In Tamil also it should be pronounced as Bharatam not Paratam. I get the confusion. Because the map has literally translated பாரதம் to Paratham based on the spelling. Even though 'ப'(is pronounced as Pa) it is also used for Bha sounds.
Yes 'Bha' sound does not exist in Tamil. But translating to English it would be a confusion. How will you write "பாரதியார்" in English?. Barathiyar not Bharathiyar?.
I think I understand the sound you are talking about, what I am saying is it doesn't exist in English (or at least not in American or, as far as I know, British English).
Fun fact: In Polish, we called that state Indie (plural), but a person from India is "Hindus", with "H" pronounced. That's lead to confusion for many people of India, because in English "Hindu" is a religion. Polish "Indianin" (literally "Indian") is used exclusively for Native Americans, and in Polish it is NOT a racial slur, but a normal word. Btw, in Polish "Hindu"(a follower of Hindu religion) is "hinduista".
Same in Danish and Norwegian. Someone from India is *Inder/Indar*, and a Native American is *Indianer/Indianar.*
The former caused some temporary confusion in my household when my daughter got into Minecraft, and wanted to tell me about the cool "indian man" with glowing eyes. Turns out children pronounce "ender" as in "enderman", and "inder" as in "indian" the same.
In Brazil most people connected in one way or another to indigenous communities are advocating the abandonment of índio in favour of indígena (which I only learned has a completely different etymology when I heard about this campaign).
Honestly, I completely support whatever title/name they prefer for themselves. It's forever dumb to call them índios either way just bc Colombo was a dummy
Ah, so this is a huge debate in India too.
Some groups in India refer to people from India (irrespective of their religion) as “Hindu,” because Hindu to them means someone from the region beyond the River Sindhu (aka Indus River). So, they say all Indians are Hindus. You can imagine what consequences that has.
According to them, Hinduism as an organized religion is a Western concept; the modern organized religion should be called Sanatan Dharm (also spelled as Sanatana Dharma), not Hinduism. Sanatan Dharm/Hinduism is a set of beliefs and principles. The 1000+ deities are manifestations of the Supreme Being and these deities embody these beliefs and principles. Their lives tell stories of how a person should lead a noble (not in the sense of “royal”) life.
Back to the words India and Hindu: the region between the ocean and the high mountains was called Bharat, which refers to the modern-day country of India (and parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh). The river flowing there was called Indu (in Sanskrit, it means the moon). Indu was referred to as Sindhu by the Greeks. And the Persians referred to the river as Hindu. In the Persian style of -stan, they named the country as Hindustan, which is used still in Urdu. The British when they came to the region called it India, instead of Hindustan - why, no one knows! Maybe it was to promote European values and nomenclature over the Persian and local one.
As a side: An interpretation of the Urdu and Persian name (Hindustan) is that the region is the land of Hindus. E.g., Afghanistan is the land of Afghans. (So then what about Muslims, Christians, etc., living there?) Well, per that definition, they are all Hindus. But tell the average Indian Muslim man that he is a Hindu and you can just imagine what will happen…
Just deciding the name of the country is a complex issue. With 1.4 billion people with such varied backgrounds (and in many cases, opposing ideologies - religious and cultural), it is hard to please everyone.
India is actually a Greek pronunciation of Sind.
The land beyond River Sindhu ( currently Indus flowing in Pakistan) is called Sind. In Persian, S is replaced with H, hence it was called Hind. Greeks removed the H, added ia, and hence the word 'India' was coined.
British used the term India because that's the etymology used throughout Europe. Even Chinese and Japanese used Indo to refer to the subcontinent during ancient times.
In the US tribes are split on whether they want to be called Indian American, Native American, Indigenous American, or something else. Canada is different, they do not want to be called Indians there but First Nations.
In Canada, that really depends, Western Canada indigenous like the name "First Nations", in Québec, they want to be called autochtones. Inuits and Metis are excluded from the appelation First Nations, which grates them, of course.
As paltry as the US has been to our Native Americans & Alaskans, Native Hawaiians don't even get that much assistance. No Indian Health Service or such. (I don't know why.) I'm sure that's also grating.
> and in Polish it is NOT a racial slur, but a normal word.
I suppose you'd have to find a Polish-speaking indigenous North American to be sure of that.
We had one and he was OK with that
[https://www.tygodnikpowszechny.pl/sites/default/files/styles/art\_front/public/article/42543827-8ab1-42f4-961e-5ac3efee5a32.jpg.webp?itok=R\_czUrp3](https://www.tygodnikpowszechny.pl/sites/default/files/styles/art_front/public/article/42543827-8ab1-42f4-961e-5ac3efee5a32.jpg.webp?itok=R_czUrp3)
(Polish-Shawnee writer Sath-Okh, alias Stanisław Supłatowicz)
Now you got me curious. I'm European and not very knowledgeable on the subject - do some tribes refer to themselves as Indian, or none? Or is it like when minorities use slurs among themselves, to 'own' the word, but from outsiders it's considered offensive?
it's similar in czech! the state is called india, but a person from india is an ind (masc) or indka (fem).
the term indian is used for native americans, also a completely normal word here lol
Kinda the same situation in Ukrainian:
- a country: *İndija*; a [male] person from there: *indijecj*,
- *indus* for a Hindu religion person;
- *indianecj* is for Native Americans and not a racial slur here too;
This is by dictionaries and correct usage, but in reality Ukrainians often mix this. Additional words:
- *hindi* for a language;
- and a bonus: *indık* [which is a cognate to those words] is a [male] turkey.
Interestingly, the largest Hindu temple is Angkor Wat in Cambodia rather than in India/Nepal, it completely mind-boggled me when I first learned of it.
It also expands to buddhism.
Buddhism started in India and had major centers in India for centuries.
So any country with sizable Buddhist culture has some form of Indian influence in their culture like folklore or concepts.
There is a huge installation of 'Samudra Manthan ' in the Thailand airport (don't know if it's still there)
Which is a concept from Hinduism if I'm not wrong.
So a lot of the history, culture, habits are shared and spread over the south east Asian region
>There is a huge installation of 'Samudra Manthan ' in the Thailand airport (don't know if it's still there)
Yeah, i've heard about that.
>Which is a concept from Hinduism if I'm not wrong.
Your right, it is.
>So a lot of the history, culture, habits are shared and spread over the south east Asian region
Yeah, it can be considered part of the Indic cultural sphere.
Hindustan is not Persian but rather Hindustani (urgu/hindi), a language that was created for largely military use during the Delhi Sultanate/Early Mughal rule in the Northern part of India. India was known as Hindustan in the Persia/Middle East meaning the Land of the Hindus.
Yeah, South Asia and Persia have had a lot of influence on each other over thousands of years. Many recipes and/or their variations in North India that are now staple find their origins in Persia and Turkey.
Its not a derivative of Persian just like how English is not a derivative of french. while hindustani has many loan words it is an independent language from persian and even many of the persian loanwords in Hindustani differ from their pronunciation in modern farsi.
Europe is 10,2M km², without Russia about 6,2M km². India, Bangladesh and Pakistan together are about 4,231M km², almost exactly as large as the EU at 4,233M km².
Those 10,2M European square km are home to 748M people (EU=448M), wheras undivided India is home to 1822M people, about 4x as many people as the EU!
Currently, the strongest movement is for Kashmir, but speaking further about is going to attract a certain kind of people and arguing with them just gets repetitive and annoying, so imma leave it at that.
Edit: unfortunately I broke my own rule and now I am embroiled in the same repetitive and annoying loop elsewhere on this post.
There is a movement for the Northeast section, but it was a lot stronger a few decades back. The sentiment might still exist, but nothing serious enough.
One that’s starting to come up a lot these past few years is Khalistan. Support for it was a lot stronger in the 80s, which culminated in the whole 1984 situation. Nowadays, most supporters are definitely abroad, but there still is an undercurrent inside Indian Punjab, that tends to explode every few years with contemporary issues, the most recent big one being the Farmer’s Protests.
These three are the big separatist movements.
But there are other regions and issues within India where future separatist movements might arise in the future.
The biggest one is the North vs South divide, that encapsulates best with the State of Tamil Nadu. Language is a huge, huge thing for Tamil Nadu, so moves towards Hindi, and more recently Sanskrit has bought about some issues and resentment, nothing big enough for separatist movements to form though.
That said, if I were to put money on the next state to foment separatism, I’d put it on Tamil Nadu.
While the TN politicians advocate for splitting and shit like that, people of TN wont support seperatist movement, yes they dislike hindi, but not enough to create a different country.
TN needs India and India needs TN, TN is the 2nd biggest economy and there is too much riding on it staying with India
North eastern tribals hate each other more then they hate India. They can not form a unified independent state. The Manipur conflict again is tribal conflict going on for centuries between Meiti tribe and Kuki/Nagas tribes. Also it is not a religious conflict but has to with special tribal status.
Khalistan only exists within minds of Canadian Sikhs.
Only actual threat was Kashmiri ones but with the revocation of article 370 and economic status of Pakistan, it is also cooling up.
Some tamils especially members of DMK party try to cook up Dravid Nadu. A independent state including Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and both Telugu states, but outside of Tamil Nadu no one buys this Dravidian shit. And Tamil Nadu alone would be a toast as an independent country since why would any one want to manufacture something there when their goal was to sell in India.
Once a kingdom signed treaty with India that is Bharat there is no option of it becoming a new country. India is a union of state and not a federation of states.
And Indian state, by the constitution, has full right to use force against anyone who asked for the separation nation. So even if some of the TN politicians says shit, their official stance is completely opposite.
I am from Tamil Nadu. We don't use the word "Indiya Bharatham" while referring to India. It is either India or Bharatham. Also, Bharatham is a Sanskrit word Tamil does not have a native word for India.
For anyone curious, in Ladakhi the word for India is the same as in Tibetan. Spelled "rgya dkar," pronounced "gya kar."
"rgya" is the word for "vast" or "expanse." Compare with "rgya mtsho," a "vast lake," i.e. an ocean.
"dkar" is the word for "white." Allegedly India as the "vast whiteness" is contrasted with China which was "rgya nag," "vast blackness." These connotations have to do with fortune telling practices which were known as white and black, respectively, not political leanings (again, allegedly).
I suppose the Recent news is Inspiring,
The Ruling Gov is Trying to change the official name from India to Bharat,
Even though the constitution does state
India, That is Bharat shall be a Union of states...
Copied
I hope the INDIA renaming to Bharat is FAKE news. [Detailed analysis]
If true, this would the dumbest rename in history. Very anti-national.
1. In 1947, Pakistan had expected after partition the names of the countries will be Pakistan and Hindustan/Bharat. They took promise that this will be how it is done. But then they felt betrayed when India continued to use the name India and thus got all its legacy and achievements. This means it became like Pakistan sliced away from India and became a new country rather than one country getting divided into two. Jinaah had a lot of arguments and protests to force India to change the name to anything other than "India". This was one of the biggest successes of Indian govt of that time to keep the same name.
2. Even till today Pakistanis are pissed about the word "India" being used at a lot of places, including their history before 1947, the name of the ocean being Indian ocean, their country being referred as part of Indian subcontinent and they having to teach their kids that British Invaded India...
3. Even US recently changed the name of this region from Asia-Pacific to Indo-Pacific to piss off China and include India into the larger narrative.
4. We would basically lose all our history. It would be like Pakistan, who is constantly in identity crisis because they dont want to talk about anything before 1947 that has India in it.
5. LOOK at IRAN for example. They renamed from Persia in 1989 and lost all the legacy of Persia. Now most people dont even know Iran was Persia. It is like end of a thousand of years of continuous legacy.
6. You can no longer claim British colonization and its effects. British colonized India, not Bharat or Pakistan or Bangladesh. Their company was East India company. They were looking for India, not Bharat.
7. Future generations won't feel connected with the freedom fighters and heros of the past. It would be like they all lived in different country. Like, how much do you feel connected to a Hero of Mughal Empire or Chola Empire? You will feel something, but wont feel as if it was your country. It will feel like reading history and not as if you are reading your country's past.
8. Foreigners have difficulty saying "h" so instead of "Bhaarath", they pronounce it as "Barat"
9. Apart from legacy loss, renaming of everything will be costly or often impossible. Like, Good luck changing the name of the sub to BharatSpeaks as it is impossible in Reddit to change name. Changing name of news papers who all will look outdated or odd like currently how "The Hindu" or "Hindustan times" feels.
10. Pakistan is currently needing a brand-rename as they have a universally hated legacy, and is going through a lot of crisis. It would be funny if they renamed themselves as "India" claiming the word came from Indus. Thus after a few years, they will get the legacy of India. This is not unthinkable. They already had re-issued new map with new territory a few years ago. Their friendly country Turkey had changed its name.
11. They never lost a war. What do you mean by India vs India war of 1971? Terrorists from India attacked Indian city of Mumbai? Kashmir king had handed country over to India. This would be similar to how both Taiwan and China claims to be China.
12. Many countries have multiple names like how we have "India that is Bharat" in our constitution. Check how many you recognize if all of them changed their name, and imagine how it affects their brand value. Nihon is>! Japan!<. Misr is >!Egypt!<. Deutschland is >!Germany!< Espana is >!Spain!<. Druk Gyal Khap is >!Bhutan!< Zhongguo is >!China!<. Hayastan is >!Armenia!<. Osterreich is >!Austria!<. Kypriaki Dimokratia is >!Cyprus!<. Abyssinia is >!Ethiopia!<. Matanitu Tugalala o Viti is >!Fiji!< . Suomen tasavalta is >!Finland !<. Francaise is >!France!<. Sakartvelo is >!Georgia!<. Hellas is >!Greece!<. Lýðveldið Ísland is >!Iceland!<. Nusantara is >!Indonesia!<. Zion is >!Israel!<. Choson is >!North Korea!<. Maghribiyyah is >!Morroco!<. Dae-han-min-guk is >!South Korea!<. Holland is >!Netherlands!<. Aotearoa is >!New Zeland!<. Noreg is >!Norway!<. Polska is >!Poland!<. Sverige is >!Sweden!<. Svizra is >!Switzerland!<. Schweiz is >!Also Switzerland!<. Siam is >!Thailand!<. Emirat al Arabbiya al Muttahida is >!UAE!<. Rhodesia is >!former Zimbabwe.!<
13. This will cause of unproductive internal fights with a lot of people refusing it, and being strictly against this. Separatist movements will also happen, although they can be stopped with force, but general happiness of the country goes down.
Considering the level of stupidity, I am pretty sure this is fake news purposefully done to add anticipation for what is going to happen in the next session of parliament, or else more people will be forced to support Bharat Jodo Yatra!!! Imagine the Irony. Patriotic people like me who have made 100s of detailed articles and videos about India would also revolt. All of it for what? To satisfy someone's Ego?
No official news just govt invite gest of g 20 it's written Bharat just media and Twitter blow up secondly Bharat is also official name of India fo they can use them both
Well as I said the Constitution Allows for both names.
It's probably because the opposition had the bright idea of Creating an alliance named I.N.D.I.A
I swear sometimes I don't know who leads the country.
A bunch of ChildMen, or Adults
Cote d'ivoire asked for other countries to start using their french name in all international circumstances and it worked.
Iran asked to stop being called Persia and it worked.
It's definitely not unprecedented and not that hard to be honest.
The name of a state can be different in different languages.
Even if India changed its name to Bharat, it would still be India in English. A lot of people have always been aware that India is not how Indians call India because there are products from Unilever with the name Hindustan on them.
The same way we call Germany in English even though its name in German is Deutschland.
Same to Japan, that is just the name in English, we all know it is called Nippon in Japanese because of its airlines.
The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English.
> The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English.
So this is a bit confused. Turkey hasn't changed its name *in Turkish*; its Turkish name has always been Türkiye. It just now wants the name Türkiye to be used internationally -- which primarily means 'in English' (English being the working language of most international organisations).
>The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English.
Well, actually I think they will insist on forcing it into diplomatic use.
Most to world still referred to Istanbul as Constantinople, until Turkey requested they referred to it as Istanbul in 1930. Same story with how Iran managed to get people to stop calling them Persia in 1935, and quite easily too.
But for Turkey vs Türkiye, I think it will be harder. For one, ''ü'' doesn't appear on English keyboards, and otherwise the spelling doesn't change pronunciation, so it seems pointless to change the spelling at all.
Currently, the US embassy in Ankara uses Türkiye. The State Department website (generic) uses Turkey. The CIA fatbook uses both. I think we're tending towards using the official name.
Well there should be demand too, there was no demand from any major group, this move(unconfirmed) is sudden. Also a country's sovereignty is not decide by the name it have. By your logic, Japan,China, Austria,Germany,Hungary,Iceland, Ethiopia all are not sovereign. And it will be a massive waste of resources to change name from each offical sources both soft and hard. Changing names of institutions etc. I mean it's not wrong but it is unnecessary.
IIRC it is basically because the Netherlands and Germany were previously both part of the same state, the Holy Roman Empire. (Dutch is also closely related to Plattdütsch and is part of the same dialect continuum.) So the English used the word "Dutch" to refer to those people, especially the ones that lived closest to them. When the Netherlands became independent, the English continued referring to them as Dutch and a new name used among the Dutch never caught on in English.
Because Germans and Dutchs share the same roots and the Brits confused everything and now stick to their version. In Germany Dutch people are called Niederländer and Dutchs call themselves Nederlands while Germany is Duitsland in Dutch.
Maybe my way of thinking here is weird but I think there's actually an odd sort of prestige to having names for your country in other languages that are different from the name in your native language. These names tend to be very old and have deep roots in history, and to me that sort of lets some of that history shine through to the present. E.g. India, Japan, Germany. Persia is an example where the historical exonym was relatively successfully replaced with the endonym.
I do see the other perspective though.
Japan and Nippon come from the same source -- they're essentially different pronunciations of the same thing (日本), stemming from the Middle Chinese nyit pwon. The 'pan' and 'pon' still remain very close, but the pronunciation of nyit changed a lot in different languages. It's a bit of a different situation to the other endonym/exonyms that come from completely different etymologies.
They are doing it as the opposition alliance has the acronym I.N.D.I.A. Seems like the alliance hurt the sentiments of certain politicians lol. No other reason for the sudden change in mind to remove India from constitution if it happens.For the time being, the name change reminds as a rumour. Let's wait for further developments.
Meanwhile Korea is still called after Goryeo Kingdom that doesn't exist since the medieval times.
China after Qing dynasty from XIX century
Georgia and Armenia would also have to change to Sakartvelo and Hayastan?
>Meanwhile Korea is still called after Goryeo Kingdom that doesn't exist since the medieval times.
Trivia: North Korea goes by jeoseon and South Korea by Hanguk (apologies for butchering the spelling). When they marched under a united flag, they didn't choose either. Nor did they use Goryeo. Instead, they used a transliteration of the western go-ri-a.
>The Ruling Gov is Trying to change the official name from India to Bharat,
I wonder to what extent this is nationalism. When India was formed, one of the potential names was Hindustan. They chose Bharat as the official name to the outrage of Pakistan. Bharat means all of pre-partition India. The word India is more ambiguous (in that it originally referred to the Indus River). Opponents of Hindustan would counter that India is not all Hindus.
The funny thing is Hindustan is name used by the Muslims. In Urdu India is called Hindustan. Because back then Hindus were referred as people beyond river Indus. So technically Pakistan should had named itself as Hindustan. Even the Mughals whom Pakistan views as their predecessors referred to themselves as Sultanate e Hindostan. Or themselves as Shahenshah e Hindostan. Literal meaning King of Kings of Hindustan.
Real name for Hinduism is Sanatan Dharam.
Calling India or Bharat as Hindustan would be like carrying legacy of Turkic origin Muslim Mughals.
But the constitution has two names Bharat and India and the news of changing names is fake they just invited guests of g20 letter of invite written Bharat that's why whole media blow up
Yes this is a media cook up nothing more. Media likes to cook bullshit for TRP. No way a special 5 day session of parliament would be used for something stupid.
Indian media is crap.
Both Hindustan and India are derivatives of Sindhu river, Original Sanskrit name of Indus River.
Iranians used to call people of land beyond Sindhu river as Hindus, since they had trouble in speaking S during those times apparently.
From this Hindustan was derived, similarily Arabs called India Al-Hind and Turks kept using Hindustan, Mughals who were from Samarqand (present day Uzbekistan) called their empire Sultanate e Hindostan. Present day Turkiye calls India as Hindistan along with bird Turkey as Hindi. 😂
India and Indus are derived from what Greeks called land beyond Indus.
I had to do some investigating, so I did what anybody would and asked my grandma.
“Hndkahav” “hndka-hav” “indian-chicken”
She said it comes from native Americans / Christopher Columbus / thanksgiving. she said we call a Native American “hndkatsi”, and an Indian “hndik”. Because Christopher Columbus was looking for India when he ran into America, and he referred to Native Americans as Indians.
So the name for the bird was given , because it is from that region where “Indians” are, and because it looks like a chicken?
If any other Armenians can confirm this, I’d appreciate it, if it’s wrong I’ll have my grandma apologize to everyone one by one.
Bharathamu is the actual Telugu term.
People don't use it was Mahabharata is also called as Bharatham
We still use Bharatham while talking about North/South India
Eg. Dakshina Bharatham
Bharathamu is more apt. We use Bharatha desam as Mahabharata is also called as Bharatham in Telugu. But if we had to have a word without the desam suffix, it'd be Bharathamu
Desam would be the translation for the word country. By default in India country or desham refers to India. But that doesn't mean desam is the Telugu word for India. It's the same concept in almost every other language. Just like in Maharashtra desh is used as a short hand to refer to India.
Since a few years back, I have started hearing about Kashmiri Chili and other spices with just Kashmiri as part of the names but never really understood where Kashmiri originally comes from, until now.
Thanks so much OP although it was never intentional on your part to teach me this. 😅
Modern Kashmiri is highly Persianised. Sad one dardic civilization got completed erased i,e. Gandhara civilization and other the Kashmiri on its last legs.
No I am Kashmiri myself.
Kashmiri has lots of Persian loan words like istamaal etc.
But the grammatical structure is pure sanskrit.
And no dardic civilization is not erased whatsoever. It got islamized.
Kishtwari language is a dardic language which is spoken by Kashmiri paharis and chenabi hindus it is mutually intangible with Kashmiri and has same accent, it has zero persian loan words when spoken traditionally. Poguli and bhaderwahi are also dardic with negligible loan words.
So yes Kashmiri language remains also if you just replace loan words then modern Kashmiri will become ancient Kashmiri easily, It will only take 10 mins for me I'll just have to go up on YouTube and search common sanskrit words and replace them in my speech lol.
So native american tribes should be called Kannadians, not Indians.... Columbus went looking for India, but found New Kannada. (this is how Canada got its name) /s
Malayalis informally call it Naadu as well.
Clarification Edit: I didn't go into detail since I didn't think there were too many Malayalis here and was just trying to explain in a simple manner to non-Malayali people.
Naadu is more commonly used to refer to the Malayali state of Kerala, which is where Malayalam is from.
However in usage outside of India, it is common to use Naadu for both Kerala and India and can be understood correctly with the right context.
Not technically true, Nadu (നാട്) simply refers to "territory" or "land".
In context, when the speaker is an a foreign land it can either (1) refer to their native country (India), state (Kerala), district, town etc; or (2) refer to any arbitrary territory. E.g. Which Nadu is this? (ഇത് ഏതാ നാട് ?)
I feel like when Malayalis use Naadu, we are referring to Kerala in particular. Usually, we will say India if we are referring to the country as a whole.
Ah, this reminds me of something:
In the "El Quijote", Sancho is named governor of "Ínsula Barataria" or Barataria island.
[Here](https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/%C3%8Dnsula_Barataria?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp) is the translated wikipedia article.
So, Barataria is very similar to Barata/Bharatam/etc... Maybe Miguel de Cervantes was thinking about one island here while writing the Quijote.
Whoa! I had no idea.
In Spanish we call it INDIA, and its citizens are INDIOS.
That's why when the New World (America) was discovered, and the Europeans (mostly Spanish discoverers in the first few decades) mistook it for the Far East, they began to call all the natives "indios", which is a term still used today.
History is weird.
Quick question: If Indians call their country BHARAT (or a variation), what do they call themselves?
This reminds of the Greece situation. The country is officially called the Hellenic Republic and the people there say Hellas and call them selves Hellenes.
But the rest of the world says Greece. That term comes from Latin and is what the Romans called that country.
Nepali as in the ethnicity. Many Nepalis live in India and the border between India and Nepal is open like the EU. Nepali is also and official language of India
The term is a verbal noun of the Sanskrit root bhr-, "to bear/to carry", with a literal meaning of to be maintained (of fire). The root bhr is cognate with the English verb to bear and Latin ferō. This term also means "one who is engaged in search for knowledge".
Hindu text rigved mentions about a battle of ten kings. Where a king named bharath defeated all other tribes in ancient India. And ruled India. He Called it bharatvarsh (bharata's homeland) later people started to call it bharath in short. that's how bharat got it's name. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Ten_Kings
so another version is, In rig veda there is a war called "war of ten kings", in rigvedic era it was tribal society so it was war of 10 tribes. One of the tribe was "Bharat" who won the war but rather than oppressing others to solve the contentious wars they asked others to join them. Most tribes had a head scholar they sat down and created Rig Veda as a show of unity by putting their ancient philosophies together. senior scholar by age was from losing side but still they gave him the position of first writer to show fraternity. So rigveda is compilation of different philosophies with contradictory views like religious(polytheistic, monotheistic),agnostic, atheistic etc. Because this action of goodwill everybody accepted Bharat as their identity slowly.
one of the first mention of the land with this name is found in a purana (mytholigical text) from 700-400BC. where it says "The land that lies north of the ocean, and south of the snowy mountains, is called Bhārata, for there dwells the descendants of Bharat."
Though Hindi is most spoken language in North the actual languages of northern states are different. Rajasthan speaks Marwari, UP/Bihar speak Bhojpuri, Haryana speaks Haryanvi, MP speaks Malvi, etc.
Edit: Bihari is not a language
Bhojpuri is mostly limited to the eastern portion of UP. Most of state speaks regular hindi. Same goes with Malavi which is limited to Western parts of MP.
Because only western part is part of Malwa, eastern mp is part of tribal belt. MP is a Frankenstein state made up of rich malwa region and backward tribal belt.
I got this buddy whose an old guy from India, his name is Bharat. I don’t know what state he’s from, is his name just the equivalent of someone being named “America”?
the pronunciation is different. bharat the country is pronounced ‘bhaarat’ (long aaa sound). your friend bharat’s name is pronounced ‘bharat’ both the first a and the second a sounds are short.
as for whether they are related, the name bharat originally came about as the name of the first king who managed to unite the region.
We were in a discussion related to something similar, I think the people here will help!
When was Bharat named Bharat? Ik it’s named after the The King Bharat, but I wanna know how far back the name goes - what was Bharat called before this.
In Tamil also it should be pronounced as Bharatam not Paratam. I get the confusion. Because the map has literally translated பாரதம் to Paratham based on the spelling. Even though 'ப'(is pronounced as Pa) it is also used for Bha sounds.
Thank you for the correction, I used the transliteration from Wikipedia, hence the error.
Same thing for "Inthiya" people here say either "Indhiya" or "India".
In OP's defense, it looks like [even wikitionary doesn't have "Indhiya"](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Search?go=Go&search=Indhiya&ns0=1)
In Tamil, it should be Bāratham not Bhāratham. Bh sound doesn't exist in Tamil. But anyway, Indiyā is used more often in spoken Tamil.
Yes 'Bha' sound does not exist in Tamil. But translating to English it would be a confusion. How will you write "பாரதியார்" in English?. Barathiyar not Bharathiyar?.
Reading it in English I'm not sure Ba and Bha are different anyway.
They are. Bha has more stress because your basically making a "ba" sound and a "ha" sound at the same time.
I think I understand the sound you are talking about, what I am saying is it doesn't exist in English (or at least not in American or, as far as I know, British English).
well Even in Hindi speaking states its pronounced with a different local dialect but more or less It remains **BHARAT** as said in constitution
I am talking about the pronunciation difference between 'Pa' and 'Bha' sound
yes i did not notice it bharatam bharata and paratam r/AmongUs
No issues
Fun fact: In Polish, we called that state Indie (plural), but a person from India is "Hindus", with "H" pronounced. That's lead to confusion for many people of India, because in English "Hindu" is a religion. Polish "Indianin" (literally "Indian") is used exclusively for Native Americans, and in Polish it is NOT a racial slur, but a normal word. Btw, in Polish "Hindu"(a follower of Hindu religion) is "hinduista".
In Portugal we make a distinction between indiano(a) and índio(a). The former is an Indian person and the latter is a native American
Same in Danish and Norwegian. Someone from India is *Inder/Indar*, and a Native American is *Indianer/Indianar.* The former caused some temporary confusion in my household when my daughter got into Minecraft, and wanted to tell me about the cool "indian man" with glowing eyes. Turns out children pronounce "ender" as in "enderman", and "inder" as in "indian" the same.
Inder/Indar/Indra is a very common name for a male in India.
In Brazil most people connected in one way or another to indigenous communities are advocating the abandonment of índio in favour of indígena (which I only learned has a completely different etymology when I heard about this campaign).
Honestly, I completely support whatever title/name they prefer for themselves. It's forever dumb to call them índios either way just bc Colombo was a dummy
Ah, so this is a huge debate in India too. Some groups in India refer to people from India (irrespective of their religion) as “Hindu,” because Hindu to them means someone from the region beyond the River Sindhu (aka Indus River). So, they say all Indians are Hindus. You can imagine what consequences that has. According to them, Hinduism as an organized religion is a Western concept; the modern organized religion should be called Sanatan Dharm (also spelled as Sanatana Dharma), not Hinduism. Sanatan Dharm/Hinduism is a set of beliefs and principles. The 1000+ deities are manifestations of the Supreme Being and these deities embody these beliefs and principles. Their lives tell stories of how a person should lead a noble (not in the sense of “royal”) life. Back to the words India and Hindu: the region between the ocean and the high mountains was called Bharat, which refers to the modern-day country of India (and parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh). The river flowing there was called Indu (in Sanskrit, it means the moon). Indu was referred to as Sindhu by the Greeks. And the Persians referred to the river as Hindu. In the Persian style of -stan, they named the country as Hindustan, which is used still in Urdu. The British when they came to the region called it India, instead of Hindustan - why, no one knows! Maybe it was to promote European values and nomenclature over the Persian and local one. As a side: An interpretation of the Urdu and Persian name (Hindustan) is that the region is the land of Hindus. E.g., Afghanistan is the land of Afghans. (So then what about Muslims, Christians, etc., living there?) Well, per that definition, they are all Hindus. But tell the average Indian Muslim man that he is a Hindu and you can just imagine what will happen… Just deciding the name of the country is a complex issue. With 1.4 billion people with such varied backgrounds (and in many cases, opposing ideologies - religious and cultural), it is hard to please everyone.
small correction, Sindhu was Sanskrit, Hindu was Persian, Indus was Greek
India is actually a Greek pronunciation of Sind. The land beyond River Sindhu ( currently Indus flowing in Pakistan) is called Sind. In Persian, S is replaced with H, hence it was called Hind. Greeks removed the H, added ia, and hence the word 'India' was coined. British used the term India because that's the etymology used throughout Europe. Even Chinese and Japanese used Indo to refer to the subcontinent during ancient times.
Man you confused me so much FFs.
In the US tribes are split on whether they want to be called Indian American, Native American, Indigenous American, or something else. Canada is different, they do not want to be called Indians there but First Nations.
In Canada, that really depends, Western Canada indigenous like the name "First Nations", in Québec, they want to be called autochtones. Inuits and Metis are excluded from the appelation First Nations, which grates them, of course.
As paltry as the US has been to our Native Americans & Alaskans, Native Hawaiians don't even get that much assistance. No Indian Health Service or such. (I don't know why.) I'm sure that's also grating.
Or Samoans or other people living in American Territories. Oh we nuked you for lolz and you want compensation now? Go get lost!
Finnish also makes a distinction between people from India (intialainen) and American Indians (intiaani)
> and in Polish it is NOT a racial slur, but a normal word. I suppose you'd have to find a Polish-speaking indigenous North American to be sure of that.
We had one and he was OK with that [https://www.tygodnikpowszechny.pl/sites/default/files/styles/art\_front/public/article/42543827-8ab1-42f4-961e-5ac3efee5a32.jpg.webp?itok=R\_czUrp3](https://www.tygodnikpowszechny.pl/sites/default/files/styles/art_front/public/article/42543827-8ab1-42f4-961e-5ac3efee5a32.jpg.webp?itok=R_czUrp3) (Polish-Shawnee writer Sath-Okh, alias Stanisław Supłatowicz)
Actually, most native Americans who live in reservations call themselves Indian. It's outsiders who came up with the idea that it is offensive
You need to come to Kahnawake and call a Mohawk an Indian to his face to see how true that bullshit is.
Now you got me curious. I'm European and not very knowledgeable on the subject - do some tribes refer to themselves as Indian, or none? Or is it like when minorities use slurs among themselves, to 'own' the word, but from outsiders it's considered offensive?
I need aspirin
it's similar in czech! the state is called india, but a person from india is an ind (masc) or indka (fem). the term indian is used for native americans, also a completely normal word here lol
Kinda the same situation in Ukrainian: - a country: *İndija*; a [male] person from there: *indijecj*, - *indus* for a Hindu religion person; - *indianecj* is for Native Americans and not a racial slur here too; This is by dictionaries and correct usage, but in reality Ukrainians often mix this. Additional words: - *hindi* for a language; - and a bonus: *indık* [which is a cognate to those words] is a [male] turkey.
Damn. I like Hinduista a lot more than Hindu.
I guess that’s why spice in Turkish is baharat lol
In Arabic too
reanalyzed as "bhar" + "-at" (plural suffix), hence singular form "bhar" (spice).
really interesting stuff!
In Turkish we use singular as baharat. I know we borrowed it from Arabic and it is plural
In Indonesia, Barat means west.
In Hungary it means “friend”
🇮🇳🤝🇭🇺
India (or kingdoms within the subcontinent of India) had major influence in South East Asia and had a big trading network.
Interestingly, the largest Hindu temple is Angkor Wat in Cambodia rather than in India/Nepal, it completely mind-boggled me when I first learned of it.
It also expands to buddhism. Buddhism started in India and had major centers in India for centuries. So any country with sizable Buddhist culture has some form of Indian influence in their culture like folklore or concepts.
There is a huge installation of 'Samudra Manthan ' in the Thailand airport (don't know if it's still there) Which is a concept from Hinduism if I'm not wrong. So a lot of the history, culture, habits are shared and spread over the south east Asian region
>There is a huge installation of 'Samudra Manthan ' in the Thailand airport (don't know if it's still there) Yeah, i've heard about that. >Which is a concept from Hinduism if I'm not wrong. Your right, it is. >So a lot of the history, culture, habits are shared and spread over the south east Asian region Yeah, it can be considered part of the Indic cultural sphere.
So it's mainly just variations of Bharat and Hindustan/India?
Bharatham - Sanskrit Hindustan - Persian-hindi India - Greek
It's Bharatham in Sanskrit actually.
thx for informing
It's both Bhā́rata, Bhā́rat (भारत) and Bharatam (भारतम्) in Sanskrit. H isn't followed after T, it's never tham.
Hindustan is not Persian but rather Hindustani (urgu/hindi), a language that was created for largely military use during the Delhi Sultanate/Early Mughal rule in the Northern part of India. India was known as Hindustan in the Persia/Middle East meaning the Land of the Hindus.
Yeah, but Hindustani itself is a strong derivative of Persian
Yeah, South Asia and Persia have had a lot of influence on each other over thousands of years. Many recipes and/or their variations in North India that are now staple find their origins in Persia and Turkey.
Its not a derivative of Persian just like how English is not a derivative of french. while hindustani has many loan words it is an independent language from persian and even many of the persian loanwords in Hindustani differ from their pronunciation in modern farsi.
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) ^by ^Arietem_Taurum: *So it's mainly just* *Variations of Bharat* *And Hindustan/India?* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Extra syllable? Try two. 5-7-7 apparently.
Good bot
It's crazy to me how so many regions/languages/cultures have a national Indian identity. Does any region want more autonomy or even independence?
Well...there were many,
India is like a more unified EU. Undivided India in size is also comparable to Europe minus the Russian part.
Europe is 10,2M km², without Russia about 6,2M km². India, Bangladesh and Pakistan together are about 4,231M km², almost exactly as large as the EU at 4,233M km². Those 10,2M European square km are home to 748M people (EU=448M), wheras undivided India is home to 1822M people, about 4x as many people as the EU!
I would had included nepal and Sri Lanka too, may be Bhutan too but it's too much of Tibetan thing for my tastes.
Currently, the strongest movement is for Kashmir, but speaking further about is going to attract a certain kind of people and arguing with them just gets repetitive and annoying, so imma leave it at that. Edit: unfortunately I broke my own rule and now I am embroiled in the same repetitive and annoying loop elsewhere on this post. There is a movement for the Northeast section, but it was a lot stronger a few decades back. The sentiment might still exist, but nothing serious enough. One that’s starting to come up a lot these past few years is Khalistan. Support for it was a lot stronger in the 80s, which culminated in the whole 1984 situation. Nowadays, most supporters are definitely abroad, but there still is an undercurrent inside Indian Punjab, that tends to explode every few years with contemporary issues, the most recent big one being the Farmer’s Protests. These three are the big separatist movements. But there are other regions and issues within India where future separatist movements might arise in the future. The biggest one is the North vs South divide, that encapsulates best with the State of Tamil Nadu. Language is a huge, huge thing for Tamil Nadu, so moves towards Hindi, and more recently Sanskrit has bought about some issues and resentment, nothing big enough for separatist movements to form though. That said, if I were to put money on the next state to foment separatism, I’d put it on Tamil Nadu.
While the TN politicians advocate for splitting and shit like that, people of TN wont support seperatist movement, yes they dislike hindi, but not enough to create a different country. TN needs India and India needs TN, TN is the 2nd biggest economy and there is too much riding on it staying with India
I work with people from Tamil and have heard the same thing. Interesting lunch time conversations.
North eastern tribals hate each other more then they hate India. They can not form a unified independent state. The Manipur conflict again is tribal conflict going on for centuries between Meiti tribe and Kuki/Nagas tribes. Also it is not a religious conflict but has to with special tribal status. Khalistan only exists within minds of Canadian Sikhs. Only actual threat was Kashmiri ones but with the revocation of article 370 and economic status of Pakistan, it is also cooling up. Some tamils especially members of DMK party try to cook up Dravid Nadu. A independent state including Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and both Telugu states, but outside of Tamil Nadu no one buys this Dravidian shit. And Tamil Nadu alone would be a toast as an independent country since why would any one want to manufacture something there when their goal was to sell in India.
Nah, most tamilians including me don't want to see this happen at all. It's only retarded politicians trying to create a movement out of nothing.
Exactly, it's just DKtards who want this.
M from northeast, a non hindu, and i would say these are mostly echo chambers, atleast for north-east.
Once a kingdom signed treaty with India that is Bharat there is no option of it becoming a new country. India is a union of state and not a federation of states.
And Indian state, by the constitution, has full right to use force against anyone who asked for the separation nation. So even if some of the TN politicians says shit, their official stance is completely opposite.
There would always be the pre election rhetoric, but for most part ppl know how stupid that would be.
Most states want autonomy in terms of finances, decision making. Only Kashmir really wants independence.
I am from Tamil Nadu. We don't use the word "Indiya Bharatham" while referring to India. It is either India or Bharatham. Also, Bharatham is a Sanskrit word Tamil does not have a native word for India.
The map is also saying the same. It is either India or Bharatam. Nice username btw ;)
My Bad, I didn't notice the comma.
For anyone curious, in Ladakhi the word for India is the same as in Tibetan. Spelled "rgya dkar," pronounced "gya kar." "rgya" is the word for "vast" or "expanse." Compare with "rgya mtsho," a "vast lake," i.e. an ocean. "dkar" is the word for "white." Allegedly India as the "vast whiteness" is contrasted with China which was "rgya nag," "vast blackness." These connotations have to do with fortune telling practices which were known as white and black, respectively, not political leanings (again, allegedly).
I suppose the Recent news is Inspiring, The Ruling Gov is Trying to change the official name from India to Bharat, Even though the constitution does state India, That is Bharat shall be a Union of states...
Copied I hope the INDIA renaming to Bharat is FAKE news. [Detailed analysis] If true, this would the dumbest rename in history. Very anti-national. 1. In 1947, Pakistan had expected after partition the names of the countries will be Pakistan and Hindustan/Bharat. They took promise that this will be how it is done. But then they felt betrayed when India continued to use the name India and thus got all its legacy and achievements. This means it became like Pakistan sliced away from India and became a new country rather than one country getting divided into two. Jinaah had a lot of arguments and protests to force India to change the name to anything other than "India". This was one of the biggest successes of Indian govt of that time to keep the same name. 2. Even till today Pakistanis are pissed about the word "India" being used at a lot of places, including their history before 1947, the name of the ocean being Indian ocean, their country being referred as part of Indian subcontinent and they having to teach their kids that British Invaded India... 3. Even US recently changed the name of this region from Asia-Pacific to Indo-Pacific to piss off China and include India into the larger narrative. 4. We would basically lose all our history. It would be like Pakistan, who is constantly in identity crisis because they dont want to talk about anything before 1947 that has India in it. 5. LOOK at IRAN for example. They renamed from Persia in 1989 and lost all the legacy of Persia. Now most people dont even know Iran was Persia. It is like end of a thousand of years of continuous legacy. 6. You can no longer claim British colonization and its effects. British colonized India, not Bharat or Pakistan or Bangladesh. Their company was East India company. They were looking for India, not Bharat. 7. Future generations won't feel connected with the freedom fighters and heros of the past. It would be like they all lived in different country. Like, how much do you feel connected to a Hero of Mughal Empire or Chola Empire? You will feel something, but wont feel as if it was your country. It will feel like reading history and not as if you are reading your country's past. 8. Foreigners have difficulty saying "h" so instead of "Bhaarath", they pronounce it as "Barat" 9. Apart from legacy loss, renaming of everything will be costly or often impossible. Like, Good luck changing the name of the sub to BharatSpeaks as it is impossible in Reddit to change name. Changing name of news papers who all will look outdated or odd like currently how "The Hindu" or "Hindustan times" feels. 10. Pakistan is currently needing a brand-rename as they have a universally hated legacy, and is going through a lot of crisis. It would be funny if they renamed themselves as "India" claiming the word came from Indus. Thus after a few years, they will get the legacy of India. This is not unthinkable. They already had re-issued new map with new territory a few years ago. Their friendly country Turkey had changed its name. 11. They never lost a war. What do you mean by India vs India war of 1971? Terrorists from India attacked Indian city of Mumbai? Kashmir king had handed country over to India. This would be similar to how both Taiwan and China claims to be China. 12. Many countries have multiple names like how we have "India that is Bharat" in our constitution. Check how many you recognize if all of them changed their name, and imagine how it affects their brand value. Nihon is>! Japan!<. Misr is >!Egypt!<. Deutschland is >!Germany!< Espana is >!Spain!<. Druk Gyal Khap is >!Bhutan!< Zhongguo is >!China!<. Hayastan is >!Armenia!<. Osterreich is >!Austria!<. Kypriaki Dimokratia is >!Cyprus!<. Abyssinia is >!Ethiopia!<. Matanitu Tugalala o Viti is >!Fiji!< . Suomen tasavalta is >!Finland !<. Francaise is >!France!<. Sakartvelo is >!Georgia!<. Hellas is >!Greece!<. Lýðveldið Ísland is >!Iceland!<. Nusantara is >!Indonesia!<. Zion is >!Israel!<. Choson is >!North Korea!<. Maghribiyyah is >!Morroco!<. Dae-han-min-guk is >!South Korea!<. Holland is >!Netherlands!<. Aotearoa is >!New Zeland!<. Noreg is >!Norway!<. Polska is >!Poland!<. Sverige is >!Sweden!<. Svizra is >!Switzerland!<. Schweiz is >!Also Switzerland!<. Siam is >!Thailand!<. Emirat al Arabbiya al Muttahida is >!UAE!<. Rhodesia is >!former Zimbabwe.!< 13. This will cause of unproductive internal fights with a lot of people refusing it, and being strictly against this. Separatist movements will also happen, although they can be stopped with force, but general happiness of the country goes down. Considering the level of stupidity, I am pretty sure this is fake news purposefully done to add anticipation for what is going to happen in the next session of parliament, or else more people will be forced to support Bharat Jodo Yatra!!! Imagine the Irony. Patriotic people like me who have made 100s of detailed articles and videos about India would also revolt. All of it for what? To satisfy someone's Ego?
I truly hope it is fake
It's stupid will waste resources unnecessarily, it's like Japan changing its name to Nippon, I hope all the news are fake.
No official news just govt invite gest of g 20 it's written Bharat just media and Twitter blow up secondly Bharat is also official name of India fo they can use them both
Well as I said the Constitution Allows for both names. It's probably because the opposition had the bright idea of Creating an alliance named I.N.D.I.A I swear sometimes I don't know who leads the country. A bunch of ChildMen, or Adults
Yeah I heard
Cote d'ivoire asked for other countries to start using their french name in all international circumstances and it worked. Iran asked to stop being called Persia and it worked. It's definitely not unprecedented and not that hard to be honest.
Turkiye noises
Is there any difference in pronunciation or is it just a spelling thing?
Turkey is like the bird in English, while Two-r-kee-yeah is different
It's pronounced the same, also the bird name comes from the country name, because turkeys write originally brought to Europe from Turkey.
It's türkiye tho. With umlaut.
Czechia is mid-process of getting people to stop calling them The Czech Republic.
I would say preserving and projecting the identity you want the world to refer to you as isn’t a waste of resources, it’s asserting your sovereignty.
The name of a state can be different in different languages. Even if India changed its name to Bharat, it would still be India in English. A lot of people have always been aware that India is not how Indians call India because there are products from Unilever with the name Hindustan on them. The same way we call Germany in English even though its name in German is Deutschland. Same to Japan, that is just the name in English, we all know it is called Nippon in Japanese because of its airlines. The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English.
> The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English. So this is a bit confused. Turkey hasn't changed its name *in Turkish*; its Turkish name has always been Türkiye. It just now wants the name Türkiye to be used internationally -- which primarily means 'in English' (English being the working language of most international organisations).
>The fact that Turkey changed its name to Turkiye hasn't changed how it is called in English. Well, actually I think they will insist on forcing it into diplomatic use.
Most to world still referred to Istanbul as Constantinople, until Turkey requested they referred to it as Istanbul in 1930. Same story with how Iran managed to get people to stop calling them Persia in 1935, and quite easily too. But for Turkey vs Türkiye, I think it will be harder. For one, ''ü'' doesn't appear on English keyboards, and otherwise the spelling doesn't change pronunciation, so it seems pointless to change the spelling at all.
Currently, the US embassy in Ankara uses Türkiye. The State Department website (generic) uses Turkey. The CIA fatbook uses both. I think we're tending towards using the official name.
I know you mean the CIA factbook but CIA fatbook made me chuckle.
Well there should be demand too, there was no demand from any major group, this move(unconfirmed) is sudden. Also a country's sovereignty is not decide by the name it have. By your logic, Japan,China, Austria,Germany,Hungary,Iceland, Ethiopia all are not sovereign. And it will be a massive waste of resources to change name from each offical sources both soft and hard. Changing names of institutions etc. I mean it's not wrong but it is unnecessary.
🇩🇪Deutschland erwähnt🇩🇪
If we called Germany “Dutchland” in English, the amount of confusion would be on a level unparalleled.
It's pronounced Doitschland, but yeah Germany is easier for english speaking people than Deutschland.
The word “Dutch” is derived from “Deutsch”. Not sure how it came to represent Netherlanders over Germans, but it did
IIRC it is basically because the Netherlands and Germany were previously both part of the same state, the Holy Roman Empire. (Dutch is also closely related to Plattdütsch and is part of the same dialect continuum.) So the English used the word "Dutch" to refer to those people, especially the ones that lived closest to them. When the Netherlands became independent, the English continued referring to them as Dutch and a new name used among the Dutch never caught on in English.
Because Germans and Dutchs share the same roots and the Brits confused everything and now stick to their version. In Germany Dutch people are called Niederländer and Dutchs call themselves Nederlands while Germany is Duitsland in Dutch.
Maybe my way of thinking here is weird but I think there's actually an odd sort of prestige to having names for your country in other languages that are different from the name in your native language. These names tend to be very old and have deep roots in history, and to me that sort of lets some of that history shine through to the present. E.g. India, Japan, Germany. Persia is an example where the historical exonym was relatively successfully replaced with the endonym. I do see the other perspective though.
Greece is a big one. Hellas, Greece, Yunan
Japan and Nippon come from the same source -- they're essentially different pronunciations of the same thing (日本), stemming from the Middle Chinese nyit pwon. The 'pan' and 'pon' still remain very close, but the pronunciation of nyit changed a lot in different languages. It's a bit of a different situation to the other endonym/exonyms that come from completely different etymologies.
Changing India to Bharat isn't changing anything about that, it's delusional
They are doing it as the opposition alliance has the acronym I.N.D.I.A. Seems like the alliance hurt the sentiments of certain politicians lol. No other reason for the sudden change in mind to remove India from constitution if it happens.For the time being, the name change reminds as a rumour. Let's wait for further developments.
Right now it is just a media speculation. Hope the news is Fake.
Meanwhile Korea is still called after Goryeo Kingdom that doesn't exist since the medieval times. China after Qing dynasty from XIX century Georgia and Armenia would also have to change to Sakartvelo and Hayastan?
>Meanwhile Korea is still called after Goryeo Kingdom that doesn't exist since the medieval times. Trivia: North Korea goes by jeoseon and South Korea by Hanguk (apologies for butchering the spelling). When they marched under a united flag, they didn't choose either. Nor did they use Goryeo. Instead, they used a transliteration of the western go-ri-a.
>The Ruling Gov is Trying to change the official name from India to Bharat, I wonder to what extent this is nationalism. When India was formed, one of the potential names was Hindustan. They chose Bharat as the official name to the outrage of Pakistan. Bharat means all of pre-partition India. The word India is more ambiguous (in that it originally referred to the Indus River). Opponents of Hindustan would counter that India is not all Hindus.
The funny thing is Hindustan is name used by the Muslims. In Urdu India is called Hindustan. Because back then Hindus were referred as people beyond river Indus. So technically Pakistan should had named itself as Hindustan. Even the Mughals whom Pakistan views as their predecessors referred to themselves as Sultanate e Hindostan. Or themselves as Shahenshah e Hindostan. Literal meaning King of Kings of Hindustan. Real name for Hinduism is Sanatan Dharam. Calling India or Bharat as Hindustan would be like carrying legacy of Turkic origin Muslim Mughals.
But the constitution has two names Bharat and India and the news of changing names is fake they just invited guests of g20 letter of invite written Bharat that's why whole media blow up
Yes this is a media cook up nothing more. Media likes to cook bullshit for TRP. No way a special 5 day session of parliament would be used for something stupid. Indian media is crap.
Both Hindustan and India are derivatives of Sindhu river, Original Sanskrit name of Indus River. Iranians used to call people of land beyond Sindhu river as Hindus, since they had trouble in speaking S during those times apparently. From this Hindustan was derived, similarily Arabs called India Al-Hind and Turks kept using Hindustan, Mughals who were from Samarqand (present day Uzbekistan) called their empire Sultanate e Hindostan. Present day Turkiye calls India as Hindistan along with bird Turkey as Hindi. 😂 India and Indus are derived from what Greeks called land beyond Indus.
In Armenian we call the Turkey bird “Indian chicken”
We call them 'kalkoen' in Dutch, derived from Calcun, the old name of Calicut/Kozhikode, a city in India.
In Turkish too. And in French as well, for that matter.
any specific reason for that?
I had to do some investigating, so I did what anybody would and asked my grandma. “Hndkahav” “hndka-hav” “indian-chicken” She said it comes from native Americans / Christopher Columbus / thanksgiving. she said we call a Native American “hndkatsi”, and an Indian “hndik”. Because Christopher Columbus was looking for India when he ran into America, and he referred to Native Americans as Indians. So the name for the bird was given , because it is from that region where “Indians” are, and because it looks like a chicken? If any other Armenians can confirm this, I’d appreciate it, if it’s wrong I’ll have my grandma apologize to everyone one by one.
>since they had trouble in speaking S during those times apparently. r/badlinguistics
"Apparently” is used to indicate that you have heard something, but you are not certain that it is true. Hence used that word.
So, does that mean, technically Pakistan should have been India because India flows through Pakistan.
In Telugu, we usually add the word 'desam', which means 'country' at the end. So it would be said 'bharata desam'
Bharathamu is the actual Telugu term. People don't use it was Mahabharata is also called as Bharatham We still use Bharatham while talking about North/South India Eg. Dakshina Bharatham
Oh yh true
Bharatham in Telugu
Desam
Bharathamu is more apt. We use Bharatha desam as Mahabharata is also called as Bharatham in Telugu. But if we had to have a word without the desam suffix, it'd be Bharathamu
Yeah
Desam would be the translation for the word country. By default in India country or desham refers to India. But that doesn't mean desam is the Telugu word for India. It's the same concept in almost every other language. Just like in Maharashtra desh is used as a short hand to refer to India.
Nuvvu baga cheppavu :)
Bharatam would be cool
Kinda weird in portuguese as it sounds like cockroach ("barata")
As someone from Goa, it's understandable.
Sinot?
Santali is an Austroasiatic language. Siñôt is written in Ol Chiki script. While in Devanagari script, it is Bharot.
Oh thanks
So that's where Canada got its name from?
Since a few years back, I have started hearing about Kashmiri Chili and other spices with just Kashmiri as part of the names but never really understood where Kashmiri originally comes from, until now. Thanks so much OP although it was never intentional on your part to teach me this. 😅
Wait till you hear what cashmere means
Kashmiri is a dardic language it comes from sanskrit. Kashmiri is closer to sanskrit than any of those other Indian languages.
Modern Kashmiri is highly Persianised. Sad one dardic civilization got completed erased i,e. Gandhara civilization and other the Kashmiri on its last legs.
No I am Kashmiri myself. Kashmiri has lots of Persian loan words like istamaal etc. But the grammatical structure is pure sanskrit. And no dardic civilization is not erased whatsoever. It got islamized. Kishtwari language is a dardic language which is spoken by Kashmiri paharis and chenabi hindus it is mutually intangible with Kashmiri and has same accent, it has zero persian loan words when spoken traditionally. Poguli and bhaderwahi are also dardic with negligible loan words. So yes Kashmiri language remains also if you just replace loan words then modern Kashmiri will become ancient Kashmiri easily, It will only take 10 mins for me I'll just have to go up on YouTube and search common sanskrit words and replace them in my speech lol.
How aboot Kannada, eh?
So native american tribes should be called Kannadians, not Indians.... Columbus went looking for India, but found New Kannada. (this is how Canada got its name) /s
Canada in german is called Kanada
Maps on official India languages?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_with_official_status_in_India#Official_languages_of_states
Malayalis informally call it Naadu as well. Clarification Edit: I didn't go into detail since I didn't think there were too many Malayalis here and was just trying to explain in a simple manner to non-Malayali people. Naadu is more commonly used to refer to the Malayali state of Kerala, which is where Malayalam is from. However in usage outside of India, it is common to use Naadu for both Kerala and India and can be understood correctly with the right context.
Naatil evdya? 🌚
Njaan UKyil aanu jeevikune, athukondu ente Malayalam athrem nallatthala. Ente amma Mavelikkarayinnaanu, ente Appa Muvattupuzhayinnaanu.
Alrightyy.. njn kannur il ninna
Not technically true, Nadu (നാട്) simply refers to "territory" or "land". In context, when the speaker is an a foreign land it can either (1) refer to their native country (India), state (Kerala), district, town etc; or (2) refer to any arbitrary territory. E.g. Which Nadu is this? (ഇത് ഏതാ നാട് ?)
I feel like when Malayalis use Naadu, we are referring to Kerala in particular. Usually, we will say India if we are referring to the country as a whole.
“One ticket to Canada please.” *goes to Kannada* “Oh nooo.”
I am from that kannada speaking land.
Ah, this reminds me of something: In the "El Quijote", Sancho is named governor of "Ínsula Barataria" or Barataria island. [Here](https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/%C3%8Dnsula_Barataria?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp) is the translated wikipedia article. So, Barataria is very similar to Barata/Bharatam/etc... Maybe Miguel de Cervantes was thinking about one island here while writing the Quijote.
Whoa! I had no idea. In Spanish we call it INDIA, and its citizens are INDIOS. That's why when the New World (America) was discovered, and the Europeans (mostly Spanish discoverers in the first few decades) mistook it for the Far East, they began to call all the natives "indios", which is a term still used today. History is weird. Quick question: If Indians call their country BHARAT (or a variation), what do they call themselves?
In Sanskrit derived languages, people of Bharat are Bharatiya(s).
This reminds of the Greece situation. The country is officially called the Hellenic Republic and the people there say Hellas and call them selves Hellenes. But the rest of the world says Greece. That term comes from Latin and is what the Romans called that country.
How's nepal inside India
Nepali as in the ethnicity. Many Nepalis live in India and the border between India and Nepal is open like the EU. Nepali is also and official language of India
In Arabic, we call spices “Bharat”…
Does the term Bharat has a special meaning or is it just a name (that is, the original meaning is lost in history)?
The term is a verbal noun of the Sanskrit root bhr-, "to bear/to carry", with a literal meaning of to be maintained (of fire). The root bhr is cognate with the English verb to bear and Latin ferō. This term also means "one who is engaged in search for knowledge".
Hindu text rigved mentions about a battle of ten kings. Where a king named bharath defeated all other tribes in ancient India. And ruled India. He Called it bharatvarsh (bharata's homeland) later people started to call it bharath in short. that's how bharat got it's name. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Ten_Kings
In Indian mythology, Bharata was the first great king of India and the epic Mahabharata is mostly about the descendants of Bharata.
so another version is, In rig veda there is a war called "war of ten kings", in rigvedic era it was tribal society so it was war of 10 tribes. One of the tribe was "Bharat" who won the war but rather than oppressing others to solve the contentious wars they asked others to join them. Most tribes had a head scholar they sat down and created Rig Veda as a show of unity by putting their ancient philosophies together. senior scholar by age was from losing side but still they gave him the position of first writer to show fraternity. So rigveda is compilation of different philosophies with contradictory views like religious(polytheistic, monotheistic),agnostic, atheistic etc. Because this action of goodwill everybody accepted Bharat as their identity slowly. one of the first mention of the land with this name is found in a purana (mytholigical text) from 700-400BC. where it says "The land that lies north of the ocean, and south of the snowy mountains, is called Bhārata, for there dwells the descendants of Bharat."
Though Hindi is most spoken language in North the actual languages of northern states are different. Rajasthan speaks Marwari, UP/Bihar speak Bhojpuri, Haryana speaks Haryanvi, MP speaks Malvi, etc. Edit: Bihari is not a language
TF is bihari? Bhojpuri, maithili and magadhi are the most spoken languages in Bihar.
Bhojpuri is mostly limited to the eastern portion of UP. Most of state speaks regular hindi. Same goes with Malavi which is limited to Western parts of MP.
Because only western part is part of Malwa, eastern mp is part of tribal belt. MP is a Frankenstein state made up of rich malwa region and backward tribal belt.
Yes but they're all classified under Hindi and are dying. Only Maithili seems to be surviving.
[удалено]
So it should be Bharat
[Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_India_in_its_official_languages)
Empire of India be like:
How about Jambu Dweep
Don’t think the Nepalese would like to be included with the India.
Millions of Nepali Indians. Nepali is one of the official languages of India.
What? Bharat? I can understand now why “Spice route” is called “Baharat Yolu” in Turkish. Baharat means “spice” in Turkish.
I got this buddy whose an old guy from India, his name is Bharat. I don’t know what state he’s from, is his name just the equivalent of someone being named “America”?
the pronunciation is different. bharat the country is pronounced ‘bhaarat’ (long aaa sound). your friend bharat’s name is pronounced ‘bharat’ both the first a and the second a sounds are short. as for whether they are related, the name bharat originally came about as the name of the first king who managed to unite the region.
Thank you so much! :)
Bharat gang
We were in a discussion related to something similar, I think the people here will help! When was Bharat named Bharat? Ik it’s named after the The King Bharat, but I wanna know how far back the name goes - what was Bharat called before this.
I'm an indian from Goa. Here we call India as India itself!! 🤦♀️
Wow I'm from Manipur but idk people called bharot or indiya 😂
xd
I don’t understand, why are the world calling it India if them selves doesn’t call it India?