Desi Babu, English Maimed

The BJP seems to be in a mulligatawny soup, and that is as English as you can get.

India's literacy is not something to be proud of, so questions about language are less about parochialism than about power.

The BJP party president Rajnath Singh told ABP TV:

"English language has caused a great lot of loss to India. We have started forgetting our religion and culture these days. There are only 14,000 people left in this country speaking in Sanskrit. Knowledge acquired out of English is not harmful but the anglicization penetrated into youths in this country is dangerous."

What religion is he talking about? Do believers forget a religion only because they speak a language that the scriptures were not originally written in? Nobody quite knows what the good angels, apostles and sages conveyed via unknown means that today form holy texts. These are available in translation in regions where they are not even the prominent faith. It is part proselytisation, part academic interest.

In India, many religions are practised and many more languages spoken. Is the BJP, under the guise of lamenting for a language, merely pushing a faith agenda?

Then, we come to the issue of culture. Culture is lived experiences as much as what society might deem to be 'cultural aspects', in terms of heritage and creation of indigenous ethnic art and mores. People imbibe these and add to them along the way. There is no single culture that can be forgotten or remembered. What we broadly term "Bharatiya sanskriti" (Indian culture) is an amorphous entity made up of all of these.

I do agree with Rajnath Singh, though, on the point about anglicisation. It is not dangerous — we do know of the dangers from non-English speaking Indians only too well — but it is limiting. However, bringing in Sanskrit here is tactical. To revive a dying language is one thing, to use is as a political tool quite another. It is part of the reclaiming our heritage agenda that is always kept on the burner. This is dangerous.

Of the 14,000 people who speak in Sanskrit, how many consider it their primary language? Do they use it in personal and professional interaction, assuming their profession is not propagation or teaching of Sanskrit?

Should the BJP not helm this movement and promote Sanskrit among its target audience? Give electoral tickets only to those who have some knowledge of Sanskrit. Start a poster campaign in Sanskrit. Use it to at least begin their meetings.

We know this is only to rake up some cultural issue as a preemptive election strike. Oddly enough, it will not alienate the acolytes, who know no language other than English, because they are being sold a dream, and dreams come cheap.

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat had gone on to say the situation under Congress was worse than British rule (my full post here):

"Today, there is an insistence on education in a foreign language (English), instead of education in the mother tongue. As a result, the importance of the foreign language has increased to a large extent in the country.”

English is as much a foreign language as Hindi is to someone from a region not much exposed to it, as South Indian languages are to those in the North, the East...we can go on about these languages that people speak today and not in the past.

Having said this, I do believe that we are losing pride in our languages and look upon English speakers as superior. There is a neat divide between the English speakers and those who use regional languages, and this is manifested in almost every aspect. The hierarchy should bother us, and I say this even as I write in English and am more comfortable in it than with other languages that I do know and some I try to understand.

However, in diplomatic discourse I think a unifying language helps a country like India. Japan and China are supremely confident and get away with it. We might not, and unfortunately when we use an international platform with Hindi it is tom-tommed as something special, instead of the most natural thing.

---

This reminds me of The Times of India’s Teach India campaign I had mentioned earlier. Look at their promo. Why would someone ask “Englis aata hai kya?” and make a kid feel awkward? Does that person not know how to pronounce ‘English’?

I also don’t understand how a boy at the edge of opportunity will look for open spaces in walls. If he is at the edge, it would be a mountain or a ledge. Where do walls come in?

And all this is to get a working knowledge of English to open up “many little career opportunities” and help in the “surge forward”.

That’s really kind. No big opportunities for the little people, and are we not surprised that this would be a surge forward and not backward?

---

End note:

In a debate, there is always room for some lighthearted moments. Madhu Kishwar had written in a piece: “The brown sahibs of today have made English their language for love making, talking to their infants and even scolding their pet dogs!"

I had no idea that infants could understand languages they were cooed in. And would dogs get a superiority complex only because they were scolded in English? Would an ordinary mongrel acquire a pedigreed halo if told to shut up, instead of "shanti"?

What language does love-making have? It is touch. It is visual and olfactory as well. Does moaning have a language? Yes, some words are used, but would it alter the intimacy if they were whispered in another language from the one the two people are at ease with?

For those who do wish to revive Sanskrit, I offer you two words that might help: 'siddha', achieving, could be used for climax; if the experience is overwhelming, you would be in a state of 'samadhi'.

Try it and tell me how it was!

© Farzana Versey

'Euro-English'

Imagine, how easy it is to get one language to become another. I don't usually post forwards here, but could not resist this...or ziz...from my inbox:

"The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the  British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for  improvement and has accepted a 5- year phase-in plan that would become  known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will  replace the soft "c".. Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump  with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should  klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in  the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f"..  This will make words like fotograf 20%  shorter.

In the  3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted  to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are  possible.

Governments will enkourage the removal of double  letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate  speling.

Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the  silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go  away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such  as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz  yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from  vordskontaining "ou"  and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil  sensi bl riten  styl.

Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil  find it ezi TU understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali  kum tru.

Und  efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze  forst plas.

If zis mad you smil, pleas pas on to oza  pepl."

Is English an island?

How English is English?  Will we ever know why an editor deleted several words of foreign origin from the Oxford English Dictionary? Was he a racist? Or a purist? In the socio-historical context, both these words have been used interchangeably a few times. Nazism and apartheid do believe they uphold purity of a race.

How does language fare as far as this is concerned?

There is a touch of espionage in the manner in which OED’s editor Robert Burchfield went about the process of erasing. Sarah Ogilvie, a former OED editor, writes in her book 'Words of the World' that he started a rumour that the earlier editors were resistant to outside influences. Her research revealed quite the opposite:

"I observed a pattern, that actually it was the earlier editors who were dealing with words in a really enlightened way. They certainly weren't these Anglocentric, judging kind of editors – they were very sensitive to cultural differences and they seemed to be putting in a lot of foreign words and a lot of words from different varieties of English, which must have been amazing for that day when colonial varieties of English were just emerging.”

I’d like to interject here. Foreign words are not the same as different varieties of English. A foreign word may or may not be used in an English context, but has been absorbed into it. Therefore, these are not “loan words”; they are borrowed, or more appropriately, absorbed words. Do they make the English language richer?

As someone from a country that was once colonised, but who has benefited from an education where English was the primary language, I used to try and stick to Anglo-Saxon words when writing, unless they were snatches of conversations. I did make a departure in my columns when I used Hindi headlines occasionally. The bold typeface in 24-point would stare defiantly at the reader. It may sound strange, if not cheesy, but the titles usually come to me first when I mull over the topic I am to write about. I discovered that it connects. Of course, overdoing it would not work.

I still avoid using common Latin and French phrases, but where would our courts be without suo moto and how would we explain that something is the raison d’être? We can indeed go on with several examples. The question here is: how malleable should language be? Let us not forget that it is not merely a literary tool.

When the OED was in its liberal phase, Ogilvie quotes a reviewer who wrote: “There is no surer or more fatal sign of the decay of a language than in the interpolation of barbarous terms and foreign words.”

Can we talk about these two in the same breath? Barbarous, says the OED, means “coarse and unrefined” in the context of language. It could include slang and curse words; they might be seen to degenerate the language. Do foreign words do the same? Is not slang based on specific colloquialisms? Swear words too, which Ogilvie states were in fact introduced by Burchfield, may have varied ethnic roots.  If they are not included in a dictionary, it could well mean they are not seen as polite or do not fit into the politically-correct paradigm. Are they, then, reliable? I discovered that William Gladstone had written a letter to The Times and found this word that we use so regularly as “vile”. Reliable is American. Ain’t that groovy?

Burchfield deleted 17 per cent of the words included by his predecessors and they were all of foreign origin. However, from the reports, they don’t seem to be particularly ripe for plucking out. Is it where they came from rather than what they are that bothered him? If he was so convinced, then why did he lie that those words were removed earlier?

Ogilvie said: 

"The only way I can explain him doing it is that, in the scholarly word of linguistics, the 1970s was when the first work on varieties of English started to come about. Maybe he wanted to be seen as part of all that."

It is interesting that while he had problems accepting other words, he led a dichotomous existence that stood up for those words because it was trendy to do so.

Can we not say the same about ourselves? We often use words that are ‘in’, even if we might not have any sympathy or understanding of their origins or what they mean to the societies they come from. Such words are demonised in the course of their literary and political usage. The N word is not uttered, but does it end apartheid towards Blacks? Why has every war become a jihad, when a jihad in its purest sense is not even an external war? Is fatwa really understood for what it is– an opinion passed as an edict by a group/leader that does not have universal sanction and is not binding upon all? Should languages where these words originate from object at their misuse? Even nirvana is employed casually, as though each time a person sits in the lotus yoga position s/he has attained the ultimate freedom from the Self.

However, the English language would be poorer if foreign words did not embellish it, particularly in symbolic form. Some might wish to pronounce a fatwa against them, but for those who strive to better themselves it is time for linguistic jihad. We may or may not produce a magnum opus but, to use a couple of Americanisms, wouldn’t it be fab if it turned out to be awesome? 

(c) Farzana Versey

Demonising a smile

Adults fake it. Do children? Anders Breivik’s smiling picture as a four-year-old is being used by psychologists to analyse what led him to kill 77 people in Norway. It’s been called the smile of the monster. Such photographic ‘evidence’ will demonise children.

At his trial in Oslo, a doctor said:

“Much of what we see in him today is visible here, not least in the disarming smile he hides his feelings behind. He had difficulty expressing himself emotionally. He lacked light, joy and the pleasure of playing with others. We feared he would develop serious psychopathology (problems), which may indicate mental illness. Unfortunately we were right, but we never imagined that one day he would become a mass murderer.”

This is just so dangerous. There are children who are shy for various reasons. Many turn out to be writers, scientists, actors, pretty much involved in activities that either are done in isolation or to become somebody else. Look at the picture again. Have you never seen a child smile like this – perhaps your own or someone in your family, maybe your childhood pictures? Have you gone and killed someone?

There is much to discuss about troubled childhoods. They affect the children more than anyone else. Does every child with a not-so-happy background read works that are considered violent? Besides, does such a smile reflect exactly what form of aggression will be used? What is the impetus for choosing one over the other?

About masking, it is a defensive reaction or in many instances nervousness. It could also mean suppressed laughter, and that one is taught in classes on decorum – do not laugh out loud at someone or over a poor joke, it is bad manners. Like, don’t talk with your mouth full.

If the psychiatrists are saying that it revealed “serious illness” in Breivik’s case, and was used to keep away emotions, then it is used by many adults at different times. The most extreme example would be Hitler’s masked smile that seems to be a held-back sneeze.

Body language is a fascinating study, but it cannot be seen as parts of a whole. How we look at people or away, how we sit in company, how we talk to or at, how we purse our lips, how we cross our legs are all about a situation at a given time. This need not be about us as we are, but what we behave like with someone for some reason. It may change in a few minutes or a few hours, days, months.

And those who give a full jaws smile need not be ‘open’ really. That too is part of the faking, the congeniality people.

I do wonder if Mona Lisa had the makings of a terrorist since we just don’t know what she’s hiding or revealing.

No farting please, we’re Pakistani

A person sitting in Karachi will now be unable to send a text message telling his friend not to be so ‘cocky’ about his entry through the ‘back door’ for a ‘bakwaas’ post. And the woman will have to rein in her articulation about an innocent ‘period’, although she can go ahead with the comma, but dare not tamper with the ‘tampon’.

Pakistan’s Telecommunications Authority has decided that certain words cannot be used anymore for SMSes. No, even if your car is crashing because of a certain failure, you cannot type out ‘headlights’.

I find this quite interesting because the letter sent out to the service providers says that there is a law for preventing information that is “false, fabricated, indecent or obscene” or “in the interest of the glory of Islam”.

A person sitting with thumb on the touch-screen or a tiny keypad is hardly thinking about the glory of the faith. And how does calling someone an ‘idiot’ tarnish the shine of Islam? Interestingly, while ‘padosi ki aulaad’ (offspring of the neighbour) is not allowed, you can type kafir (infidel). No problem. And no ‘Jesus Christ’. Duh?

Apparently, much of it is to stop Pakistanis from getting all sexy, so ‘lick me’, ‘do me’ (not even a favour), ‘S&M’ (M&S is okay, Marks and Spencers will be happy), ‘lotion’ (forget the moisturiser), ‘porn’, ‘gay’, ‘homosexual’ are out. You cannot even be held ‘hostage’ anymore or try ‘harder’ and find a ‘hole’ in the wall. Do not even think about a social ‘intercourse’, and you can suffer pain but do not mention ‘athlete’s foot’. And if you have ‘breasts’, then keep them to yourself. Wear a ‘condom’, but just don’t talk about it.

My concern is that many of such words are used in jokes rather than in real interactions. Okay ‘pussy lick’ and ‘fuck you’ and other stuff may be real, but who thinks about ‘monkey crotch’?

And here is this gem: ‘Chipkali ke gaand ke pasine’ (sweat off the 'anus' – another banned word – of a lizard). That is really deep.

So, here’s to my friends in Pakistan: 'Padosi ki aulad', you cannot claim to not have a ‘foreskin’ anymore.

What will happen to the "glory of Islam"?

The morning after...

Rain-drenched flags. A PM who speaks about the same old things. Why should we live up to the dreams of our freedom fighters? Are we not entitled to our own dreams? Why talk about the sacrifices of our soldiers and farmers, when both are pushed into it - one due to skirmishes with outside forces (or to contain the anger that spills over within our own borders) and the other because they are forced to commit suicide. Yet he talks about a Green Revolution; he talks about security. 

And, of course, the economy. The world looks to us, at us...

Those scam-stained blokes who are in jail will be dealt with. Indeed. 

I think these Independence Day speeches should move to a new venue. Maybe Davos or somewhere. 

- - -

I was hoping to be disturbed by loud music. The road beyond my lane has another lane. It is where slumdwellers set up a music system and disco lights. I anticipated the usual Mahendra Kapoor and Lata Mangeshkar songs with a sudden burst of "Dhinka Chikka".  There was silence. Until, lazily at around 10 AM or so, a whimper was heard: "Mere desh ki dharti sona ugley..."

I checked the bullion rate. It had hit Rs. 26,000 or so. 

The next speech of the PM should be from the gold souk or something. 

- - -

One gets the usual greetings. This time, not much. What I received instead was a response to my post Cameron's "culture of fear" from my Hindutva party contact. It makes for interesting reading and, naturally, I will share my reply. 

Note

Dear Farzanaji,
Pranam,

I am not sure if Cameron has linked the present riots to the multi-cultural programme. He has, however, said that multi-culturalism has failed much before the riots, and he was talking in the sense of the non-integration of the Muslims community with the mainstream society. This lament has been expressed by other European leaders with respect to
their own countries.

On multi-culturalism my thoughts are as follows.

The primary problem is that the term culture is not properly defined. In common parlance it would be a secular term, and would normally have a geographical connotation. Thus we can have an Iraqi culture, or an Iranian culture, or an Indoensian culture, or an Egyptian culture. But to lump all of them in a common term of Islamic culture would be wrong. I am sure that no Indonesian would accept that in culture and civilisational terms he has anything common with a Turk.

Similarly, on the Christian side, I do not think that a French would accept that he has the same culture as the English, or a German with an Italian. Nor would a Welshman agree that he has the same culture as an Englishman. In Germany, the Bavarians really think they should be a separate country. As do the Basques in case of Spain.

However, if one were to see that the participants in the programme are those that represent the religion of Islam and Christianity, but you will not see one who represents Somalia. Nor do you see anyone who represents the Welsh, for example.

Hence, you see that the programme should be rightly called multi-religion and not multi-culture. Because of the confusion of the
definition, the programme is not going anywhere to come to even close to solving the problems that the society is encountering. And if the problem of a follower of Islam not being able to fit into a secular society is broght, it is brushed aside since the position taken is that the programme deals with culture and not religion. On the other hand, those who are invited to participate are not those who can talk about their culture.

My Reply

Dear X-ji:

Thank you for the response. Cameron has not said the riots were a part of multiculturalism. He cannot possibly do so. But, given the nature of the reaction, it was obvious that the government was unconcerned. When does a government show such slackness? When it knows that the indigenous populations are safe.

Therefore, the multiculturalism bogey is anti-immigrant. That is the reason my piece took off from the example of South Asian victims and Cameron's special words for them. It was a shrewd move. They want our best talent. That's it.

Where Islam is concerned - and since many people are concerned about Islam to the exclusion of all else! - it is really a part of this mixed bag that has appeared on their shores. The reaction is extreme because the current situation internationally is geared towards fighting a 'war on terror'. Due to the obvious jihadi groups, it becomes convenient. I am speaking here purely from the multi-culti perspective.

A lot has been said about the difference in reaction of Norway's leader and what could possibly be the US position following the attacks by Breivik. The insistence of the media to not brand him a terrorist is part of the multiculturalist ethos.

I understand your differentiating between religion and culture. However, the issue is about the 'other' here. It could be geographical, cultural or religious.

Think about anti-immigrant stand of some people in Mumbai. It was based on outsiders. So, it was geographical but with it comes language, and sometimes religion. Will we not also club them as 'culture'?

Culture has a larger connotation and includes various aspects of living. The London riots are being seen as economic protests, which is one part of the story. Race is another and then within that there are the chosen few as opposed to the not acceptable.

A bit like good Taliban, bad Taliban that transformed into good Muslim and bad Muslim. Ironically the good Muslim in political terms is one who is not toeing a religious line.

I am not sure what mainstream means because there is no single British idea (think Ireland) and most certainly no single Indian one. So what stream is the main one? Even politically, which means how the country is run, there are several disparate ideas.

Yet, for an outsider, there is something called Indian culture. It is based solely on India as a nation and what they see of it. It could be the Taj Mahal or the ghats in Varanasi or the churches or Ayurveda.

This is the real mainstream. All else is manufactured to belong, like a newly-wed bride in her new home.

Happy Independence Day.

- - -

The media had fun. Every few minutes, TV actors would pipe up with the national anthem. The saffron, white and green was splashed around.

Kaun Banega Crorepati started rather tepidly. Amitabh Bachchan, usually well-dressed, wore some band-gala type jacket, which did not have a band-gala but a purple scarf tucked into the neck. Whatever it was, it was ill-fitting and creased unbecomingly at the chest.

The first contestant had a dream. If he won he'd go to Malaysia and get all possible massages by beautiful women. He did a good job for Malaysia tourism, though little for the Indian economic utopia we are marketing.

- - -

I told you, August 15 came and went, and I woke up to a picture that says more about India than a lot of speeches and writeups.

See this:

Its title was, "Yahoo opens new window". Huh? It shows a film actress on her way to the Banganga crematorium for Shammi Kapoor's last rites. We do know that in the song from the film Junglee he utters a loud "Yahoo!" but how does it open a new window now?  Anyhow, I give up on these careless smarts.

There are people clicking pictures of celebrities at the funeral. Nothing dies because it is business as usual. I won't judge these camera-happy folks. They don't get to see the famous often. And the fact that they have mobile phones that they know how to use well is part of our consumerist society. Every ad tells us this - the poor can reach out.

There are the urban poor and the rest. Cellphones can only take you so far. What is it that people can connect to? A soldier video conferences with his lady love and enquires about a spot on her beautiful face; the villager hollers at someone back home; the young and old have instruments in their hands. Do they have power?

Do they even have dreams? 

Bad writing worse

She has “slaughtered sparrows and the English language”, they say, and have awarded her for the “crappiest of sentences”. They are generous, “How can there be good literature if there was no bad literature?” Aw. It is like saying how can you have good mangoes unless there are bad mangoes. The Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest for 2011 has chosen Wisconsin professor Sue Fondrie for her “her 26-word sentence”.

Here it is:

“Cheryl’s mind turned like the vanes of a wind-powered turbine, chopping her sparrow-like thoughts into bloody pieces that fell onto a growing pile of forgotten memories.”

Okay, it isn’t the best of sentences, not even good. But is the verbosity a problem? And how many sparrows have been slaughtered? I have read sentences that run into paragraphs. We also apply the word literature carelessly. Does it mean all of published work or is there a standard, like high art or classical music? Don’t we expect a hush to fall when we hear lit-er-a-ture enunciated in high-ceilinged libraries with tomes of men and women who chiseled words to sculpt a story? Guess what? I just composed a 26-word sentence. Had this line been in a book, would it be doomed?

I am tired of saying that language evolves, people in different parts of the world talk in varied tongues, think and dream in lingos that are not universal even within the standard English category.

We have the Bad Sex Writing Award and I find it amusing because when there can be bad sex why should the writing elevate it always?

I would like to give Fondrie a more holistic treatment. Outside of this sentence, do we know anything about Cheryl’s mind? Maybe it did turn – would it sound better if instead of turning it churned or lashed? Her thoughts being sparrow-like could mean they were chirping in small voices or were just small, niggling, pecking at grains. However, there had to be bloody pieces. Why? Because when there is an addition to forgotten memories the new entrants need to show that they have met with death. Blood is a potent symbol of it. Lashing winds and churning cannot draw out blood, so the turbine comes into the picture.

Anyhow, here are two possible versions.

A minimalist, often a fine creature, but when following a trend just settles for a quickie, might say it like this:

Cheryl’s thoughts became history.

The writer of erotica would write:

Cheryl’s thoughts palpitated even as her breasts felt raw after the night that left her drained from the vanes of the wind-powered turbine that had roughed her up. Her desires fluttered sparrow-like despite the hangover the morning after. She ran her hands over the sore skin and felt a trace of blood, its trail went all the way to the door. He had left long ago, adding to the growing pile of forgotten memories. She went back to the wind-powered turbine.

Now, I await my award with bated - and baited - breath. 

Puncturing Punctuation

 ? , ; : (...) !

Punctuation marks are to writing what meaningful pauses are to conversation. The comma drama was a yawn that became a sneezing epidemic. In the last couple of days you have been assaulted by the Oxford comma from everywhere. Op-eds in respected journals have quoted from social networking sites where, forget commas, even words are half-chewed to ‘brng on da mt horses’, so to speak.

Therefore, the dirge seems ironic. They have dusted grammar books and are telling us in Moses-like tones that the Oxford comma is a serial comma. My imagination has been running wild ever since as I see a woman (comma does not sound manly enough) wearing an eye-mask, ice pick in hand, going on a murderous spree over lines, slicing them mid-sentence, and killing all ambitions of linguistic rebellion.

The controversy started when some Oxford group announced that there was no need for that comma; it was not meant for the whole world but its muddled academic huddle. People who had no knowledge of that pit-stop between words got agitated. How can you take it away, they asked. In the interest of facts, let me also cite what happens if you desist from the usage of this mark. Should you choose to write, “I ate burgers, fries, and brownies” then you are the Oxford kind. If you write, “I ate burgers, fries and brownies” you are wrong. No, not for eating them, but because you were supposed to add a comely comma before ‘and’. Don’t ask me why. Okay, let me guess: is it to demarcate that the fries are not part of the brownies and the brownies are not mixed in the fries and you have paid for three items and not two?

I love the English language; I love language gliding over tongue and sliding on paper and blinking on monitors. But, I am more than likely to say, “I ate burgers, fries, brownies…” The ‘and’ is an add-on anyway, so a comma with an add-on is just extra cheese.

I do respect technique but not at the expense of a natural flow of words. If there are times I might not be able to communicate adequately, it would be due to the ideas and how they are argued. As I said at the very beginning, punctuation marks are pauses, and pregnant ones at that. Most times, I am in a hurry, my thoughts are rushing past and it would be completely unfair to stop them and give them a dressing down: “Hey, how could you forget to put in that comma there?”

Much of my writing is done without any punctuation marks or as they appear naturally while typing. If after a longish stint with the writing world this does not happen as a matter of course, it might be cause for serious concern. Does it mean there are no bad sentences? Of course there are. I start some with ‘But’, which is not considered quite the right thing to do; others with ‘Because’. I know that there are others words that could easily replace them, but the ‘buts’ and the ‘becauses’ sound right to me; they are sometimes there with a purpose. A style evolves and if writing is as hormonal as it is for me, then I’d be damned to play killjoy and correct fragments. They are meant to be fragments.

My handmaidens are the semi-colon and ellipses. They work best with my writing. And (yes, I also begin sentences with ‘and’) I do hyphenate some terms even though I am told they are considered old-fashioned now.

More importantly, I rarely use the exclamation mark in prose pieces; it is like canned laughter. If some people do not smile back at my smiling words, then they have missed the joke. I haven’t.

French kissing Facebook & Twitter?

Forget it. France has banned the use of these two words because they amount to “clandestine advertising”. If you say you are a “tweeter”, then France's Superior Audiovisual Council will ask you to shut up. You also cannot mention “Facebook events”. Apparently, there have been earlier attempts to regulate words like “Coke” and even “e-mail”.

French TV and radio employees must use a generic phrase like “social network” or “reseaux sociaux,” rather than Facebook or Twitter. Exceptions involve citing sources of information, as one might use the newspapers Le Monde or Le Figaro to cite the origin of a news story.

It seems okay, but does France not have a McDonald’s? Don’t they drink Coke?

“This decision is not only stupid and hypocritical, it is also scary because behind the legal alibi, it reeks of anti-Americanism, chauvinism, and a complete misunderstanding of today's world,” says Karim Emile Bitar, a frequent commentator on French affairs at a Paris think tank.

Most internet activity that has germinated in the United States has made inroads in other countries with their own language versions that cater to the nation. But these are in the area of search engines, maps, locators, and special-interest activities.

Is France becoming a closed society? How does not using a specific word and continuing to use the social network make sense? This is not chauvinism but hypocrisy. If anything, the French do not have to worry about Americanisms because the major elite industries like fashion and art-house cinema are still their preserve, not to speak about gourmet cuisine.

I respect each society’s need to preserve its culture, but this is not culture. This is just expanding the universe and connecting.

Now if only Americans bid adieu to referring to their deep-soul snogging as a French kiss and completely did away with any thoughts of a ménage a trios we’d have a cause celebre.

Oh, la la, that would be a piece de resistance. Non?

PS: To think that the only reason I wrote my first letter to the editor while in school was because I wanted to use the word ‘Apropos’. I won the best letter prize. Touché.

Accentuated

Awwrrright, lemme roll mah ‘rrrrrs’ and see if I can do the yankee drawl. Not so tough. Better than getting the brain damaged. Which is possibly what happened to Karen Butler. One minute the Oregonian was in the dentist’s chair for routine surgery and soon enough she was speaking with an Irish accent. Apparently, during the period of sedation she developed the Foreign Accent Syndrome. It is rare and the “change of accent can be triggered by minor strokes, brain damage or even severe migraines”.

The ailment part of it does not sound good, but accents are a peep into so many worlds, and not just geographical. From Peter Sellers mimicking the typical Indian one – although there is nothing like a typical Indian accent; there is only a typical Indian head-bobbing – to the heavy guttural enunciation of Arnold Schwarzenegger, it can be used to analyse behaviour.

Why would an American get an Irish accent and not a Welsh one or from any other part of the US, a country where syllables dance in more varied ways than the stratified red and blue states? Was there some past connection? Was she drinking Guinness before? Did she have an argument about Gerry Adams or had she been reading James Joyce?

The classic battle, of course, is between American and the British English. Indians seem to prefer the American accent. It is easier to chase a word that runs over another than to figure out a starched consonant. I know of someone who studied at Oxford and returned with an American accent! Another thing that beats me is how expats manage to acquire foreign accents so quickly whereas those who come from overseas and live in India do not. I have friends who enjoy our food, our clothes, but they do not have the slightest trace of any Indian accent. Take the example of Sonia Gandhi. Even her Hindi sounds like pasta.

Those of us who are still in Anglo-Saxon mode cannot dream of going to the lav-a-tory, although the Brits ought to be happy that their political party is such an intrinsic part of the American ablutions. I will also not go according to sked-ule; I’d much rather ‘shed’ the mule to get to the schedule.

But these are nits. The Italian, the French, the Spanish have distinct ways of speaking English that make for rather charming pauses in conversation. And I love to recollect a conversation with an Egyptian who I had urged to talk.

“Ookay, thawk.”

“No, you.”

“Woth thu thawk? Yor olwiss farthing and farthing.”

It was time to indeed start farthing…fighting…if only I could stop lifing…laughing.

Kannada Calling, Mr. Narayan Murthy

Any Kannada books?

Infosys Chairperson N R Narayana Murthy can afford the luxury of emotions, among other luxuries. The Karnataka government wanted him to inaugurate the Vishwa Kannada Sammelan. Kannada writer Baragur Ramachandrappa was not happy with this. Murthy finds it “absurd to label him anti-Kannada”. These were the words in the report, but not by Mr. Ramachandrappa. He had written to the chief minister:

“I can understand them inviting him to inaugurate the World Investors’ Meet. His contribution to the field of business is immense. But what has he contributed to Kannada and its culture. The establishment needs to understand that they are organising a Vishwa Kannada Sammelana and not a Vishwa Karnataka Sammelana. The subtle distinction is that the former has a cultural context to it. How does Narayana Murthy fit into this scenario? He is not a cultural face.”

Culture in this context is specific to the arts and not to social mores. So, there is indeed a distinction. But the government wants a global face. Why must regional literary and artistic activities be held hostage to how the international community perceives them? Apparently, Mr. Murthy had advised the authorities to choose a litterateur, but they said it was not relegated to Kannada. In that case they ought to change the title of the event. Money power seems to be doing all the talking and also getting legitimised as the cultural façade. It would not hurt Murthy to be seen as such since roots have such currency, especially among global Indians. No wonder he said:

“Kannada is the language of my emotions.”

Emotions are private. They are not displayed at seminars and most certainly not as an identity card.

As happens often, it becomes a tussle between the local language and English. Baragur pointed out:

“He always quotes Chinese model, where English is being encouraged but says nothing about the fact that major IT companies there have developed software in the Chinese to ensure that their mother tongue is part of the next generation too.”

This is a moot point and not a lesson we are ready to learn. The Chinese have managed a fine balancing act and most of their enterprises can in fact said to be culture-driven, in that there is little compromise on that front. In India, at least in urban areas, we discourage regional languages; it is considered too vernacular.

This is not to dismiss English. I am writing in it. This is to give a holistic approach. But Mr Murthy’s take is different:

He said he would have 200-250 peons, drivers, etc asking him every year to get their kids admitted to English-medium schools. They asked him to take up the issue with the government so that the children of the poor can also become engineers and doctors. Murthy told the government: “Why don’t we have information on TV and press about the advantages of English and Kannada medium by qualified people. Let people then decide.”

How will people decide? Will there be elections on this issue? Or a committee will be formed? How can one lay down the advantages of a language when it is an evolving entity that is used to express several things at different times?

It is no surprise that peons and drivers would want their children to study in English-medium schools. They should not be denied it. But, as he himself stated, he studied initially in a Kannada school and went on to be what he is. Therefore, language is not an impediment. One is not so concerned about the poor getting into English-medium schools as much as the rich not being tutored at all in Kannada or any other regional language. Murthy is skirting this issue by firing from the shoulders of the poor.

This brings us to his role in Kannada culture. He may be the face of Karnataka and Bengalaru (Bangalore) more particularly. He probably does sponsor cultural activities. However, it is time the government stopped patronising people for the wrong reasons – whether they be entrepreneurs or even cultural upstarts who curry favour with the establishment. And if they want to showcase not just Kannada, then they can get whoever they wish to inaugurate the sammelan. Narayan Murthy may then not even need to waste his emotions.

- - -
More on the 'worth' of CEOs as calculated by students here

Not wanted -Muslims in Germany?

Everyone is upset with Germany’s interior minister, Hans-Peter Friedrich, for saying, “Islam in Germany is not something substantiated by history at any point.”

Instead of seeing it as a “slap in the face of Muslims”, as Lamya Kaddor, chairperson of the Liberal-Islamic Union in Germany is seeing it, the more pertinent query is about the minister’s belief that successful integration needs “two things: knowledge of the social reality in Germany and a clear awareness of the western Christian origin of our culture”.

There will be indepth analyses, but one thing is clear: There is a huge identity tussle in Western Europe and if it is getting them in touch with their roots, then Islam should be given credit.

The two points mentioned by the minister have two simple answers:

• The social reality of Germany includes immigrants and not only the four million Muslims. While it is important for them to learn the language, will it integrate them? Unskilled migrants often don’t need to communicate with their distant bosses. There are several examples and we cannot use this to alienate anyone. Our own migrants to the Gulf regions know little or no Arabic and they constitute a huge chunk of the workforce at every level. With so many multinationals in India, we see foreign women and men and they do not speak Hindi, even if they are working for NGOs.

• Regarding the Western Christian origin of German culture, besides the evolution to the idea of the supreme Aryan race to several others, it has not been static. However, I am glad the minister has put it this way. For long the West has been hiding behind the hypocritical curtain of the division of state and religion. It used the negative images of Islam as an example of how rotten it is to have these two aspects together. The fact is that western nations have always had the Christian subtext.

At last someone has voiced it clearly. Now we can look at these nations in the same manner in which they look at others.

Veena Malik represents freedom of expression?

Last night we got to see Pakistan’s best and worst on TV. There was ghazal maestro Ghulam Ali on the grand finale of the music show Sa Re Ga Ma Pa and then there was Veena Malik, the has-been wannabe – yes, she seems to be a veteran of wannabe-ing – who even in her moment out of Bigg Boss kissed the mirror she was gifted. There was a second’s poignant flash when she spoke about being tanha (lonely), but that is a personal aspect that one may or may not identify with. It isn’t even narcissism.

She IS black and white

 It is rather sad that only because some mullahs are baying for her blood due to her clothes and ‘open’ behaviour she has become a symbol for freedom of speech and an opportunity to take on the moral brigade. “This is not too dissimilar to the public floggings of the Taliban variety,” said one commentator. Really? Those women do not have a choice regarding what they wear and what they say. In Pakistan Veena would be doing precisely what she is doing now – and she has admitted so herself – and no one would notice.

I am afraid if some Pakistanis think this is the modern version of their country that they wish to hawk to India, whose film industry incidentally is being dissed for “commodification”, then they’d please prop her up in the salons of Karachi and Lahore. She has just declared that she will return despite the threats. So give her a hero’s welcome. I mean, do we want to hear stuff like she “has dared to participate in the famous and brainless Indian reality TV show”? She was considered powder-puff before she came on this show; all the newspapers had relegated her to the gossip genre on which she was feeding. Her appetite for this had been detailed in their media, and that was before the mullahs reared their beards.

In India she would be on par with any item girl performing in some small town on New Year’s Eve. Her attempts at being anglicised and modern were laughable, especially her language skills. She would try out PTV Urdu when it suited her and then shout out in English with a Multan-Manhattan accent. And just what was it about calling that other has-been ‘Ash-mit’. Since I started watching the show a few weeks after its debut, I had initially thought it was some inside joke, but when the host Salman Khan corrected her a few times, I knew this is how she pronounced it. Why is it so difficult for a Pakistani to say Ashmit? Does she refer to, say, an Ashfaque as ‘Ash-fack’? Does she say ‘ash-aar’ for ashaar (couplets)? Her local roots came through glaringly when she’d call Shweta ‘Shivaeta’.

If Pakistanis think that what we have is a “Bollywood circus”, then the likes of Veena Malik may only manage to be molls of the clowns. Anyone remember Meera?

It is understandable that she wants to grab eyeballs, and who does not on that show and in showbiz? But, I wish Pakistanis would realise that making such people into a cause to uphold demeans the women who wear what she does and are bold and brazen and go out and work. And, no, I am not making noises about the Hudood Ordinance here. Please, that is a separate and important issue. Clubbing it all with this drama-daasi (slave) - she has miles to go to become a drama queen - only reveals that otherwise sensible people too are getting so affected by this ‘failed state’ business that they’d latch on to anything that looks unIslamic. Guess what? She thinks she is answerable only to Allah!

And like that bikini contest winner, she too might talk about nationalism and taking a message of Indo-Pak peace. Thanks, but no thanks. We have our own mirrors and our own filthy ponds and our own pebble pelters. Where ripples are concerned, and much else, we are pretty self-sufficient.

The White House Whitewash Job

Mind your language
The White House Whitewash Job
by Farzana Versey
Counterpunch, April 9-11, 2010

Forked tongues are part of the political arsenal, therefore what the White House says and what the White House does rarely meet even the facile “Read my lips” dictum.

Hamid Karzai was the fattened cat of American foreign policy that intervened to transform their version of a tribal society into their feudal Afghan version of a democracy. As strategies go, it worked as well as LSD.

Cut to the new airbrushed initiative. While the Bush Doctrine underlined National Security Strategy in the document that stated, “The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century,” it was upfront about its limited idea of ideology. It meant ‘Attack’ and it did. George W. Bush had no clue about history and no vision for the future. He was not even attempting ‘change’ and was rather complacent about the status quo as much as Bill Clinton was with the blue dress.

All was not well and the world knew it. They had put Islamic nations, which included those who were beleaguered, being forced out of their own land or battling internal strife, into a shoebox to consecrate their febrile memory.

The shoebox was a metaphor for beneath the boots, unshod, in short of as much value as skeletons in the cupboard.

Tagged along with it was Islamophobia. We fell for it, at least the term. No one seemed to realise that phobias are about fears. If you are phobic, then you hide away. You do not taunt, tease or challenge unless you want to exorcise that fear.

Now Barack Obama is attempting the first two. He, like the aggressors, knows that there never was any fear. The Islamophobia construct was not the doing of Islamists but their opponents. It was to create the fear of fear.

Obama's band of boys has decided that phrases such as “Islamic radicalism” should be deleted from the shoebox. A report states that there will be a "new version to emphasize that the US does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terrorism, counterterrorism officials say...The revisions are part of a larger effort to change how the US talks to Muslim nations."

Notice how counterterrorism officials are issuing such statements and how it is about the US talking to Muslim nations. One wonders whether there will be any real attempt at altered perspective. If the idea is not to get trapped in linguistics, then it does not qualify as a diplomatic manoeuvre and need not be emphasised. However, it is being dangled as a huge carrot not only of political correctness but empathy, and therefore is too cunning a ploy for Obama to be anointed as statesman. For, had there been any genuine intent, then there would be no need for the use of the words ‘Muslim nations’.

This is mere playing with terminology. What the United States and a large section of the western world wishes to engage with is not Muslim nations, but to create a fear so that the demons can be exorcised, and exorcised only partially. If you do so completely then there will be no shoebox.

They wanted to bring peace and democracy to Iraq? Rubbish. Besides the hallucinations and the ground level war, they managed to get local insurgents to fight the Al Qaida in Iraq. Was there any Al Qaida in Iraq, to begin with? A group of Sunnis, members of Sahwa, Awakening Councils, thought they were on to become big-time US allies. It did not work that way. Last week, gunmen dressed as Iraqi officers killed 25 people in a Sunni village; the victims were handcuffed and shot dead.

The forked tongues work wonderfully to prop up this idea of internal turmoil as a ruse for ‘preventive war’. Hamid Karzai announces that he might join the Taliban, as though it is like signing up at the local gym, and there is concern. This is fake. Quoting a minister, Farooq Marenai, who mentioned that the President said “rebelling would change to resistance”, the report helpfully added that he was “apparently suggesting the militant movement would then be redefined as one of resistance against a foreign powers rather than a rebellion against an elected government”.

Karzai works best under pressure; in fact, that is the only way he works. The Taliban has always been a resistance to foreign powers or puppets of foreign powers. Their method of resistance may be questioned but Karzai’s grouse is personal, that Parliament reduced his powers over the electoral process. Since he cannot hold the Taliban responsible, he accused foreign powers. The simple fact is that it is true. He is making noises with the purpose of gaining extra rights for himself within the US-controlled system he heads.

His comments should not have alarmed anyone. They have. Peter Galbraith, a former UN envoy to Afghanistan, appeared on television and said, “He’s prone to tirades. He can be very emotional, act impulsively. In fact, some of the palace insiders say that he has a certain fondness for some of Afghanistan’s most profitable exports.”

Since President Obama is on language, he ought to make note of this. Forget what alterations are made on paper, this buffers the image of backward societies. If Karzai accused the US of fraud in the Afghan elections, then why is Mr. Galbraith out to limit his powers to appoint officials until he proves himself to be a reliable partner to the US? It just does not make sense. Wanting to reduce his clout is in effect an admission that it is possible to do so and might have been done since Galbraith himself states that the US had got him a second term!

One wonders who is tripping on what.

And while talking about reliable partnerships, is America going to decide the nature of it alone? Is a partnership not about two sides?

Taxi, Taxi

I thought it was Raj Thackeray. But it was Maharashtra chief minister, Ashok Chavan, trying to convince us that is was important that taxi drivers in Mumbai will get a licence only if they are domiciled in the city for 15 years and can read, write and speak in Marathi.

This is not the Shiv Sena, but we must remember that Mumbai’s psyche has subconsciously imbibed the SS ideology. It is part of the anti-immigration move. Most commentators wonder how a cosmopolitan city can be like this. It is precisely the cosmopolitanism that is causing the problems. We are dealing with several types and now have them pushed against the wall based on different factors – religion, region, language, economic status, education.

Most cabbies are from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. As always, the cities biggies are saying, oh, let us stop them for a month and see how the city suffers. That is not the point. This is a selfish way of looking at things.

How many passengers can read, write and speak in Marathi? Even if they do, most prefer to speak in English or Hindi. English because it makes them appear superior and Hindi because it is the language of Bollywood. I have seen yuppie types converse in ‘Bhai’ underworld lingo! It is not unusual to watch a Raju driver type being addressed as “Boss, idhar say right turn maarna…oye baap, oopar bhejneka chance mangta kya?”

I have tried conversing in some Marathi with cabbies who insist on responding in Hindi. They are either sensitive about my lack of fluency or prefer to use another language.

The other argument about domicile would make sense if the Marathi drivers knew the city as well. The reason given is that they should be able to identify addresses. This is a problem, and I have encountered Marathi-speaking drivers who do not know.

Instead, there should be a system of a central office that can provide such details. With low mobile phone rates, it is not too difficult.

With the advent of private taxis, this will be a huge blow to the black-yellow cabs. Instead of language skills, there should be other mandatory rules – like insistence on running the meter, being polite to passengers, not refusing to ply to certain areas, clearly indicating the timings that a particular cab operates.

An anecdote during the month of Ramzan is worth repeating. I had to reach the airport. No cabs anywhere in sight. Finally, I found one. There was a traffic jam and he started grumbling about getting the wrong place to go to in Marathi to someone on his cellphone. I ignored him. Then the vehicle behind brushed against his cab. He got out, there was a fight and finally upon discovering there was no damage he returned. He started on this spiel about how he would get delayed for breaking his fast.

I started talking on my cellphone and did the Muslim act by interspersing the conversation with “mashallah, inshallah” and ended with "Khuda hafiz”. When we were close to our destination, he said he did not know where the terminal was. I directed him, although all the signs were there.

I had not realised that he had not stared the meter. “Soch-samajh ke de do (give what you think best).”

“Hum pehli baar airport nahin aaye. Seedha bataa do, yeh ginti karma hamara kaam nahin hai (It isn’t the first time I am going to the airport. Tell me straight, I am nto here to count),” I said.

He demanded four hundred for a ride that costs not more than 250 bucks.

I had no choice and he knew it. I did tell him clearly, though, that this was nto the amount and he said he had come all the way and was getting late.

This was getting too much, so after paying him, I did not shut the door, but peeped in and said, “Aapka roze rakhne ka koi faayda nahin. Asli roza hota agar aap tameez se pesh aate aur tareeke se meter chalate. Ab jao aur iftaar manao aur apne gunaah ki muafi maango. Hamara koi nuksaan nahin hua hai, aapka hua hai inn paison ko lene ke baad bhi.” (Keeping the fast has not helped you in any way. True roza is when you behave well and follow the rules. Now go break your fast and accept your mistake. I lost nothing but even with the additional charge you have.)

Azmi’s Raj and Amchi Mumbai

Abu Azmi had been going to town that he would not take the oath in Marathi long before he was sworn in. While Raj Thackeray’s goons from the MNS had no business to get rough with him in the legislative assembly, and follow it up with stone throwing at his house and business establishments, in many ways Azmi had laid the foundation.

Language chauvinism is as bad as any other sort, especially in cities that have a large immigrant population. There are two factors at play:

1. Those who force it down people
2. Those who oppose it even when they do not need to

Azmi says he is not fluent in Marathi and took the oath in Hindi. The script for the two languages is the same. He could have read it out in Marathi. How would it affect him if he said ‘shapath’ instead of ‘saugandh’, both of which mean oath? Part of the problem is that he belongs to the Samajwadi Party whose leader comes from the Hindi heartland, Uttar Pradesh, as do many of its prominent politicians. Azmi’s act in Maharashtra would probably affect the party’s reputation elsewhere.

Has he not put up Marathi signboards on his shoe shop and restaurants? Then, what is the need to make such a fuss beforehand so that those guys are prepared to act when the time comes? Who benefits? All of them. The MNS – with the Marathi maanus; Azmi – with the Hindi belt and for standing up for the national language; Congress – to have someone do their dirty work; Shiv Sena – for jumping in just when they were being dismissed off.

This must be noted. The media and even politicians have been too quick to end the Shiv Sena era and giving Raj Thackeray’s MNS more credit than it deserves. His party did get a few seats, but overall what was its showing? Can we not look at it in perspective? It may be a relatively new party that made its election debut, which is like welcoming a bride into her marital home. The saas will put her on test soon enough, not to forget that her training will be all thanks to her maika (Shiv Sena). Raj pits himself in opposition to his cousin Uddhav and not Bal Thackeray. It is a smart move being passed off as respect. Balasaheb has re-entered Sena Bhavan. Prince Charles, Uddhav, has to just watch as the Queen sits on the throne.

Make no mistake. Raj and the MNS have only managed to give the SS more respectability. As I have written earlier, Raj was the fall guy and will remain so. The goons are with him, but not the real ammunition.

Pushing Duh

Next time you get all Wilde or Confucius, you might miss what lies between. It’s Paris Hilton, who has made it to the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations.

I do not know what the standards used for such choices are, but one assumes there is an element of wit or thought, and it rides on some literary or artistic drive, if not merit. Merit is subjective.

Sarah Palin has made it, too, but then that quote did become famous and symbolised a part of an election campaign: “What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick.”

Honestly, I don’t have a snotty attitude towards what the reports have made a point to mention – Paris’s partying and sex tape. The problem is the choice of quote: “Dress cute wherever you go, life is too short to blend in.” Is this funny? Profound? Interesting?

I mean ‘cute’ blends in like whipped cream does in milk, honey. Besides, this quote has not made heads or headlines turn. It is a run-of-the-mill advice that a matron would give students in a dorm on a good day.

It is so un-Paris. Heck, it is even un-Prague.

Is there a value to duh?

There is something tragic rather than comical when celebrities start to get all highfalutin. Intellectualism isn’t the prerogative of every goatee-glasses-crumpled skirt-seeking muse creative person on the make. We do have some absolutely marvellous quotes from the entertainment world. Think Woody Allen, think Mae West, think Jean Harlow, think Chaplin, think Sam Goldwyn. Think dry humour, sarcasm…heck, you need élan to carry that off with panache. No emphasis needed to make a point. It has to spout like grease off the tongue.

In a world where 'lolling' is not a pastime, heavy-set words wearily fall off mouths drained of innovativeness in an attempt at throwing attitude and furtive funniness.

Almost two years ago, Vanity Fair had an interview with ‘Top Chef host Padma Lakshmi’. It is a known fact that most interviewers don’t bother to counter-question. After reading those bits, I don’t think “The lady's like a sailor!” She is just vocabulary-ly challenged.

Here are some of her replies. There are a few counter-queries I would pose, if I were the one conducting the interview. (I had posted this portion before.)

PL: On the Top Chef Emmy nomination: "[It] was a big fucking deal.”

Me: Erm…was that the deal?

PL: On life without her ex-husband, Salman Rushdie: "I'm really fucking sad."

Me: Bad for the guy you are with. It means you are sorrowful while at it, right?

PL: On her new cookbook: "Finishing the fucking book was like being in labor for two years!”

Me: Shouldn’t you have worn a condom?

PL: On hosting a dinner party: "I pulled this out of my ass."

Me: Is that why the guests called it shit?

PL: On an AIDS charity she supports: "…we’re doing a campaign and an event and you should buy a fucking table.”

Me: Are you trying to say if you do it on the table, then you ain’t get no AIDS, but AIDS gets aid?

PL: On telling the press if she had a boyfriend: "My husband would call fucking Reuters."

Me: So, everytime you and Salman were at it, he said “Let’s Reuters”?

PL: On a tabloid's coverage of her bra size: "…they said it was 36C. I said, 34C, motherfucker!”

Me: Does it not mean that mamma-obsessed tabloid fellows like it bigger?

PL: On her current living situation: "Now I’m staying in a fucking hotel with all my shit in storage."

Me: Are you saying you live like a stowaway in your own room?

The Bad Bed and Open Letter to Indian Manhood

The Americans did it with their phonetic spellings. India gobbled their burgers and even the Oxford-educated returned with American accents, forget those on a vacation rolling their tongues going khurrie while aching for a spicy curry.

I am in no hurry, but Kolkata schools have decided that the Oxford English dictionary can go take a walk and S can comfortably be replaced with a Z. But, then, why is His still spelled with S in the US? Why is it not ‘hiz’? And the Americans still Cough; they don’t Coff. And, when they do go round the corner, it is to the lavatory and not the lav-a-tory, which would make the last bit very British, innit? And they invent and work on scientific endeavours (they drop the O…which conveys they aren’t orgasmic about it, but that’s okay) in a laboratory and not a lab-ra-tory even if their Pavlov’s dog is a Labrador.

Back to the Indian schools, one principal said that the world has shrunk and there are more people shrinking into each other - well, he didn’t say this, but it means the same thing – we need to accept change. This means we have to accept words spelled the way they are pronounced.

This can have hilarious consequences in India. Now, we are talking about Bengalis who have a peculiar manner of transforming S into Sh and Sh into S. So Subhash is pronounced as Shubhas. The broad spectrum of the South is quite something else when the Tamilian states. “I yam underrstaanding”, would you understand what he has understood? And the Gujarati who has already got fame for merely having some snakes in the mole (snacks in the mall) and enjoyed rape in the hole (rap in the hall) would elicit more than phonetic censure. Up north, the Punjabi likes the Bad more than anything else; it isn’t just candid admission of wickedness…all he desires is a Bed. And when he remembers the Dad, it is more often than not the Dead.

I dread to think what could possibly happen if you let these pronunciations – mostly pronounced as pronounciations – into the American linguistic trail. It would result in chaos as consonants run over vowels that are trying to escape each other.

I am a bit finicky about spelling and the moment a Z sneaks into S territory, I organise it in a manner almost evangelical. It is my cosmic (there, I got you, we are the same) connecshun.

- - -

Yet, I do so love some good Indianisms, especially if they are not deliberate and smart attempts at pidgin. Since there has been some anger over my earlier blog on the Indian male and the foreign woman, I thought of formulating a letter in the language that is spoken by many and has a charm all its own…

My dearest Indian manhood…

I am only saying to you with utmost sincerity and openness of heart that I was not wanting to hurt you with tall tales of our mens and their likeness for white skin and light eyes. Whatfor you getting angry and angrier. I knowing that you are sometimes pavitra paapi, that is pure sinner, but you are inside like Amul butter and underwear banyaan (vest).

I know you are treating all womans with respect and consideration and showing Taj Mahal to say how big king made big monument where big queen Mumtaz ji is laid. You are sentimental and kind. Cash also, but you are nice. You like ma ka halwa, no, no, not making halwa out of mother but what mother makes for you, even if wife or daughter making, you say ma ka. For you all womans are like mothers only.

You are misunderstanding my motioning about foreign woman having trouble with Indian man. Some mens are like that only, some are not. What to do, not all fingers in hand are equal, some are long, some short, like other parts of bodies and other peoples parts of bodies. You getting me? No, no, I am not saying you must get me. You don’t want, say no straight. I not minding. I not even wanting your wanting. I am ok, you are ok. Live and let live. Wah, wah, what line.

You like line? Not queue for waiting for latest iPhone addition. Why addition and not subtraction or multiplication or division. I sound like mathematical genius, no? Hehe. I also feeling like that sometimes when I give grocer five rupees extra by mistake, I say with moving of hand, keep change. He say it is not change, it is rupees. Stupid illiterate fellow not knowing English.

So cutting long story short and making it dwarf, I want to say to you with full sincere wishes that I am only liking Indian manhood more than anything. I am swearing on Indian Constipation that I am not liking conspiracy theories and no foreign hand.

Happy? Ismail pliss… Good-good.

Countdown to the One Millionth Word?

This is among the worst instances of dumbing down. They are catering to everyone’s fantasy of concern - something from fashion, pop culture, the greens, music, sports; they are also trying to balance cultures and countries.

Tomorrow, June 10th, 2009 at 10:22 am (Stratford-on Avon Time) The Global Language Monitor in Austin, Texas will announce the winning word. I find the location rather quaint. Maybe these Texans just wanna go on vacation. Are you not all excited to know whether Indian women’s panties, “cuddies”, will get the green signal or will it be the real green McCoy, locally- produced “locavores” that are part of “slow food” which isn’t fast?

Now, there is something for fast moms called “octomom” that is, believe it or not, “the media phenomenon of the mother of the octuplets”. Huh? Do the sperms like consult newspapers and TV channels about how to hit different ova at the same time so that you get a few nice bundles of eight?

You can “de-friend” someone from your social network and if you send them steamy messages via email you will be “sexting” them. You may send steam and sauna in other ways, but there is no word for it.

The US President's popularity would be “Obamamania”, which is kind of lame, but what is surprising is “Mobama” – relating to the fashion-sense of the US First Lady. I thought it would be green, given her penchant for dresses and gowns that look like they are made from feathers or the colour of flora and fauna.

After the success of the film Slumdog Millionaire, two words from India figure. “Slumdog” would qualify as slang although it goes under the ‘politically incorrect’ category and “refers disparagingly to someone living in the slums”. If it is disparaging, then why is it qualifying at all? And “Jai ho” is a phrase taken from a song.

The issue is not with words from varied cultures; English language speakers and writers do employ Latin, French, Spanish phrases, and ancient English is nothing quite like we know it now.

My quarrel is with the limited idea of “the coming of age of English as the first, truly global language”. One does not need to blow trumpets to announce such an event. Languages evolve and those speaking it in different countries add bits and pieces of the local dialect. No one goes to check whether such a word has been anointed by the English dictionary or this gimmick.

But these Language Monitor people are serious:

“Due to the global extent of the English language, the millionth word is as likely to appear from India, China, or East Los Angeles as it is to emerge from Stratford-Upon-Avon, Shakespeare’s home town.”

This isn’t expanding the horizons but clasping them in a clinch to draw attention to their ethnicity. How does it add to a language?

The Chosen Word will depend on citations, usage, appearances in the media, the Net, blogs and networking sites. This is just to confirm the celebrity status of the words, irrespective of whether they make sense or not.

Poland’s contribution is about predatory lending practices, bankers behaving like gangsters. Every stud imagines he is a “bangster”. I don’t even want to think about some guy in a suit and tie ripping me off my money…even if he is one in a million.

We’d be poles apart.

Speaking tongues

The mere sound of a language I am not too familar with enamours me. Since human facial expressions do not vary much, although they may have different cultural meanings, it is the way words are used that make people stand apart from one another.

As one who dislikes uniformity, these differences make interactions dynamic. With a working knowledge of a few Indian languages, I do get by quite well. Foreign languages? Mostly some handy phrases that can get me into trouble if used out of context. I did learn a few cuss words in Farsi for a specifically noble purpose when I was young and did not fancy the idea of Iranian men giving the glad eye while running their fingers over prayer beads. Did I not tell you I hate multitasking?

School brought with it French. Except for fragrances and the French Revolution, we knew nothing about the country. Lingerie was pronounced as ling-a-ree. How on earth were we to know that the French employ their tongues deftly but rather sparingly? Therefore, while the deep deserves their reverence, words subsist on the tongue's whim to stay suspended in the mouth as the lips pucker or sneer to form sentences.

Among the Indian languages that gives nary a thought to phonetics or even vowels, Bangla would probably be right there ahead of the rest. The Bengali speaks as though with a mouthful of food that is swallowed rather than chewed.

Recently I received one of those notes that was addressed to "fellow Bongs"...after I had got over the surprise, I decided to write a verse on that mish-tick (mistake):

Aapne humein fellow Bong samjha, yeh tau ghalati hai
Unko poochhoge tau kahenge unnati hai
Shaayad yeh sirf meri aazmaish thi
Sach kahe tau Charulata* banne ki hamesha se khwaahish thi
Hum bhi moonh mein zabaan rakhte hai*
Magar Kali Devi jaisi hamari kahaan latakti hai
Ghaliban Ghalib tau humein halki si bhi gaali nahin denge
Jab Bangla bolne ki zidd mein tabah* ko tobah* keh denge

Tried transliterating it…

You called me a fellow Bong, that was an error
If you ask them, though, they’d say it makes me a winner
Perhaps this was to test me
For to be Charulata was always my dream
I too have a tongue in my mouth
But unlike Kali’s mine doesn’t stick out
Ghalib won’t curse me even in a whisper
As I transform the Urdu bang into a Bangla whimper

~FV

* That is a line from Ghalib

Charulata = the main protagonist in Satyajit Ray's eponymous film
tabah = destruction
tobah (ideally spelled as taubah, but deliberately not here) = repentance or used as an exclamation

This is a play on Bangla pronunciation which enunciates 'a' as 'o'.

A literal translation would have broken the rhythm.

But why all these explanations for a mere transgression?!