Talk:Deccani language

India: Hyderabad Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Hyderabad (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was last assessed in April 2012.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Sure...Dakkhini & Dakhani are one & the same ... but Hyderabadi Urdu mau be merged with Urdu.

Hyderabadi Urdu should be merged with Urdu -- Hyderabadi Urdu is a dialect of Urdu and this information should be listed under the "Dialects" section of Urdu.

Dieresis 15:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC) All languages are dialects. The question is how to treat two dialects that are distinct but also closely related. How closely are they related and how does the distance between them compare to other sets of related dialects? Whether or not the articles are merged, it is important to recognize that these two dialects are linguistically distinct. For example, Hyderabadi Urdu speakers pronounce ق as خ and northern Urdu speakers find this practice passing strange.[reply]

Merging with Dhakni

Hyderabadi Urdu definitely has its place in history. In fact in the evolution and development of Urdu Hyderabadi Urdu has played a major role. It has its unique place and unique literature that is distinguishable and distinguished. I would state in the nature of Hyderabadi Urdu grammar the distinction of male and female verb ending has taken the same form. For example both male and female would say "Main kha'na' kha raha'hun." My humble opinion is to enrich the page further rather than merging it. Thanks. --Omer Farook 01:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a native speaker of Dakhni from Chennai. I believe that Hyderabadi Urdu can be a sub dialect (if such a thing exists) of Dakhni. There are a lot of differences between Dakhni spoken in various states. They have absorbed the characteristics of their native states. Therefore, I am in agreement with Omer that this article must be maintained and not be merged with Hyderabadi Urdu. Thanks, --Afroze.sahib (talk) 01:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dakhni is actually dialect of Dakhini which people of Karnataka speak.

Hyderabadis speak a dialect called Dakani (pronounced daccani)

This language has got nothing to do with Urdu.

In fact Urdu is actually a dialect of Dakhini Kizznyc (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lingua franca of South India ?

A scentence in the third parapraph says "Dakhini is the lingua franca of the Muslims of South India". This is clearly wrong. How about changing this to something that refers to the geographies where Dakhini is spoken ? The muslims of Southern Tamil Nadu, the Muslims of Malabar, all spoke different languages than Dakhini. -- Sudarshanhs 20:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dieresis 10:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC) I agree. This language may be spoken in various places, but I don't think most South Indian Muslims speak it.[reply]

--Afroze.sahib (talk) 00:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC) Most of the muslims in Kerala speak Malayalam and Tamil is still the majority language among muslims in Tamilnadu. So, it is false to claim that Dakhni Urdu is the lingua franca of South Indian muslims. However, it must be noted that Dakhni is the only language spoken across Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. There are urdu words in dakhni but this does not mean it should be merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mma200us (talk • contribs) 00:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bangalori Urdu is totally different. It's never recommended to be merged with dakhni urdu or hyderabadi urdu. Similar to Hyderabadi Urdu, it also has its own terms such as Sabaa (or) Sabaan for tomorrow. Many such words they use when talking with each other. It would be nice to see a page with its terms in a different page, If you want, I can collect it for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakeemhere (talk • contribs) 13:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think it shuould be merged. I am from TN and the URDU we speak is 40% different from Hyderabdi URDU which is a little more refined than Dhakni though not as refined as Lucknowi URDU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.142.92.201 (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can collectively say that Dakhini is an ethnic group, and there are some non-muslims as well. Kizznyc (talk) 07:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's changed to Dakhini Muslims now Kizznyc (talk) 07:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have a lot of knowledge of my Dakhini ethnicity and a high IQ please advise because only through people can we remove the misunderstanding that we speak Urdu. Kizznyc (talk) 07:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Number of speakers?

Are there statistics that can be added here? MrZaius^talk 04:10, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hoping that happens but until Government of India considers south speakers to be speaking Urdu which is a mistake we cannot have any census Kizznyc (talk) 07:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu in Aurangabad

I Don't agree of merger. It has been suggested by some one to merge the article Urdu in Aurangabad with Dakhni. May i know the reason for the same ? As without giving any reasons one cannot effect a merger. IXU79 (talk) 09:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge. The article specifically relates to the city of Aurangabad. Therefore needs a seprate identity. Fuwad ca (talk) 16:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That exactly is the question. What is so special about Aurangabad? Maquahuitl^talk! 03:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it need to be "so special" to be on wikipedia? Is their any such rule? The article is about the contribution of Aurangabad to the development of Urdu language and about Urdu in Aurangabad city over ages and thats enough a reason to have a seprate article.Fuwad ca (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The question has been answered in a different context though. Here is a link to that discussion.Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Urdu_in_Aurangabad

I again repeat what I have said before about this article:

I think the article highlights the contribution of Aurangabad city to the development of Urdu language and culture. It traces the history of the language in the Deccan and since Aurangabad was the capital of the Deccan first under the Delhi sultanate, the Mughal Empire, and then under the Nizam, its contribution to the development of the language should be recognized.

As it is, there are very few and sketchy articles on Urdu Language, therefore I request the administrators to keep this article as it helps a reader in increasing his knowledge about Urdu language. It also adds to the resource on Urdu language available on Wikipedia.

Also many prominent Urdu poet and writers specific to Aurangabad who do not find coverage on Wikipedia are covered in this article, like: Balaji Trimbak Naik Zarra, Mirza Daud, Muhammad Mah Mehram, Arifuddin Ajiz, Dargahquli Khan Dargah, Fazli, Sarim, Lala Lachmi-narian Shafiq, Shaikh Chand and Yusuf Nazim. With so many writer and poets (not covered by specific articles) from Aurangabad I think the article does justice to the topic and does not require a merger.

(Note: the user is also the creator of this article.)

IXU79 (talk) 17:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, First, dont merge the article Urdu in Aurangabad with Deccani/Dakhini, and the merger template should be removed. The reasons why I dont support the idea of merger: The title of the article and the topics discussed in the article says about the development of Urdu in Aurangabad and its contribution. Where as it does not says much about the Urdu of Aurangabad.--Omer123hussain (talk) 09:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, As there is very less difference between each other, It looks logical if we could merge Hyderabadi Urdu and Bangalori Urdu with Deccani Language by creating a different sections. and rename the articles Hyderabadi Urdu as Urdu in Hyderabad, India and Bangalori Urdu as Urdu in BangAlore.--Omer123hussain (talk) 09:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read what I have added about Wali Deccani. I admit although he was single handedly responsible for the modern Dakhini, the old Dakhini which is seen in Kadam Rao Padam Rao and Kitab E Nawras goes to show Dakhini is not of Aurangabad Kizznyc (talk) 07:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need lot of attention

Honestly guy's need lot of homework to be done for this article, though there are many forms of deccani spoken in the region. It all need to be covered in this article. Well hope for the best and make it possible.--Omer123hussain (talk) 08:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have made quite significant changes but I don't know how to put it in which section please modify as you see fit. Kizznyc (talk) 07:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who is reverting my Changes?

I have gone through a lot of trouble asking my grandparents and elders and edited from a phone and not saved the text anywhere.

If you delete my edits when they are accurate how is it fair?

Please don't do that anonymous person Kizznyc (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it Hindustani or not?

The article both claims that Deccani is a transplanted variety of Dehlavi and that it's an independent language. It goes back and forth between these two contradictory claims. I don't know if there's more than one Deccani, or if sources disagree on its ancestry, but this should be cleared up. — kwami (talk) 08:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is a transplanted variety of Dehlavi. Anything that says otherwise should be removed, or at least, questioned.

I just cleaned up yesterday some vague claims to the effect that it was "Urdu". "Urdu" got invented when literary Dakhini came back to Delhi after the Bahamani Sultanate was deposed. Urdu is a Persianised Dakhini/Dehlavi.

It was only after Wali, a poet of Dakhini, arrived in Delhi that Hindustani began to develop as a literary language in the North. Wali used what is known as Rekhta/Hindi and showed that it was capable of great poetry. Rekhta means 'scattered' and implies that it had not yet so much been Persianized as happened later. It is known as the earliest form of Urdu-Hindustani poetical speech. Urdu as a language name occurs for the first time in 1776 in a couplet by the poet Mashafi (1750—1824). However, the use of Urdu referring to camp, court, or city (Zaban-e-Urdu or Zaban-e-Urdu-e-Shahi or Zaban-e-Urdu-e-Mualla) had been current since 1560.^[1]

It is better not to use the term "Hindustani" for any of these languages. It was "Dehlavi" or "Delhi Hindavi", which was adopted by Deccan and became a lingua franca in the South. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Dua, H. (2010), "Hindustani", in Keith Brown; Sarah Ogilvie (eds.), Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World, Elsevier, p. 498, ISBN 978-0-08-087775-4

@kwami: There seems to be some conflation with the "Deccan language" (currently a redirect to Dakhini). Ethnologue has a "Deccan" language [1] (dialects: Kalvadi and Bijapuri) which they say "may be the same as Dakhini dialect of Urdu". The ISO-code dcc maps to Glottolog deccan1239 which again lists Kalvadi and Bijapuri as dialects (Dakhini is dakh1244). Hammarström only gives three sources. The Bailey festschrift is bot assigned, and contains no information about Deccan. I have no access to Ferguson & Gumperz (1960). Grierson describes "Bijapur" and "Dharwar" (= Kalvadi) as dialects of Marathi. –Austronesier (talk) 10:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you. I'll try to fix it up in the next day or two, unless one of you gets to it first. — kwami (talk) 11:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I split off the Deccan language article, though I'm not sure it's a distinct language. — kwami (talk) 07:12, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dehlavi gone

Kwamikagami, please check this edit. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edits

Hi Omer123hussain. I reverted your recent edits for the following reasons:

1. The relationship between Banda Nawaz (Gesu Daraz) and Dakhini is dubious, it seems like some works like the Miraj-al Ashiqin may be misattributed to him. This is discussed in Digby pg 334 and Shaheed & Shahid pg 99. Both these sources are used in the Deccani article.

2. From the sources both you and I have provided it doesn't seem evident that the Bahmanis patronised Deccani. Deccani may have grown during their rule due to Sufis but it appears Persian was the language the court favoured the most. This is why I felt mentioning one of the Bahmani rulers by name was unnecessary.

Open to discussion on this, thanks. Gowhk8 (talk) 19:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits,

Banda Nawaz (Gesu Daraz) and Dakhini, may be it is dubious, but there is much possiblity that he wrote in deccani as he use to interact wiht locals and preach them; as per attached sources. Any way we can mention both sides in the article, that is what encyclopedia is about.

Obviously it was not court language of Bahmanis, but there patronization need to be mention afterall the dialact/language florished during there region, infact they invited sufi's to be setteled and supported there cause and work in there region is also a kind of patronization. So bahmanis need a mention.--Omer123hussain (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Dua, H. (2010), "Hindustani", in Keith Brown; Sarah Ogilvie (eds.), Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World, Elsevier, p. 498, ISBN 978-0-08-087775-4

[1]