Nathaniel Ament-Stone wrote:
>
> I've heard so many conflicting stories about these two. Here are the
> major ones.
>
> First argument: They are one and the same, just written differently
> and split because of politics and religion.
Wrong!
>
> Second argument: They are similar, but written in different scripts,
> with different grammars and drastically different vocabulary (Hindi
> from Sanskrit and Urdu from Persian and Arabic)
Partially right. Urdu is close to Hindi as much as some other Indian
languages (eg. Punjabi, Gujarati or Bengali)
>
> Third argument: They have nothing in common and cannot understand each
> other.
Wrong!
>
> What is it??? Are they mutually intelligible or do they have no
> relation? Are they one in the same? What's the degree of difference?
> I'm really confused because I can't get the same answer from anybody.
It is like with some European languages that have some similarities but
are still different (Dutch, German and English or some eastern European
languages like Russian, Polish, Slovak and Czech). So over the years the
languages were influenced and mixed with other languages. Mainly by
large groups of people travelling from one place to another and taking
their language with them and thus changing other local languages.
There are many linguistic sites that can explain how languages developed
from historical view.
Risha
|
|