is there a need to bleach and purge every traces of former Buddhistic or
> Hindu heritage, culture and history to prepare for a New Born Muslim? But
> this appears not the case in Indonesia where many Indonesian Muslims still
> carry Hindu Sanskrit names with Muslim additives. Sukarno Putri,
> Sukarno (Su_karna), Fatmavati (Padmavati) are examples. The national Airline
> is named after the mythological bird Garuda, ie personal executive carrier
> of God Vishnu.
I think you are also mixing up ethnicity with religion. A Sanskrit name
is not necessarily a "Hindu" name. Neither is an Arabic name
necessarily a "Muslim" name.
What the Indonesians do seems very reasonable to me: they mix their own
ethnicity and their own religion in coming up with names. (It is quite
a different matter that their language has had connections to Sanskrit
and therefore we relate to their names. But, the fact that we relate to
them doesn't make their names Hindu.)
Uday Reddy
sayan bhattacharyya
In article <33B812...@ctp.com>, Soumitra Bose <sb...@ctp.com> wrote:
>
>A secular bangla name means any name which does not have strong
>references with religious overtone , like Krishna, Hari, Radhaballav,
>Shankar,shivaprosad , mohammed, abu talib,abu bakr,yadjid etc.
>Secular bangla names are like Sutanu,Suman,Sumanto,Shuvra,Sourav,
>Anubroto, Arun etc . There are Arabic names which are secular too.
>Not all bengali names are from sanskritic roots like Tapan,Swapan,Nilu,
>Neel etc and the whole range of nick names .A versy strong trend, as i
>said , is coming up to have the official name as the nick names , they
>therefore are very much secular too.
>The basic intention in choosing a name is obvious from the name chosen.
A former poster in scb who used to post here in the past (whom I will not
identify by name) has chosen to name his son "Birsa" after Birsa Munda.
I think this is an admirable choice of name.
We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
naming our newborns.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
>
> Did I ever say force was the "answer?" We are not forcing you to do
> anything. But, we can certainly ask (uncomfortable) questions and point
> out discrepancies. When you go about declaring "Bangla is my race" etc.
> it does kind of fall flat when your name isn't even a Bangali name.
As I have said before, having a bangali name has nothing to do with
being Bangali. The main idea is if I speak Bangla language or not. So,
it does not fall flat.
> We
> are not faulting you personally. We understand perfectly well that your
> name was chosen for you before you even came to senses. That is not the
> point. But, this "tradition" that you speak of doesn't seem to me to be
> an entirely an honorable one. It is time for the young folk to rethink
> it.
>
> Uday Reddy
We find our tradition of naming a wonderful one. And if we do not have
respect for our tradition, that will be a shame: then how can we expect
others to find our tradition interesting and nice? If you want to feel
the honor in our tradition, you have to think like a Bangali with a
different name. Because if we do not understand other people's culture
and tradition, we like to brand it as "different" or "queer". This
Arabic-Farsi-naming tradition for Bangalis have withstood many different
cultural influences (British, Pakistani, etc.) and would stay there for
many more years to come. Cheers.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
> >
> > or anything. THE REASON IS JAVANESE AND MALAY ARE SPOKEN BY THE MUSLIMS
> > (95% +) AND SO PEOPLE PREFER TO USE THOSE NAME. SAME LOGIC BEHIND
> > HAVING TURKISH NAME FOR THE TURKS AND FARSI NAME FOR THE IRANIANS.
>
Many bangali names and hindi names are very much the same. And may be
that is why muslims do not prefer to have Bangla names. As I have said
before, Javanese language is mostly spoken by the muslims and they are
not very close with the people from Indian subcontinent. So, they feel
nothing bad in having Javanese names. Same is for turkish people. The
reason many muslims bear turkish names is because it is spoken mainly by
the muslims. And the bottom line is that this is completely
traditional. This, under no way, means that a muslim with arabic name
is going to hate non-muslims. It is just tradition and preference.
And these different traditional practices make the world's different
groups diverse!!
Cheers.
> Either you haven't understood what we are trying to get at, or your
> response was so incoherent that I couldn't figure it out. The point
> that has been made is that Indonesians are not trying to fake ethnicity
> (Arab, Farsi, Turkish etc.) in spite of being Muslims. This counters
> the argument that Muslims in general tend to fake ethnicity (to satisfy
> their overriding need to be "different," as I understand).
No, muslims are not faking identity.
Zaigham Kazmi
Soumitra Bose wrote:
> Yes , it is true keeping a secular name is a sign of more secular action
I don't think there is anything like "secular name". If you meant
keeping hindu name by a muslim or muslim name by a hindu that is more
political than secular.
Zaigham Kazmi
Milind Saraph
Mohammad Javed Khan <mak...@mtu.edu> writes:
>We find our tradition of naming a wonderful one. And if we do not have
>respect for our tradition, that will be a shame: then how can we expect
>others to find our tradition interesting and nice?
<snipped>
>This Arabic-Farsi-naming tradition for Bangalis have withstood many different
>cultural influences (British, Pakistani, etc.) and would stay there for
>many more years to come.
I am sure it will. However, there is no question as to how this tradition
arose. It was an attempt by local converts to identify with ruling
Muslims, (which in early times were of Turkish and Persian origin who married
locally) and set themselves apart from Hindus. I was somewhat surprised to
see how many Pakistanis claim non-subcontinental origin.
-- Milind Saraph
Srabani Banerjee
Why?
Srabani
Raghu Seshadri
sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: A former poster in scb who used to post here in the past (whom I will not
: I think this is an admirable choice of name.
: We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
: rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
: naming our newborns.
Poor infants ! They are innocent victims of whatever
faddish thoughts that happen to be
passing thru the mind of the parent, come
naming time.
Well, atleast it will help the child to
develop a sense of forbearance about things,
I suppose. This is sort of the premise
I suppose. This is the premise of the
famous song "A boy named Sue".
After all, Moon Unit, the daughter of
Frank Zappa hasn't turned out all that bad.
Wish I could say the same about the
son of Mr Karunanidhi, the current CM of
TAmil Nadu, who is named Stalin. It is true
that this guy, currently the honorable
Mayor of Madras, has a criminal record
a yard long. But his name had probably
nothing to do with it - even if he were
named Satyavadi Harishchandra, he'd
still have ended up a scumbag.
The upshot is - children are tenacious,
they manage to survive even the
hideous names cranky parents inflict them
with. But they do serve as a frozen
reminder of the oddities of their
parents' minds in their youth.
RS
sayan bhattacharyya
In article <33B95C...@ctp.com>, Soumitra Bose <sb...@ctp.com> wrote:
>Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>>
>> sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
>> >
>> > We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
>> > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
>> > naming our newborns.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> Srabani
>If that is Sayan's wish , be that as it may .Why should someone ask
>"why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
>.What is so wrong about it ???
Soumitra has put it very well.
By the way, here is a list of some baby names which I'd like to see
used more for Bengali babies:
1) Birsa (after Birsa Munda)
2) Ulgulan (in the Mundari language, this word means "struggle"
the slogan of the Birsaits during the Munda rebellion
used to be : "There is no end to _ulgulan_, there
is no death to Birsa")
3) Sidhu (Sidhu and Kanhu were the leaders of
the Santhal rebellion)
4) Kanhu
5) Titumir (Titumir was a leader of the Wahabi movement
who fought a heroic battle against the British
from his bamboo fort ("bNasher kella") before
being killed)
6) Muhammad Ismail (legendary leader of the carters' union in
Calcutta in the 1930s; organized the highly
successful carters' strike)
7) Danesh (Haji Danesh, leader of the Tebhaga movement in
South Bengal)
"edesher itihase poRi
ketabe ketabe shudhu rajader naam,
tara-i bisheshyo, bisheshon, kriya...sorbonam !
ei namee lokeder desh tomay selam!
jara namee damee lok noy tader kahinee monet pore,
manusher itishas,
manusher itihas likhte hobe-i ! "
-- Suman Chatterjee
sayan bhattacharyya
Raghu Seshadri <sesh...@cse.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>: In article <33B95C...@ctp.com>, Soumitra Bose <sb...@ctp.com> wrote:
>:
>: >Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>: >> Why?
>: >If that is Sayan's wish , be that as it may .Why should someone ask
>: >"why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
>
>Do you see the joke here, Soumitra ?
>
>You chastise Srabani Banerjee for asking "why"
>and in the process you have asked a couple
>of "why"s yourself !
No joke there, Raghu. Soumitra was asking a rhetorical question.
Srabani was not.
The two are not comparable.
Soumitra Bose
Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
> sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >A secular bangla name means any name which does not have strong
> > >references with religious overtone , like Krishna, Hari, Radhaballav,
> > >Shankar,shivaprosad , mohammed, abu talib,abu bakr,yadjid etc.
> > >Secular bangla names are like Sutanu,Suman,Sumanto,Shuvra,Sourav,
> > >Anubroto, Arun etc . There are Arabic names which are secular too.
> > >Not all bengali names are from sanskritic roots like Tapan,Swapan,Nilu,
> > >Neel etc and the whole range of nick names .A versy strong trend, as i
> > >said , is coming up to have the official name as the nick names , they
> > >therefore are very much secular too.
> >
> > >The basic intention in choosing a name is obvious from the name chosen.
> >
> > identify by name) has chosen to name his son "Birsa" after Birsa Munda.
> > I think this is an admirable choice of name.
> >
> > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
> > naming our newborns.
>
> Why?
>
> Srabani
"why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
Raghu Seshadri
: In article <33B95C...@ctp.com>, Soumitra Bose <sb...@ctp.com> wrote:
:
: >>
: >> sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
: >> > We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
: >> > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
: >> > naming our newborns.
: >>
: >> Why?
: >"why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
Do you see the joke here, Soumitra ?
You chastise Srabani Banerjee for asking "why"
and in the process you have asked a couple
of "why"s yourself !
RS
:
:
Raghu Seshadri
sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
: rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
: naming our newborns.
:
Poor infants ! They are innocent victims of whatever
faddish thoughts that happen to be
passing thru the mind of the parent, come
naming time.
Well, atleast it will help the child to
develop a sense of forbearance about things,
I suppose. This is sort of the premise
of the famous song "A boy named Sue".
After all, Moon Unit, the daughter of
Frank Zappa hasn't turned out all that bad.
Wish I could say the same about the
son of Mr Karunanidhi, the current CM of
Tamil Nadu, who is named Stalin. It is true
that this guy, currently the honorable
Mayor of Madras, has a criminal record
a yard long. But his name had probably
nothing to do with it - even if he were
named Satyavadi Harishchandra, he'd
still have ended up a scumbag.
The upshot is - children are tenacious,
they manage to survive even the
hideous names cranky parents inflict them
with. But they do serve as a frozen
reminder of the oddities of their
parents' minds in their youth.
RS
:
:
:
:
:
Srabani Banerjee
Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
> Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> >
> > sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >A secular bangla name means any name which does not have strong
> > > >references with religious overtone , like Krishna, Hari, Radhaballav,
> > > >Shankar,shivaprosad , mohammed, abu talib,abu bakr,yadjid etc.
> > > >Secular bangla names are like Sutanu,Suman,Sumanto,Shuvra,Sourav,
> > > >Anubroto, Arun etc . There are Arabic names which are secular too.
> > > >Not all bengali names are from sanskritic roots like Tapan,Swapan,Nilu,
> > > >Neel etc and the whole range of nick names .A versy strong trend, as i
> > > >said , is coming up to have the official name as the nick names , they
> > > >therefore are very much secular too.
> > >
> > > >The basic intention in choosing a name is obvious from the name chosen.
> > >
> > > A former poster in scb who used to post here in the past (whom I will not
> > > identify by name) has chosen to name his son "Birsa" after Birsa Munda.
> > > I think this is an admirable choice of name.
> > >
> > > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
> > > naming our newborns.
> >
> >
> > Srabani
> If that is Sayan's wish , be that as it may .Why should someone ask
> "why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
Excuse me, but Sayan clearly said, `We Bengalis should...' That sounds
like something more than a mere wish. And, in any case, I still don't
see what is so wrong about my question.
Srabani
Raghu Seshadri
sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
:
: No joke there, Raghu. Soumitra was asking a rhetorical question.
: Srabani was not.
:
: The two are not comparable.
If so,
do you realize that Srabani's "why" is more complimentary
to you in assuming that you really have a thoughtful reason
for your prescription that you can actually state ?
Soumitra seems to assume that it is merely an
ideosynchratic wish on your part which cannot
be rationally questioned.
Who is right ?
RS
:
:
:
:
:
Mohammad Javed Khan
You got it buddy. Cheers.
Javed
Siddhartha Duttagupta
On 1 Jul 1997 21:00:05 GMT, sesh...@cse.ucsc.edu (Raghu Seshadri)
wrote:
>Wish I could say the same about the
>son of Mr Karunanidhi, the current CM of
>Tamil Nadu, who is named Stalin. It is true
>that this guy, currently the honorable
>Mayor of Madras, has a criminal record
>a yard long. But his name had probably
>nothing to do with it - even if he were
>named Satyavadi Harishchandra, he'd
>still have ended up a scumbag.
>
There is a famous paragraph in "Drishtipat" a novel by
Jajabar, where he talks about "buddhadebs" being
arrested for trafficking in women!
As a tangent I remember his advice for bengali parents
not to name their sons after "courageous" and daughters
after "attractive". (I do not want to be flamed for the bengali words
he chose;)))
Offcourse if you do have a "kana cheley" you are at liberty to name
him "padmo-lochan".
regards, siddhartha
Nasirul Chowdhury
sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
>
> In article <33B95C...@ctp.com>, Soumitra Bose <sb...@ctp.com> wrote:
>
> >Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> >>
> >> sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
> >> >
> >> > We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
> >> > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
> >> > naming our newborns.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >>
> >> Srabani
>
> >If that is Sayan's wish , be that as it may .Why should someone ask
> >"why??" . Sayan is not forcing on to some other, he is just wishing
> >.What is so wrong about it ???
>
>
> By the way, here is a list of some baby names which I'd like to see
> used more for Bengali babies:
>
> 1) Birsa (after Birsa Munda)
> 2) Ulgulan (in the Mundari language, this word means "struggle"
> the slogan of the Birsaits during the Munda rebellion
> used to be : "There is no end to _ulgulan_, there
> is no death to Birsa")
> 3) Sidhu (Sidhu and Kanhu were the leaders of
> the Santhal rebellion)
> 4) Kanhu
> 5) Titumir (Titumir was a leader of the Wahabi movement
> who fought a heroic battle against the British
> from his bamboo fort ("bNasher kella") before
> being killed)
> 6) Muhammad Ismail (legendary leader of the carters' union in
> Calcutta in the 1930s; organized the highly
> successful carters' strike)
> 7) Danesh (Haji Danesh, leader of the Tebhaga movement in
> South Bengal)
I think you are trying to impose your socially constructed views to all
the BAngAlis. Ofcurse you have the right to name your child whatever you
wish.....but please don't preach about other people's kid.
Apu
Uday Reddy
Zaigham Kazmi wrote:
>
> Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
> > Yes , it is true keeping a secular name is a sign of more secular action
>
> I don't think there is anything like "secular name".
It must be a measure of the dogma, obscurantism or brain-washing that
such absolutely straightforward and crystal-clear concepts cannot be
understood even after repeated explanation.
A secular name is one that is not rooted in religious beliefs. Examples
abound: "Jyothi" (the bright one), "Ramani" (the beautiful one), "Vijay"
(the victorious one),... A religious name is one that is based on
religous belief, like my full name "Uday Sankar" (Sankar born). I
shorten it to "Uday" which is secular (means dawn).
Secular ethnic names too abound: "Reddy", "Roy", "Chowdhary", "Thakur",
"Mitra", "Singh", "Khan"... Religious last names exist, though they are
rarer, e.g., "Ram", "Islam". Most other last names are borderline:
"Shastri", "Bhattacharya", "Iyer",... These are secular in literal
meaning but acquired religious significance.
The question that has been raised is why Bengali Muslims don't take
Bengali names, secular names in Bengali or ethnic Bengali last names.
The answer that has been offered is that they have an overriding need to
be "different" from Hindus, even if it means adopting names in foreign
languages or faking foreign ethnicities.
That settles the issue, as far as I am concerned.
Uday Reddy
sayan bhattacharyya
In article <33BAC0...@iname.com>, Nasirul Chowdhury <a...@iname.com> wrote:
>sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > We Bengalis should look more at subaltern heroes (Sidhu, Kanhu, Birsa)
>> >> > rather than at the official canonized Sanskrit ones when it comes to
>> >> > naming our newborns.
>I think you are trying to impose your socially constructed views to all
>the BAngAlis. Ofcurse you have the right to name your child whatever you
>wish.....but please don't preach about other people's kid.
"Impose", Nasirul? How on earth can I do that? One who can impose his
will on someone else is someone who is in a position of power over that
person. In a virtual medium like usenet, how could that be?
I have as much the right to disseminate my views as you have the right
not to read them.
S Bhattacharyya
Uch...@btinternet.com (Udayan Chattopadhyay) writes:
>In article <33B86B...@mtu.edu>, mak...@mtu.edu says...
>>
>>
>>
>>As I have said before, having a bangali name has nothing to do with
>>being Bangali. The main idea is if I speak Bangla language or not. So,
>>it does not fall flat.
>>
>>
>>Mohammad Javed Khan
Just to add to the spaghetti, I had a hindi teacher while
at the Ramkrishna Mission, Narendrapur, called Ram Lakshman Khan.
Cool, eh ? :-)
Santanu
>I don't see why you should concede the point that "Mohammed Javed Khan" is
>not a "Bangali" name ...
>If names of certain origin are in widespread use by Bengalis, do they not be
>come, de facto, "Bangali" ...?
Soumitra Bose
Zaigham Kazmi wrote:
>
> Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
> > Yes , it is true keeping a secular name is a sign of more secular action
>
> keeping hindu name by a muslim or muslim name by a hindu that is more
> political than secular.
>
> Zaigham Kazmi
has either a meaning or a connotation or reference(other than the nick
names of course which now is a style to be the official name somewhere
).
If the reference is scriptural it is religious , if it is not it is
secular .....
Udayan Chattopadhyay
In article <33B86B...@mtu.edu>, mak...@mtu.edu says...
>
>
>
>As I have said before, having a bangali name has nothing to do with
>being Bangali. The main idea is if I speak Bangla language or not. So,
>it does not fall flat.
>
>
>Mohammad Javed Khan
I don't see why you should concede the point that "Mohammed Javed Khan" is
K.M. Maniruzzaman
In article <5pbp4u$dbs$1...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu>,
bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu (sayan bhattacharyya) wrote:
> By the way, here is a list of some baby names which I'd like to see
> used more for Bengali babies:
>
> 1) Birsa (after Birsa Munda)
> 2) Ulgulan (in the Mundari language, this word means "struggle"
> the slogan of the Birsaits during the Munda rebellion
> used to be : "There is no end to _ulgulan_, there
> is no death to Birsa")
> 3) Sidhu (Sidhu and Kanhu were the leaders of
> the Santhal rebellion)
> 4) Kanhu
> 5) Titumir (Titumir was a leader of the Wahabi movement
> who fought a heroic battle against the British
> from his bamboo fort ("bNasher kella") before
> being killed)
> 6) Muhammad Ismail (legendary leader of the carters' union in
> Calcutta in the 1930s; organized the highly
> successful carters' strike)
> 7) Danesh (Haji Danesh, leader of the Tebhaga movement in
> South Bengal)
>
Danesh was from north Bengal, actually. During the last days of his
life, he deviated from his life-long path and joined Ershad.
--
Manir
email: ma...@okabe.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
url: http://okabe.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/okabelab/manir/manir.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of Mankind."
ĞAlbert Einstein
Mohammad Javed Khan
NDatta wrote:
>
> Soumitra Bose wrote:
> >all names are not necessarily semite .Semitic tradition is but just one
> >of the traditions in the world .The biggest population of the world
> >lives outside the semite tradition .So secular names do occur there ,
> >try to learn some language better other than English or Arabic .You
> >would realize that .
>
> Mr. Bose is not right if he is implying that there is no name of Middle
> Eastern origin that is secular. Shah Jahan, for example, is definitely a
> secular name. It is as this-worldly as it can possibly be. Prithvi Raj,
> incidentally, means the same as Shah Jahan.
I do not know what Mr. Soumitra Bose is up to, but what I believe is
name is not everything. Name of a person certainly does not show the
true image of that person. As I have said before that keeping
"arabic-farsi-turkish" name for muslims in Bangladesh is traditional,
keeping a "secular" name will not change the attitude of the people.
Name is just something to be called by. It is education and attitude
that needs to be changed for making a better person.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Mohammad Javed Khan
Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
>
> all names are not necessarily semite .Semitic tradition is but just one
> of the traditions in the world .The biggest population of the world
> lives outside the semite tradition .So secular names do occur there ,
> try to learn some language better other than English or Arabic .You
> would realize that .
Mr. Soumitra Bose:
I understand what your point is about the "secular names". But my point
is there is no reason to brand names like that. For example, since
Mohammad (SM) was our prophet, you would love to brand the name mohammad
as "unsecular" or "fanatic" or "bigot" or whatever adjectives you have
in your list. Now what about friends of our Prophet Mohammad (SM) who
were very good muslims? Are they also going to be termed as
"unsecular"? How about friends of friends' names who were also very
good muslims? We do not, in many cases have the names of so many
friends of our prophet who also served Islam and help it to spread.
I do not think that will work Mr. Soumitra. Because some of the worst
incidents of religious intolerance in the world's history have been
perpetrated in the soil of "secular" india. Secular name did not
prevent it from happening. So, I do not support the idea that secular
names will solve all our problems. As a matter of fact we should stick
to our naming tradition. In this process many people will keep
"secular" arabic names while many will keep "unsecular" arabic names.
Bye Bye Mr. Soumitra.
Mohammad Javed Khan
Sohel Q. Khan
> Uday Reddy wrote:
> >
> >
> > Did I ever say force was the "answer?" We are not forcing you to do
> > anything. But, we can certainly ask (uncomfortable) questions and point
> > out discrepancies. When you go about declaring "Bangla is my race" etc.
> > it does kind of fall flat when your name isn't even a Bangali name.
>
All language in the world became rich by having words from other
language. The origin of many English word we use today do not have
root in old English. Many of the English words are
actually from French, Latin, Scandanavian etc. Bangladeshi people
speak a language name "Bangla". The modern "Bangla" language has
become rich by having many foreign words. In Bangladesh people,
use words "Rickshaw", "Chair", "Masjid", "Pani" ect. everyday.
These are the few examples of many foreign words that Bangladeshis
use everyday as their mother language "Bangla". Samilarly,
Bangladeshis have accepted foreign words to name their Children.
Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
Some people will not agree with me here. They will want to
preserve the original Bangla languge. But, with the day of global
unification, when whole world will want to speak one language,
bringing foreign words in Bangla (whether for naming a person or a
tri-Cycle) should not be matter of objection. It is ironic to see
the people from Pashim Bango outcry for Bangla names, however, call
their place West Bengal ( the name given by the British) and tell
around that they speak "Bengali" ( the name given by the British).
I mean they do not write on the SCB that they speak "Bangla".
"Bengali", "West Bengal" are foreign words;
"Bangla", "Pashim Bango", "Bangladesh" are true Bangla words.
Uday Reddy
NDatta wrote:
>
> "Foreign words" tend to become native words when sanctified by usage over
> a long period of time. Allah is a word of Arabic origin. But today it is
> just as much a Bengali word because a majority of the Bengalis very often
> refer to God as Allah. Mohammed was ofcourse an Arabic name to begin
> with. But today it is as much a Bengali name because millions of Bengalis
> have been naming their sons "Mohammed" for generations.
Hi Nibir, I have never advocated purging foreign-origin words from
languages, either Bengali or Tamilian. So, this argument is a strawman.
Nobody has so far stated on this thread that the Arabic/Turkish/Farsi
words that are used in Bengali Muslim names are really part of Bengali
at the present time. I rather doubt that that is actually the case.
> Separation of State and Church is a healthy tradition. Secularism is
> indeed a virtue in public life, especially in multireligious nations. But
> there is nothing wrong to turn to religion in private life to satisfy your
> quest for spiritual satsfation. Jimmy Carter is deeply religious and there
> is nothing wrong in that.
Another strawman. We are using "secular" in its literal sense, viz.,
non-religious. I haven't seen anybody argue in this thread that names
must be secular (though it seems that something that Soumitra said
raised this misunderstanding). Rather the argument is that a Bengali
name, ergo a name made up of Bengali words, is not necessarily a Hindu
name. There are enough secular words in Bengali (as in any other
language), which Muslims could presumably use in their names. But, that
is not being done.
I hope you are not arguing that a Muslim must necessarily have names
that exclude Bengali words, otherwise they somehow become "Hindus." I
hope you are not arguing that Bengali words are the preserve of Hindus.
I hope you are not arguing that a Muslim must necessarily have names
with Arabic/Farsi/Turkish words. (The religious words like "Allah" and
"Mohammed" are not the issue.)
If you have some sensible reason why Bengali Muslims must exlcude
Bengali words from their names, please let us have it.
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
>
> Soumitra Bose wrote:
> >
> >
> > all names are not necessarily semite .Semitic tradition is but just one
> > of the traditions in the world .The biggest population of the world
> > lives outside the semite tradition .So secular names do occur there ,
> > try to learn some language better other than English or Arabic .You
> > would realize that .
>
> Mr. Soumitra Bose:
>
> I understand what your point is about the "secular names". But my point
> is there is no reason to brand names like that. For example, since
> Mohammad (SM) was our prophet, you would love to brand the name mohammad
> as "unsecular" or "fanatic" or "bigot" or whatever adjectives you have
> in your list. Now what about friends of our Prophet Mohammad (SM) who
> were very good muslims? Are they also going to be termed as
> "unsecular"? How about friends of friends' names who were also very
> good muslims? We do not, in many cases have the names of so many
> friends of our prophet who also served Islam and help it to spread.
No, I don't think you understood Soumitra's point about "secular names."
It was not his point that one should necessarily have secular names.
(For that matter, his own name is not secular.)
Soumitra's point was that there are enough secular words in Bengali (as
in any other language), which Bengali Muslims could use in their names.
The idea that a Bengali name somehow makes one a Hindu is misguided and
wrong.
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
>
> All language in the world became rich by having words from other
> language. The origin of many English word we use today do not have
> root in old English. Many of the English words are
> actually from French, Latin, Scandanavian etc. Bangladeshi people
> speak a language name "Bangla". The modern "Bangla" language has
> become rich by having many foreign words. In Bangladesh people,
> use words "Rickshaw", "Chair", "Masjid", "Pani" ect. everyday.
> These are the few examples of many foreign words that Bangladeshis
> use everyday as their mother language "Bangla". Samilarly,
> Bangladeshis have accepted foreign words to name their Children.
> Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
> Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
Wonderful! So, "Javed" and "Khan" in the name of our favorite
Bangladeshi nettor on this thread are "modern Bangla" words whereas his
nickname "Suman" is an antiquated Bengali word? Wake up, Nalinaksha,
Sugato, Soumitra et al. You are getting antiquated. Get modern!
Whom are you kidding, Mr. Khan? You don't see a deliberate attempt by
Bengali Muslims to shun Bengali words from their names, with the
attendant implication that Bengali words are somehow "Hindu words" and,
by contrast, Arabaic/Farsi/Turkish words are somehow "Islamic words?"
Don't try to dupe us with your discourse on "modernity," please.
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
> Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
> Some people will not agree with me here. They will want to
> preserve the original Bangla languge.
It also occurs to me that, in the interest of "richness" which you
understand so well, you should have no objection to Islam, the quam,
becoming richer by accepting names like "Suman Khan" or "Jyothirmoy
Islam." After all, the world is moving towards one language. So,
eventually, words like Suman and Jyothirmoy will become full-fledged
Arabic words. We wouldn't want Bangla to become so modern but leave
Arabic way behind, would we? Let us make all languages modern too.
Uday Reddy
Soumitra Bose
, but the butpatty of my name is very secular along with its Samash and
connotation .
Soumitra Bose
Mohammad Javed Khan wrote:
>
> Soumitra Bose wrote:
> >
> >
> > all names are not necessarily semite .Semitic tradition is but just one
> > of the traditions in the world .The biggest population of the world
> > lives outside the semite tradition .So secular names do occur there ,
> > try to learn some language better other than English or Arabic .You
> > would realize that .
>
> Mr. Soumitra Bose:
>
> I understand what your point is about the "secular names". But my point
> is there is no reason to brand names like that. For example, since
> Mohammad (SM) was our prophet, you would love to brand the name mohammad
> as "unsecular" or "fanatic" or "bigot" or whatever adjectives you have
> in your list. Now what about friends of our Prophet Mohammad (SM) who
> were very good muslims? Are they also going to be termed as
> "unsecular"? How about friends of friends' names who were also very
> good muslims? We do not, in many cases have the names of so many
> friends of our prophet who also served Islam and help it to spread.
>
> incidents of religious intolerance in the world's history have been
> perpetrated in the soil of "secular" india. Secular name did not
> prevent it from happening. So, I do not support the idea that secular
> names will solve all our problems. As a matter of fact we should stick
> to our naming tradition. In this process many people will keep
> "secular" arabic names while many will keep "unsecular" arabic names.
>
> Bye Bye Mr. Soumitra.
>
> Mohammad Javed Khan
Putting adjectives in some others pen is not a very noble attitude of
debate . I have never put linear value judgements in putting names and i
have expressed that time and again .Name giving does not mean one becomes
"superior " or other , I never said that ,The fact of the matter is that
we have found more secular names in WestBengal in the present generation
and more secular names are getting popular in BAngladesh , this is a fact
and not a value judgement (at least definitely not linear) .
"Solving all problems" or not were never in any of my posts . Using these
kinds of rhetorics do not speak highly of some ones reading capabilities
let alone the comprehension of the context . "We should stick to our
naming tradition" is a kind of personal judgemental statement on a whole
populace . No referundum has been taken on such issue .The fact that
secular and secular bangla names are getting popular do not even support
such a "trend " being seen . One person may have one's own idiosyncracies
in naming , the other may have a different attitude .In the higher
analysis naming is idiosyncracy .IT is also a fact that naming would
definitely show the general outlooks of the parents (as the name
recipient receives it much early before he/she can decide ).And the last
statement is also a value-neutral statement .Reading Values in
Value-neutral statement shows the reader has a different agenda than the
writer .
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> No, I don't think you understood Soumitra's point about "secular names."
> It was not his point that one should necessarily have secular names.
> (For that matter, his own name is not secular.)
>
> Soumitra's point was that there are enough secular words in Bengali (as
> in any other language), which Bengali Muslims could use in their names.
> The idea that a Bengali name somehow makes one a Hindu is misguided and
> wrong.
>
> Uday Reddy
I do not think you got my message. I meant what soumitra meant by
"secular arabic names".
Javed
Mohammad Javed Khan
Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
>
> > Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
> > Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> > Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> > are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> > Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> > used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> > Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
> > Some people will not agree with me here. They will want to
> > preserve the original Bangla languge.
>
> It also occurs to me that, in the interest of "richness" which you
> understand so well, you should have no objection to Islam, the quam,
> becoming richer by accepting names like "Suman Khan" or "Jyothirmoy
> Islam."
Accepting words from other language and making the language richer have
been done over a prolonged period of time. While naming is totally a
personal matter. YOu are bungling things up Uday. If there are no
objection, you will see many more names like "Jotirmoy" and the like in
bangladesh.
After all, the world is moving towards one language. So,
> eventually, words like Suman and Jyothirmoy will become full-fledged
> Arabic words. We wouldn't want Bangla to become so modern but leave
> Arabic way behind, would we? Let us make all languages modern too.
>
> Uday Reddy
Accepting words from other language is a natural tendency which is
never forced upon. Let Bengali accept what it wants.
Javed (Mohammad Javed Khan)
nda...@aol.com
In article <33C039...@cs.uiuc.edu>,
Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> NDatta wrote:
> >
> > "Foreign words" tend to become native words when sanctified by usage over
> > a long period of time. Allah is a word of Arabic origin. But today it is
> > just as much a Bengali word because a majority of the Bengalis very often
> > refer to God as Allah. Mohammed was ofcourse an Arabic name to begin
> > with. But today it is as much a Bengali name because millions of Bengalis
> > have been naming their sons "Mohammed" for generations.
>
> Hi Nibir, I have never advocated purging foreign-origin words from
> languages, either Bengali or Tamilian. So, this argument is a strawman.
>
> Nobody has so far stated on this thread that the Arabic/Turkish/Farsi
> words that are used in Bengali Muslim names are really part of Bengali
> at the present time. I rather doubt that that is actually the case.
>
Well, Bengalis have used these names over generations and centuries. I
feel that it is not in the least unreasonable to claim them to be Bengali
names, and especially so in view of the fact that a majority of the
Bengalis use them.
> > Separation of State and Church is a healthy tradition. Secularism is
> > indeed a virtue in public life, especially in multireligious nations. But
> > there is nothing wrong to turn to religion in private life to satisfy your
> > quest for spiritual satsfation. Jimmy Carter is deeply religious and there
> > is nothing wrong in that.
>
> Another strawman. We are using "secular" in its literal sense, viz.,
> non-religious. I haven't seen anybody argue in this thread that names
> must be secular (though it seems that something that Soumitra said
> raised this misunderstanding). Rather the argument is that a Bengali
> name, ergo a name made up of Bengali words, is not necessarily a Hindu
> name. There are enough secular words in Bengali (as in any other
> language), which Muslims could presumably use in their names. But, that
> is not being done.
>
> I hope you are not arguing that a Muslim must necessarily have names
> that exclude Bengali words, otherwise they somehow become "Hindus." I
> hope you are not arguing that Bengali words are the preserve of Hindus.
> I hope you are not arguing that a Muslim must necessarily have names
> with Arabic/Farsi/Turkish words. (The religious words like "Allah" and
> "Mohammed" are not the issue.)
>
> If you have some sensible reason why Bengali Muslims must exlcude
> Bengali words from their names, please let us have it.
>
> Uday Reddy
Hi Uday:
I haven't been following this thread very closely. But as far as I could
make out, no one has claimed that names of Middle Eastern origin are a
religious obligation. Mr. Mohammad Javed Khan, for example, made it very
clear that he does not feel slighted when his near and dear ones call him
Suman. And it is not uncommon to hear of names like Rezwana Banya
Choudhury (noted singer) or Selina Ahmed Jharna (noted dancer). No one
has argued on this thread that a name like Suman or Banya or Jharna can
only belong to a Hindu.
What is being pointed out is that Bengalis have been using names of
Middle Eastern origin for generations and centuries. Such names are used
today in deference to family tradition and not because of religious
obligation or because of any antipathy to names of Bengali origin. In
fact, names of Middle Eastern origin often mingle with names like Banya
and Jharna which are of Bengali origin.
Anyway, what's in a name? To paraphrase Mr. Shahidur Rahman, Aftab or
Khurshid can be just as bright as Bhaskar or Tapan; Zeenat can be just as
sweet and beautiful as Madhuri; Rahman can be just as merciful as
Karuna-nidhi and Abdul Aziz can be just as devoted a servant to God as
Ishwar Das.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Sohel Q. Khan
On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, Uday Reddy wrote:
> Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
>
> > Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
> > Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> > Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> > are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> > Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> > used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> > Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
> > Some people will not agree with me here. They will want to
> > preserve the original Bangla languge.
>
> It also occurs to me that, in the interest of "richness" which you
> understand so well, you should have no objection to Islam, the quam,
> becoming richer by accepting names like "Suman Khan" or "Jyothirmoy
> Islam." After all, the world is moving towards one language. So,
> eventually, words like Suman and Jyothirmoy will become full-fledged
> Arabic words. We wouldn't want Bangla to become so modern but leave
> Arabic way behind, would we? Let us make all languages modern too.
>
> Uday Reddy
>
Dear, Uday do you know what obsession means? The posting of mine
that you cut short (to suit your need) and replied twice so far,
did I say anything on Islam. I have used four name above.
Two of them are of Arabic origin and the rest of the two
are of English origin. And you bought Islam here. Did I say
in my above post the "objection on Islam". Or you read some
word Islam in my above post. What had happened to you?
Arabs too are accepting many foreign words. You will find
many French and English words in modern Arabic literature. Every language
accept foreign words and become richer. Accepting foreign words do not
mean you give up all your words. I'd love to name my son
"Suman Khan", I'll call it a Bangla name. I'll also don't mind
to keep the name of my daughter 'Ferdousi Khan", that I'll also
call a Bangla name. Are you going to approve that from the
WB?
>
##
#
##### #
#
##### #
#
##
sayan bhattacharyya
Sohel Q. Khan <sk...@falcon.cc.ukans.edu> wrote:
>Here, the word "Pani" which is used by 115 Million Bangladeshi everyday
>did not see a root in original Bangla.
Wrong. The word "pani" is very much related to the Bengali word
"paniyo" which comes from Sanskrit, and means "drinkable".
"pani" is as much a Bengali word as is "jol".
>Infact, two every five words that a
>Bangladeshi speak are foreign.
What is the definition of "foreign"? One could argue that Sanskrit is
also a foreign language to the Indian subcontinent, since it was brought
in my the invading Aryans.
>Bangladeshis will never tell antiquated Bangla "Jol Dao",
It is not an antiquated usage. Both "jol dao" and "pani dao"
are equally current and equally legitimate (though in different
geographical areas).
Mohammad Javed Khan
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
>
> On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> > Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> > >
> > > language. The origin of many English word we use today do not have
> > > root in old English. Many of the English words are
> > > actually from French, Latin, Scandanavian etc. Bangladeshi people
> > > speak a language name "Bangla". The modern "Bangla" language has
> > > become rich by having many foreign words. In Bangladesh people,
> > > use words "Rickshaw", "Chair", "Masjid", "Pani" ect. everyday.
> > > These are the few examples of many foreign words that Bangladeshis
> > > use everyday as their mother language "Bangla". Samilarly,
> > > Bangladeshis have accepted foreign words to name their Children.
> > > Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> > > Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> > > are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> > > Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> > > used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> > > Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
> >
> > Bangladeshi nettor on this thread are "modern Bangla" words whereas his
> > nickname "Suman" is an antiquated Bengali word? Wake up, Nalinaksha,
> > Sugato, Soumitra et al. You are getting antiquated. Get modern!
> >
> > Whom are you kidding, Mr. Khan? You don't see a deliberate attempt by
> > Bengali Muslims to shun Bengali words from their names, with the
> > attendant implication that Bengali words are somehow "Hindu words" and,
> > by contrast, Arabaic/Farsi/Turkish words are somehow "Islamic words?"
> > Don't try to dupe us with your discourse on "modernity," please.
> >
> > Uday Reddy
> >
>
> a contemporary one. Best way to learn what a "language" is by
> reading books on linguistic. Bangladeshis are proud to speak Bangla in
> Bangladesh, in the United Nation, streets of New York, London, Penag,
> Tokyo, Singapore, HongKong and every where else. About 115 Million
> Bangladeshi speak Bangla and ask to drink water by saying, "Pani Dao".
> Here, the word "Pani" which is used by 115 Million Bangladeshi everyday
> Bangladeshi speak are foreign. No matter how Uday Reddy and "gong shout,
> will the modernization of Bangla in Bangladesh be stopped; no never.
> Bangladeshis will never tell antiquated Bangla "Jol Dao", "Mashike Adap
> Dao (Convey salute to Aunt)".
While Mashima still drinks "jol" from the pond, "Chachi/Khala" lives in
modern Dhaka with ample drinkable water. While mashima's sons and
daughters had to move to Bombay for a job and marry a gujrati for a
better life, Chachi/Khala's sons and daughters are getting higher
education in Dhaka and many have even moved to the U.S. for higher
education!! So, Mashi's sons and daughters are now no longer using
"jol", they use hindi now and say "pani de do year" while khala's sons
and daughters still use Bangla with a pride.
We will not call our "Apa" to "Didi". You
> can shout Uday Reddy, only two thousand Bangladeshi in the internet will
> hear you, may be few of them will name thier children as "Nalinaksha",
> "Sugato", "Soumitra", "Babu Ram" ect. But, the rest 115 Million
> in Bangladesh? No matter how you call them: "Uneducated", "Barbarian",
> "Islamic fundamentalist", "Unsecular", "Islamic Fanatic"; they will name
> their children with modern Bangla names Karim, Rahim, Abul ect.
> What are you going to do? Speak loudly in a loudspeaker. There, you are
> problem again. Bangladeshis in Bangladesh will not understand what
> is "Bikot Shabda Jontro ( Lound voice machine)". Again you have to
> use another foreign word, "Mike". We will call "Vabi" not "Bou-Dee".
> So, "Didi Mosahi, Uday, Jol Pai little sour." I am kidding you,
> "Didi Moshai". Sorry, I don't know the feminine word of "Moshai"
> Is "Janaba Uday Apa" OK for you?
Very well said Sohel Bhai.
The worst thing is that when we use words like "oxygen", "carbon di
oxide" in Bangla, the Soumitra and Co. do not ask us why we are not
using "omlojan" and "ongar-di-omlog". But when we name our kids as
"Rahim", "Javed", "Jafar" they call us un-bangali and fanatic. I think
Bangali culture and tradition will be shaped the way Bangladeshis behave
(since Bangladeshis are majority of Bangalis). Name is totally
personal!!
Another funny thing is the trend among some of the West Bengali people.
They keep Bangla name but when they write it in English, they follow
HIndi manner. As you all know, in Bangla the use of "o" "shhhhhh" are
very pronounced while in hindi the use of "aaaa" and "s" are much.
Should they not be having a Bangali kind of spelling (in english) for
Bangali names? Why spell like Bose and not like Boshu? Why spell
Satish and not Shotish?
Well, seems like some people want us to become "modern" by keeping names
like "Nalinaksha" "Babu Ram" or "Mr. Soumitra Bose". I will not oppose
if any Bangladeshi keeps these sorts of names, but I will not take it
as a sign of tolernace among Bangladeshis.
Mohammad Javed Khan
"I am a Bangladeshi; Bangla is my language, Bangladesh is my home."
Uday Reddy
nda...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Nobody has so far stated on this thread that the Arabic/Turkish/Farsi
> > words that are used in Bengali Muslim names are really part of Bengali
> > at the present time. I rather doubt that that is actually the case.
>
> Well, Bengalis have used these names over generations and centuries. I
> feel that it is not in the least unreasonable to claim them to be Bengali
> names, and especially so in view of the fact that a majority of the
> Bengalis use them.
Continuing practices just because they have been used for generations
and centuries is hardly a sign of progress. It is obscurantism.
I haven't seen a single Bangladeshi nettor wonder, "Gees, why indeed do
we use Arabic/Farsi/Turkish words for names when we have this great
language of our own?" "Tradition" it is said. And, "we are proud of
our Bangla," they say. Well, it looks to me that they are totally
confused.
> I haven't been following this thread very closely. But as far as I could
> make out, no one has claimed that names of Middle Eastern origin are a
> religious obligation. Mr. Mohammad Javed Khan, for example, made it very
> clear that he does not feel slighted when his near and dear ones call him
> Suman. And it is not uncommon to hear of names like Rezwana Banya
> Choudhury (noted singer) or Selina Ahmed Jharna (noted dancer). No one
> has argued on this thread that a name like Suman or Banya or Jharna can
> only belong to a Hindu.
Names of middle-eastern origin might be a "religious" obligation,
"social" obligation, or "cultural" obligation. It doesn't make a
difference and it is irrelevant to the current debate.
It is great that there are people that have Bengali names in Bengali.
But, the question is, why don't the right-thinking modernist
internet-age Bangladeshis say "yes, it is a good idea?" Why this
fascination with misguided tradition?
> What is being pointed out is that Bengalis have been using names of
> Middle Eastern origin for generations and centuries. Such names are used
> today in deference to family tradition and not because of religious
> obligation or because of any antipathy to names of Bengali origin. In
> fact, names of Middle Eastern origin often mingle with names like Banya
> and Jharna which are of Bengali origin.
Well, I don't know how much you know about the history of Bengal
Muslims. But the little bit that I have read (e.g., Rafiuddin Ahmed:
The Bengal Muslims) points to the fact that the trend of using foreign
words for Bengali names is relatively recent and it was deliberate,
forced and feudal. There was certainly an "antipathy" to names of
Bengali origin in this movement.
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> All books on introductory linguistic show how each language evolve to
> a contemporary one. Best way to learn what a "language" is by
> reading books on linguistic. Bangladeshis are proud to speak Bangla in
> Bangladesh, in the United Nation, streets of New York, London, Penag,
> Tokyo, Singapore, HongKong and every where else. About 115 Million
> Bangladeshi speak Bangla and ask to drink water by saying, "Pani Dao".
> Here, the word "Pani" which is used by 115 Million Bangladeshi everyday
> did not see a root in original Bangla. Infact, two every five words that a
> Bangladeshi speak are foreign. No matter how Uday Reddy and "gong shout,
> will the modernization of Bangla in Bangladesh be stopped; no never.
> Bangladeshis will never tell antiquated Bangla "Jol Dao", "Mashike Adap
> can shout Uday Reddy, only two thousand Bangladeshi in the internet will
> hear you, may be few of them will name thier children as "Nalinaksha",
> "Sugato", "Soumitra", "Babu Ram" ect. But, the rest 115 Million
> in Bangladesh? No matter how you call them: "Uneducated", "Barbarian",
> "Islamic fundamentalist", "Unsecular", "Islamic Fanatic"; they will name
> their children with modern Bangla names Karim, Rahim, Abul ect.
> What are you going to do? Speak loudly in a loudspeaker. There, you are
> problem again. Bangladeshis in Bangladesh will not understand what
> is "Bikot Shabda Jontro ( Lound voice machine)". Again you have to
> use another foreign word, "Mike". We will call "Vabi" not "Bou-Dee".
> So, "Didi Mosahi, Uday, Jol Pai little sour." I am kidding you,
> "Didi Moshai". Sorry, I don't know the feminine word of "Moshai"
> Is "Janaba Uday Apa" OK for you?
Hi Sohel,
1. I don't need a lecture on linguistics.
2. I don't buy that Bengalis are proud of their language when they
prefer foreign words to Bengali words in their names. (When I say
"foreign words" I don't mean Bengali words of foreign origin. I mean
foreign words.)
3. I haven't labelled anybody anything.
4. I am not shouting.
5. You haven't even begun to address the question that I asked:
> Whom are you kidding, Mr. Khan? You don't see a deliberate attempt by
> Bengali Muslims to shun Bengali words from their names, with the
> attendant implication that Bengali words are somehow "Hindu words" and,
> by contrast, Arabaic/Farsi/Turkish words are somehow "Islamic words?"
> Don't try to dupe us with your discourse on "modernity," please.
Cheers,
Uday
Sohel Q. Khan
On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, Uday Reddy wrote:
> Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> >
> > All language in the world became rich by having words from other
> > language. The origin of many English word we use today do not have
> > root in old English. Many of the English words are
> > actually from French, Latin, Scandanavian etc. Bangladeshi people
> > speak a language name "Bangla". The modern "Bangla" language has
> > become rich by having many foreign words. In Bangladesh people,
> > use words "Rickshaw", "Chair", "Masjid", "Pani" ect. everyday.
> > These are the few examples of many foreign words that Bangladeshis
> > use everyday as their mother language "Bangla". Samilarly,
> > Bangladeshis have accepted foreign words to name their Children.
> > Although root of these names are not from origianl root of
> > Bangla (i.e. Sanskrit), these foreign words such as Karim, Rahim,
> > Rosy, Baby have enriched modern language Bangla. These names
> > are not foreign anymore, they are modern Bangla names. The fact is
> > Bangla in Bangladesh is evolving very rapidly. More foreign words are
> > used in Bangla in Bangladesh than that of West Bengal. This way
> > Bangla in Bangladesh becoming richer than the Bangla in WB.
>
> Wonderful! So, "Javed" and "Khan" in the name of our favorite
> Bangladeshi nettor on this thread are "modern Bangla" words whereas his
> nickname "Suman" is an antiquated Bengali word? Wake up, Nalinaksha,
> Sugato, Soumitra et al. You are getting antiquated. Get modern!
>
> Whom are you kidding, Mr. Khan? You don't see a deliberate attempt by
> Bengali Muslims to shun Bengali words from their names, with the
> attendant implication that Bengali words are somehow "Hindu words" and,
> by contrast, Arabaic/Farsi/Turkish words are somehow "Islamic words?"
> Don't try to dupe us with your discourse on "modernity," please.
>
> Uday Reddy
>
S. Sundar Kumar Iyer
I am a little puzzled by these frequent postings on how some words are
not Bengali but English, Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, ... I suppose it is
due to some sort of superstition that as Bengali originates from
Sanskrit, only words that have roots in that language can be called
"pure" Bengali words. One of the reasons, I suppose, is the remnant of
what what we learnt in secondary schools in our grammer class where we
classify words as "tatsam", "tadbhav", "deshaj"and "videshaj".
Interestingly, Persian, Arabic, English and Turki words are classified
as "videshaj"or foreign root words. Possibly, it is this that makes
many consider Persian and Arabic words as "foreign".
Just to remind some of you, there are many common Bengali words which
are Persian/Arabic, which are not even used commonly in spoken Hindi
(which many consider more Persianised). To give some examples
chaakri - job
jaamaa - clothes
aain - law (of course most legal words have Persian or English roots)
khabar - news
So next time you claim that Bengali is more Sanskritised than
Hindi/Urdu, or only tatsam-tatbhav words are "pure" Bengali, think
twice. In my experience - limited as it might be - almost all the
Persian-Arabic words that I have heard being used in Hindi (not Urdu), I
have heard in Bengali too. It just happens that at the time when
Bengali got formalised, it was upper caste/class Bengalis who got to
define the formal language.
The same can be said about names. The majority of Bengalis have
traditionally had names that have had root in Arabic. It is
preposterous to claim that they are not Bengali names.
As an aside, this facination to identify with Sanskrit is so strong that
it is often amusing. I have come across some Telegu and Malayalam folks
who claim that their language is derived from Sanskrit! Just the
presense of a few words does not a language make. A language has many
other components - grammer, usages, etc.
S. Sundar Kumar Iyer
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> > It also occurs to me that, in the interest of "richness" which you
> > understand so well, you should have no objection to Islam, the quam,
> > becoming richer by accepting names like "Suman Khan" or "Jyothirmoy
> > Islam." After all, the world is moving towards one language. So,
> > eventually, words like Suman and Jyothirmoy will become full-fledged
> > Arabic words. We wouldn't want Bangla to become so modern but leave
> > Arabic way behind, would we? Let us make all languages modern too.
> >
> > Uday Reddy
> >
>
> Dear, Uday do you know what obsession means? The posting of mine
> that you cut short (to suit your need) and replied twice so far,
> did I say anything on Islam. I have used four name above.
> Two of them are of Arabic origin and the rest of the two
> are of English origin. And you bought Islam here. Did I say
> in my above post the "objection on Islam". Or you read some
> word Islam in my above post. What had happened to you?
Hi Sohel, I wasn't aware that I needed your permission to use the word
"Islam." I can certainly talk about Islam when it is relevant, don't
you think? And, I said "Islam, the quam" because, otherwise, I know you
will think "Islam, the religion" and start wondering where it is written
in the Quran anything about Bengali names. That will get us into
another deep morass.
If it hasn't been clear, it is Bengali *Muslim* names that are under
discussion because it is these names that shun Bengali words. That is
why "Islam, the quam" is entirely pertinent. In fact, it is the heart
of the matter.
Since you seem stuck on "modern Bangla" and its cosmopolitan character,
let us see if you can quantify this.
What percentage of words used in Bengali Muslim names are found in
a Bengali dictionary?
If you can give me a straight answer to that, I will be able to better
understand whether these names are rrreally Bengali or rrreally foreign.
Uday
P.S. I am glad to know you are planning to use Bengali names for your
children. Way to go!
sayan bhattacharyya
In article <33C1BD...@cs.uiuc.edu>, Uday Reddy <re...@cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>It is great that there are people that have Bengali names in Bengali.
>But, the question is, why don't the right-thinking modernist
>internet-age Bangladeshis say "yes, it is a good idea?" Why this
>fascination with misguided tradition?
Uday, I disagree with you. A tradition is misguided and to be rejected
only when it causes harm to self and society. (Casteism and sati, for
example, should be rejected for this reason despite being hallowed
traditons for many).
Having "middle eastern" names for Bengalis, on the other hand, is not
a tradition which is harming any one. It is a perfectly innocuous
tradition. I don't see any pressing reason to reject this tradition.
Many Bengalis (such as myself) regularly wear western clothing and
hardly if ever wear traditional Bengali dress. Does that make me any
less of a Bengali? I think not. Similarly, having a "middle eastern"
name does not make anyone less of a Bengali.
nda...@aol.com
In article <33C073...@ix.netcom.com>,
Soumitra Bose <soum...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> NDatta wrote:
> >
> > Soumitra Bose wrote:
> > >all names are not necessarily semite .Semitic tradition is but just one
> > >of the traditions in the world .The biggest population of the world
> > >lives outside the semite tradition .So secular names do occur there ,
> > >try to learn some language better other than English or Arabic .You
> > >would realize that .
> >
> > Eastern origin that is secular. Shah Jahan, for example, is definitely a
> > secular name. It is as this-worldly as it can possibly be. Prithvi Raj,
> > incidentally, means the same as Shah Jahan.
>
> ????????
> I never even used any territorial word .Semitism does not necessarily
> middle-eastern , it might have been originated from there .John is a
> semite name , and Paul as well , they are not middle-eastern .
>
> Adn Shah Jahan is not a middle-eastern name at all ....This is totally
> misconstrued reading .
I am not sure I understand what Mr. Bose is trying to say. Is he making a
distinction between Farsi which is an Indo-European language and Arabic
which is a Semitic language?
I am not well up in languages to know if the words Shah Jahan are of
Farsi or Arabic origin. But in either case, it shouldn't be wrong to
refer to them as words of Middle Eastern origin.
Furthermore, I find it difficult to believe that no name among speakers
of Semitic languages has a secular meaning. While certain Semitic names
might indeed have association with a religious tradition, isn't it
possible that they might have secular meanings of their own (much like
Soumitra)?
Anyway, naming your children is a private act that might very well
reflect your private thoughts. If you are religious, it is not unlikely
that you might end up naming your child Meera, Kabir, Lalon or Nimai.
There is nothing wrong in that.
Soumitra Bose
Soumitra Bose
> >did not see a root in original Bangla.
>
> "paniyo" which comes from Sanskrit, and means "drinkable".
>
> "pani" is as much a Bengali word as is "jol".
>
> >Bangladeshi speak are foreign.
>
> also a foreign language to the Indian subcontinent, since it was brought
> in my the invading Aryans.
>
>
> are equally current and equally legitimate (though in different
> geographical areas).
Sanskrit. Sohel Khan paltry knowledge of epistemology does not justify
using any word in either direction .
Soumitra Bose
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
>
> On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Uday Reddy wrote:
>
> > Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> >
> > > > It also occurs to me that, in the interest of "richness" which you
> > > > understand so well, you should have no objection to Islam, the quam,
> > > > becoming richer by accepting names like "Suman Khan" or "Jyothirmoy
> > > > Islam." After all, the world is moving towards one language. So,
> > > > eventually, words like Suman and Jyothirmoy will become full-fledged
> > > > Arabic words. We wouldn't want Bangla to become so modern but leave
> > > > Arabic way behind, would we? Let us make all languages modern too.
> > > >
> > > > Uday Reddy
> > > >
> > >
> > > Dear, Uday do you know what obsession means? The posting of mine
> > > that you cut short (to suit your need) and replied twice so far,
> > > did I say anything on Islam. I have used four name above.
> > > Two of them are of Arabic origin and the rest of the two
> > > are of English origin. And you bought Islam here. Did I say
> > > in my above post the "objection on Islam". Or you read some
> > > word Islam in my above post. What had happened to you?
> >
> > Hi Sohel, I wasn't aware that I needed your permission to use the word
> > "Islam." I can certainly talk about Islam when it is relevant, don't
> > you think? And, I said "Islam, the quam" because, otherwise, I know you
> > will think "Islam, the religion" and start wondering where it is written
> > in the Quran anything about Bengali names. That will get us into
> > another deep morass.
>
> you wish. But, if seems to me that you try to implicate Islam in
> everything.
>
> >
> > If it hasn't been clear, it is Bengali *Muslim* names that are under
> > discussion because it is these names that shun Bengali words. That is
> > why "Islam, the quam" is entirely pertinent. In fact, it is the heart
> > of the matter.
> >
> > Since you seem stuck on "modern Bangla" and its cosmopolitan character,
> > let us see if you can quantify this.
> >
> > What percentage of words used in Bengali Muslim names are found in
> > a Bengali dictionary?
> >
>
> published in Pashim Bangla. A very few "Bangla" Dictionaries are written
> by Muslims in Bangladesh. I don't have one, so I cannot tell you the
> percentage. Please note that the dictionaries are aids, not a reflection
> of a language. The definition of the word "language" does not say
> "whatever the words you find in a dictionary is a language."
Reflection of a very little knowledge of bangla language and literature
. Jillur Rahman of Rajshahi has come out with a bangla dictionary , and
this is so good and popular that Wbengal govt has recommended that as a
text for schools in Wbengal. Even in his book I do not find the words as
a bangla word.
Of course here we find someone thinking himself to be a more exhaustive
than a standard and accepted lexiconizer......No wonder the standard of
bangla uttered and written by these fundies and BNP leaders are so poor
...
>
> > If you can give me a straight answer to that, I will be able to better
> > understand whether these names are rrreally Bengali or rrreally foreign.
> >
>
> Interestingly, "Nam (Name)" is a Bangla word now, however, came from
> Europe. If you want to dig into ancient Bangla, there was no concept
> of naming. The concept of naming someone also came from foreign land.
> However, it had evolved into our Bangla culture.
Who the hell told you that . NAm is in Farsi and also it prakrit .in
some Sanskrit tradition we see the word too. It is an Indo-European
construct . FYI indo-european construct is a linguistic terms and did
not necessarily come from Europe .
Please read Humayun Azad (Bangla bhashar itihas) and Dr.Muhammad
Sahidulla. incidentally the best bengalee local disctionary was written
by Dr.Muhammed Sahidulla "BAngla ancholik bhashar obhidhan"(in two
volumes) . It has many words which have come to bangla , there he
clearly mentions the source of the words. Ferdousi does not feature
there ...either .....
No harm in reading before making a comment that all the dictionaries are
written by Hindus in Poshcim BAngla. Though there is no harm in that
too, yet knowing one's own country and celebrities always helps in
discourses .
>
> > Uday
> >
> > P.S. I am glad to know you are planning to use Bengali names for your
> > children. Way to go!
> >
> >
>
Sohel Q. Khan
> If you can give me a straight answer to that, I will be able to better
> understand whether these names are rrreally Bengali or rrreally foreign.
>
Interestingly, "Nam (Name)" is a Bangla word now, however, came from
Europe. If you want to dig into ancient Bangla, there was no concept
of naming. The concept of naming someone also came from foreign land.
However, it had evolved into our Bangla culture.
> Uday
Uday Reddy
S. Sundar Kumar Iyer wrote:
>
> I am a little puzzled by these frequent postings on how some words are
> not Bengali but English, Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, ... I suppose it is
> due to some sort of superstition that as Bengali originates from
> Sanskrit, only words that have roots in that language can be called
> "pure" Bengali words. One of the reasons, I suppose, is the remnant of
> what what we learnt in secondary schools in our grammer class where we
> classify words as "tatsam", "tadbhav", "deshaj"and "videshaj".
> Interestingly, Persian, Arabic, English and Turki words are classified
> as "videshaj"or foreign root words. Possibly, it is this that makes
> many consider Persian and Arabic words as "foreign".
As I indicated in another post, I have no objection at all to
foreign-origin words in modern languages. And, I fully agree that our
grammarians were brain-washed with Sanskritic culture to think somehow
that Sanskrit-origin words were first-class words and others were not.
I do hope that modern linguists get away from this stupid tradition and
give fair treatment to all words. (That aside, I should remind you that
there is some practical utility to these classifications because how
words conjugate - samaas - depends on their origin. So, it is helpful
to know, but not to discriminate.)
> The same can be said about names. The majority of Bengalis have
> traditionally had names that have had root in Arabic. It is
> preposterous to claim that they are not Bengali names.
I have no hesitation in calling them "Bengali names" if they are made up
of Bengali words, no matter what their origin. But, to claim that a
name is a "Bengali name" just because a certain Bengali-speaker has that
name is just misuse of terminology aimed to deflect the substance of my
argument.
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan
On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, S. Sundar Kumar Iyer wrote:
> I am a little puzzled by these frequent postings on how some words are
> not Bengali but English, Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, ... I suppose it is
> due to some sort of superstition that as Bengali originates from
> Sanskrit, only words that have roots in that language can be called
> "pure" Bengali words. One of the reasons, I suppose, is the remnant of
> what what we learnt in secondary schools in our grammer class where we
> classify words as "tatsam", "tadbhav", "deshaj"and "videshaj".
> Interestingly, Persian, Arabic, English and Turki words are classified
> as "videshaj"or foreign root words. Possibly, it is this that makes
> many consider Persian and Arabic words as "foreign".
>
> Just to remind some of you, there are many common Bengali words which
> are Persian/Arabic, which are not even used commonly in spoken Hindi
> (which many consider more Persianised). To give some examples
>
> chaakri - job
> jaamaa - clothes
> aain - law (of course most legal words have Persian or English roots)
> khabar - news
>
> So next time you claim that Bengali is more Sanskritised than
> Hindi/Urdu, or only tatsam-tatbhav words are "pure" Bengali, think
> twice. In my experience - limited as it might be - almost all the
> Persian-Arabic words that I have heard being used in Hindi (not Urdu), I
> have heard in Bengali too. It just happens that at the time when
> Bengali got formalised, it was upper caste/class Bengalis who got to
> define the formal language.
>
> The same can be said about names. The majority of Bengalis have
> traditionally had names that have had root in Arabic. It is
> preposterous to claim that they are not Bengali names.
>
> As an aside, this facination to identify with Sanskrit is so strong that
> it is often amusing. I have come across some Telegu and Malayalam folks
> who claim that their language is derived from Sanskrit! Just the
> presense of a few words does not a language make. A language has many
> other components - grammer, usages, etc.
>
> S. Sundar Kumar Iyer
>
Very good, Thank you.
Uday Reddy
Sohel Q. Khan wrote:
> >
> > Since you seem stuck on "modern Bangla" and its cosmopolitan character,
> > let us see if you can quantify this.
> >
> > What percentage of words used in Bengali Muslim names are found in
> > a Bengali dictionary?
> >
>
> Most of the "Bengali" Dictionaries are written by non Muslims and
> published in Pashim Bangla. A very few "Bangla" Dictionaries are written
> by Muslims in Bangladesh. I don't have one, so I cannot tell you the
> percentage. Please note that the dictionaries are aids, not a reflection
> of a language. The definition of the word "language" does not say
> "whatever the words you find in a dictionary is a language."
>
> > If you can give me a straight answer to that, I will be able to better
> > understand whether these names are rrreally Bengali or rrreally foreign.
As is clear, I did not get a straight answer to the question. I have no
interest in getting into this diversion about the role of dictionaries
in defining languages. Let it be noted that you have provided no basis
for the claim that the words used in Bengali Muslim names are "modern
Bangla" words.
> Interestingly, "Nam (Name)" is a Bangla word now, however, came from
> Europe. If you want to dig into ancient Bangla, there was no concept
> of naming. The concept of naming someone also came from foreign land.
> However, it had evolved into our Bangla culture.
Here we go again into anthropology a la Sohel Khan. Everybody with even
a tiny bit familiarity of Sanskrit knows that "Nam" is 100%
Sanskrit-rooted. And, Indians have named themselves as far in the past
as history and prehistory points. Really, Sohel, why don't you stick to
things that you actually know about?
Uday Reddy
Uday Reddy
sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
> >
> >It is great that there are people that have Bengali names in Bengali.
> >But, the question is, why don't the right-thinking modernist
> >internet-age Bangladeshis say "yes, it is a good idea?" Why this
> >fascination with misguided tradition?
>
> Uday, I disagree with you. A tradition is misguided and to be rejected
> only when it causes harm to self and society. (Casteism and sati, for
> example, should be rejected for this reason despite being hallowed
> traditons for many).
>
> Having "middle eastern" names for Bengalis, on the other hand, is not
> a tradition which is harming any one. It is a perfectly innocuous
> tradition. I don't see any pressing reason to reject this tradition.
Perhaps I shouldn't have used "misguided" because it has other
connotations. All I meant to say was "ill-conceived" and "headed in the
wrong direction." I certainly didn't mean it was "harmful."
I agree that naming is way down our priorities well below casteism, sati
etc. And, so much bandwidth has been expended on this basically because
there are considerable numbers of people that support this medieval
naming practice. You would be hard put to find anybody to defend
casteism or sati. But, that is not to say that naming is more important
than casteism or sati.
Some twenty years ago, it was common practice for East-European
immigrants to the US to anglicize their names. It is not done any more.
Convent-educated folks of our own generation in India used to anglicize
their names. Today, we frown on such things.
We are certainly entitled to frown on these medieval feudal customs that
tied up ethnicity and faith, and suppressed local traditions and
languages. It is a pity that the children of the victims of these
traditions today have no idea what is their own tradition and what has
been imposed. They can certainly follow a composite culture that blends
all of their past. But, I see nothing "composite" about Bengali Muslim
names. It is clearly medieval and feudal.
> Many Bengalis (such as myself) regularly wear western clothing and
> hardly if ever wear traditional Bengali dress. Does that make me any
> less of a Bengali? I think not. Similarly, having a "middle eastern"
> name does not make anyone less of a Bengali.
This is a good analogy. While we do think of western clothing as being
"modern," I think we prefer it mainly for its convenience. We should
also remember that this "modernity" has not affected women's attire all
that much. Among men, salwar-kameez for instance is worn more widely
today than it was twenty years ago, and I would not be too surprised to
see a movement in the near future towards wearing salwar-kameez to the
workplace. And, when such a movement comes, I would be the last person
to attack it as anti-modern or antiquated.
Uday Reddy
Soumitra Bose
foreign , he did not say have any problem in those words being adapted
in Bangla , but the fact is they are videshaja . Around 40% of the
bangla words are videshaja and they are fine but they are foreign words
no doubt . Ferdousi cannot be a bangla name , its meaning is not there
in bangla dictionary.Similarly Sandesha in bangla means a sweet and its
sanksrit meaning is foreign ot bangla it is not there in any bangla
dictionary .We do not have Murugesan in any bangla deictionary , it is
not a bangla name , but there are many Tamil-bengalees who have that
name and are fine .Uday was pointing out a fact , no other invectives or
connotations were intended I think .