which language is urdu derived from?

^ oh thats interesting!

do you have any sources for that? I would like to know more
 
I find that many Urdu speakers are Multi-Lingual. Or I should say all of the Urdu speaking people I know are fluent in at least 3 or 4 languages.


Perhaps this is because Urdu is composed of the root words of so many different languages.
 
For some reason I have found it difficult to learn Urdu. My daughter and her husband spent 2 years trying to teach me and the only world I learned is kemah and I probably spell that wrong.


EDIT: Just got sent the correct spelling keema. I said I have trouble with learning Urdu. Sheesh even my little grand children speak it and all I can do is name hamburger.
 
Last edited:
^Maybe that's why. I found many Indian/Pakistani people very fluent in English. Even though I support Uncle Woodrow theory in being fluent in more than one language, it will be easier for someone to learn a language that he already has some of its words in his mother tongue


Now I start seriously thinking of learning Urdu, especially after noticing the amazing similarity between it and Arabic. There are a lot of Indian/Pakistani people here in the Arabian Gulf region who speak it
 
I just had a strange learning experience. I was reading up on the origin of English and saw that English is in the same family of languages that Farsi, Urdu and Hindi are in. I was always aware that English is an Indo-European language, but until now it never sunk in that like Urdu it has some roots in Hindi. Although Farsi, Hindi and Urdu have stronger ties and while being Indo-European they are more specifically Indo-Iranian. Small world.

For a better explanation check this site:


http://www.anglik.net/englishlanguagehistory.htm
 
interesting, it appears that population size/clout is what determines the spread of language, with so many populations in Asia-Chinese, Paki's/Indians, Arabs etc- increasing, it appears that most people will be multi lingual in the short-medium run, with no single language dominating.
 
alcurad said:
interesting, it appears that population size/clout is what determines the spread of language, with so many populations in Asia-Chinese, Paki's/Indians, Arabs etc- increasing, it appears that most people will be multi lingual in the short-medium run, with no single language dominating.
Click to expand...

With more international contacts, in a very short time it will be essential for every body to be multi-lingual. But if history stays consistent the trend will be for the most used languages to combine and reach the point of being interchangable, a very large vocabulary language, using the words of the languages it comes from.
 
^indeed, in the long term I don't believe humans will even 'look' like us let alone use our archaic ways or speech.

but if history is to be a witness, then after every 'merging, there is 'breaking' as well.

I mean language is simply a method to exchange information and make sense of/shape the world, so indeed some parts will irreversibly change as we learn more of the world around us and unite-politically, culturally and in other ways- but individual modes of expression will probably emerge/evolve as well, humans being still humans.

btw good points bro woodrow :)
 
Woodrow: So interesting to know that you have kids and grandkids who speak urdu, mashaAllah!

Urdu, like someone here said earlier, was used as a combined language for the army in the subcontinent, the language of the 'lashkar' as they used to say. It was a combination of Persian,Hindi,Arabic and Sanskrit. Till today there are many words which are common to persian, urdu, hindi and arabic.
Though nowadays 50% of it is just english. Urdu has lost its touch honestly. People in Pakistan insist on using English words even when there are urdu words available for certain things and the urdu words are fastly gettin wiped out.
 
the difference of language is from the signs of Allah just like the difference in colour

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ خَلْقُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلَافُ أَلْسِنَتِكُمْ وَأَلْوَانِكُمْ إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِلْعَالِمِينَ​


'from amongst his signs is the creation of the heavens and earth and difference in your languages and colours. In there are indeed signs for those who have knowledge!
 
alcurad said:
^indeed, in the long term I don't believe humans will even 'look' like us let alone use our archaic ways or speech.

but if history is to be a witness, then after every 'merging, there is 'breaking' as well.

I mean language is simply a method to exchange information and make sense of/shape the world, so indeed some parts will irreversibly change as we learn more of the world around us and unite-politically, culturally and in other ways- but individual modes of expression will probably emerge/evolve as well, humans being still humans.

btw good points bro woodrow :)
Click to expand...

True as languages are used, local differences come into play, Todays slang becomes tomorrows accepted. The changes in English are very evident when you look at the differences in British, Canadian and Australian English. Or even here the differences between Northern and Southern American and even some very specific differences by States such as the unique accents and slang found in Texas, Maine, New York, New Jersey and Vermont.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top