My understanding is the main difference between Hindi and Urdu is that Hindi is in Devanagari script and Urdu is in a modified form of Arabic Script, and they can understand each others spoken language with ease, whereas Moroccans and Iraqis cannot understand each other at all. Why is this?
In: 112
How we divide various groups of dialects into languages has often been heavily influenced by modern ideas of nationalism and the emergence of nation states. In the past, most languages (aside from some liturgical languages and a few other exceptions) weren’t standardized, and languages tended to have far more dialectal variations. People rarely communicated with other people outside of their local area, so there was little need to classify languages and dialects.
When nation states began to emerge, national leaders wanted to create a sense of unity among their people, so they turned to language as a unifying force. National identity became closely tied to one’s language, so politicians would often try to promote common standard languages while discouraging minority languages and non-standard dialects. Those trying to promote minority groups would encourage their group to rally around their language/dialect. Those who wanted to create a sense of unity between separate but related groups would downplay the differences between their languages/dialects (ex. Chinese varieties, Arabic, Serbo-Croatian, etc). Those trying to divide related groups would emphasize the differences between their languages/dialects (ex. Hindi and Urdu, Serbian and Croatian, etc). Sometimes, the divisions were arbitrary and dialect continuums were split up by political borders (ex. the Scandinavian languages, German and Dutch, etc).
In the examples listed above, the political situation of the 20th Century created divisions between Hindi and Urdu speakers while encouraging unity among Arabic speakers. Under British rule, Hindi and Urdu were typically regarded as one language and the terms were used interchangably (alongside Hindustani). However, when India and Pakistan were partitioned, decades of political hostility followed, and each country tried to differentiate itself from the other. India labelled the language as Hindi and placed an emphasis on its Sanskrit vocabulary, while Pakistan labelled it as Urdu and emphasized its Perso-Arabic vocabulary (though some Indians do identify as Urdu speakers and vice versa). The different scripts also reflect the religious division between the two countries. Conversely, the Arab World experienced a push toward unity and commonality in the mid-20th Century thanks to the growth of Arab nationalism and pan-Arabism. The various Arabic varieties had always been linked together with a common literary language (Classical Arabic), but the politics of the era and greater contact amongst foreign Arabic speakers encouraged many to see the various spoken varieties as one common Arabic language for the Arab peoples.
Ultimately, political factors tend to be the biggest motivator in how languages and dialects are separated when dividing lines are murky. Sometimes, the political situation encourages people to treat two forms of speech as dialects of a single language. Sometimes, politics encourages people to treat them as separate languages. Sometimes, two dialects of a language can be reclassified as separate languages with very little change to the dialects themselves, or sometimes the reverse may happen. In an ideal world, languages would be classified purely by their linguistic similarity, but it is often difficult to separate languages from the identities of their speakers.
Latest Answers