04-23-2008, 06:14 AM
<b>A STANDARD CHARACTER FOR INDIAN LANGUAGES
Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Speech delivered at Benares, at the Nagari Pracharani Sahha Conference,
under the Presidency of Mr. R. C. Dutt,
in December, 1905.</b>
Gentlemen, The scope and object of the Nagari
Pracharni Sabha has already been explained to you
by the President. I should have gladly dilated on
the same. But as ten speakers are to follow me
within an hour and a half, I must forego the pleasure
and restrict myself, during the few minutes at my
disposal to a brief mention of the points which I
think ought to be kept in view in endeavouring to
work on the lines adopted by the Sabha.
The first and the most important thing we have to
remember is that this movement is not merely for
establishing a common character for the Northern
India. It is a part and parcel of a larger movement,
I may say a National Movement to have a common
language for the whole of India ; for a common
language is an important element of nationality. It
is by a common language that you express your
thoughts to others ; and Manu rightly says that
everything is comprehended or proceeded from vak
or language- Therefore if you want to draw a
nation together there is no force more powerful than
to have a common language for all. And that is
the end which the Sabha has kept in view.
But how is the end to be attained ? We aim at
having a common language not only for Northern
India, but I will say, in course of time, for the
whole of India including the Southern of the
Madras Presidency, and when the scope of our
labours is so widened our difficulties seem to
grow apace. First of all we have to face what
may be called the historic difficulties. The
contests between the Aryans and the non-Aryans
in ancient, and between the Mahomedans and the
Hindus in later times have destroyed the linguistic
harmony of the country. In Northern India the
languages spoken by the Indian population are
mostly Aryan, being derived from Sanskrit ; while
those in the South are Dravidian in origin. " The
difference exists not only in words but in the
characters in which those words are written. Next
to this is the difference between Urdu and Hindi to.
which so much prominence is given in this province.
On our side we have also the Modi or the running
script character as distinguished from the Balabodha
or the Devanagari in which the Marathi books are
ordinarily printed.
There are, therefore, two great important elements
which we have to harmonise and bring together
under our common character or language before we
venture to go to the Mahomedan or Persian
characters. I have already said that though a
common language for India is the ultimate end we
have in view, we begin with the lowest step of the
ladder, I mean a common character for Hindus.
But here too we have to harmonise the two elements
now mentioned the Aryan or the Devanagari
character, and the Dravidian or the Tamil character.
It should ba noted that the distinction is not one of
character only inasmuch as there are certain
sounds in the Dravidian languages which are not to
be found in any Aryan language.
We have resolved to proceed step by step, and as
explained to you by the President we have at first
taken up in hand only the group of the Aryan
languages i.e., those derived from Sanskrit. These
are Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, Gujarathi and
Gurumuki. There are other sub-dialects, but I have
nan/ed the principal ones. These languages are all
derived from Sanskrit ; and the characters in which
they are written are also modifications of the ancient
characters of India. In course of time each of these
languages has, however, developed its own peculia-
rities in grammar, pronunciation and characters,
though the alphabet in each is nearly the same.
The Nagari Pracharni Sabha aims at having a
common character for all these Aryan languages, so
that when a book is printed in that character it
may be more readily intelligible to all the people
speaking the Aryan languages. I think we all agree
on this point and admit its utility. But the difficulty
arises, when a certain character is proposed as best
fitted to be the common character for all. Thus,
for instance the Bengalis may urge that the
characters in which they write their language are
more ancient than those adopted by the Gujarathi
or Marathi speaking people, and that Bengali
should therefore be selected as a common character
for all. There are others who think that the
Devanagari, as you find it in the printed books, is
the oldest character and therefore it is entitled to be
the common character for all the Aryan languages.
I do not think, however, that we can decide this
question on poor historic grounds. If you go to
ancient inscriptions you will find that no less than
ten different characters were in use at different
times since the days of Ashoka and that Kharoshtri
or Brahmi is believed to be the oldest of them all.
Since then all letters have undergone a great deal of
change ; and all our existing characters are modifica-
tions of some one or other of the ancient characters.
It would, I think, therefore be idle to decide the ques-
tion of common character on purely antiquarian basis.
To avoid this difficulty it was at one time
suggested that we should all adopt Roman
characters ; and one reason advanced in support
thereof was that it would give a common character
both for Asia and Europe.
Gentlemen, the suggestion appears to me to be
utterly ridiculous. The Roman alphabet, and
therefore Roman character, is very defective and
entirely unsuited to express the sounds used by us.
It has been found to be defective even by English
grammarians. Thus while sometimes a single
letter has three or four sounds, sometimes a single
sound is represented by two or three letters. Add to
it the difficulty of finding Roman characters or
letters that would exactly represent the sounds in
our languages without the use of any diaqritic
marks and the ridiculousness of the suggestion
would be patent to all.
If a common character is needed for us all, it
should be, you will therefore see, a more perfect
character than the Roman. European Sanskritists
have declared that the Devanagari alphabet is more
perfect than any which obtains in Europe. And
with this clear opinion before us, it would be
suicidal to go to any other alphabet in our search
for a common character for all the Aryan languages
in India. No, I would go further and say that the
classification of letters and sounds on which we
have bestowed so much labour in India and which
we find perfected in the works of Panini is not to
be found in any other language in the world. That
is another reason why the Devanagiri alphabet is
the best suited to represent the different sounds
we all use. If you compare the different characters
given at the end of each book published in the
Sacred Books of the East Series you will be
convinced of what I say. We have one sound for
one letter and one letter for each sound. I do not
think, therefore, that there can be any difference of
opinion as to what alphabet we should adopt. The
Devanagari is pre-eminently such an . alphabet.
The question is one of character or the form in
writing which the letters of the alphabet assume in
different provinces ; and I have already said that
this question cannot be solved on mere antiquarian
grounds.
Like Lord Curzon s standard time we want a
standard character. Well, if Lord Curzon had
attempted to give us a standard character on
national lines he would have been entitled to our
respect far more than by giving us a standard time.
But it has not been done ; and we must do it
ourselves giving up all provincial prejudices. The
Bengalis naturally take pride in their own character.
I do not blame them for it. There are others in
Gujarath who say that their character is easy to
write because they omit the head-line. The Maha-
rashtras on the other hand may urge that Marathi
is the character in which Sanskrit is written, and
therefore, it ought to be the common character for
the whole of India.
I fully appreciate the force of these remarks , But
we must come to a solution of the question and for
that purpose discuss the subject in a business-like
and practical manner. Whatever character we
adopt, it must be easy to write, elegant to the eye
and capable or being written with fluency. The
letters that you devise must again be sufficient to
express all the sounds in different Aryan languages
nay, must be capable of being extended to express
the Dravidian sounds without diacritic marks.
There should be one letter for every sound and ,cice
versa. That is what I mean by sufficient and com-
plete character. And if we put our heads together
at would not be difficult to device such a character
based on the existing ones. In determining upon
such a character we shall have to take into consi-
deration the fact, namely, which of the existing
characters is or are used over a wider area. For a
single character used over a wider area if suited in
other respects will naturally claim preference to be
a common character as far as it goes.
When you have appointed your committee for the
purpose and found out a common character, I think
we shall have to go to Government and urge upon
its attention the necessity of introducing in the
vernacular school books of each province a few
lessons in this standard character, so thar the next
generation may become familiar with it from its
school days. Studying a new charactei is not a
difficult task. But there is a sort oi reLictance to
study a new character after one's si-idies are
completed. This reluctance can be overcome by the
way I have suggested and herein Government can
help us. It is not a political question as such,
though in the end everything may be said to be-
political. A Government that gave us a standard
time and standard system of weights and measures
would not, I think, object to lend its help to a scheme
which aims to secure a standard character for all
Aryan languages.
When this common character is established it
Would not be difficult to read the books printed in
one dialect of the Aryan language by those who use
a different dialect of the same ? My own difficulty
in not understanding a Bengali book is that I cannot
read the characters. If a Bengali book is printed
in the Devanagari characters I can follow the author
to a great extent, if not wholly, so as to understand
the purport of the book ; for, over fifty per cent of
the words used will be found borrowed or derived
from Sanskrit. We are all fast adopting new ideas
from the West, and with the help of the parent
tongue, Sanskrit, coining new words to express the
same. Here, therefore, is another direction in which
we may work for securing a common language
for all and I am glad to see that by preparing a
dictionary of scientific terms in Hindi, the Sabha is
doing a good service in this line. I should have
liked to say something on this point. But as there are
other speakers to follow me, I do not think I shall
be justified in doing so and therefore resume my seat
with your permission.
http://ia360621.us.archive.org/0/items/bal...lauoft_djvu.txt
Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Speech delivered at Benares, at the Nagari Pracharani Sahha Conference,
under the Presidency of Mr. R. C. Dutt,
in December, 1905.</b>
Gentlemen, The scope and object of the Nagari
Pracharni Sabha has already been explained to you
by the President. I should have gladly dilated on
the same. But as ten speakers are to follow me
within an hour and a half, I must forego the pleasure
and restrict myself, during the few minutes at my
disposal to a brief mention of the points which I
think ought to be kept in view in endeavouring to
work on the lines adopted by the Sabha.
The first and the most important thing we have to
remember is that this movement is not merely for
establishing a common character for the Northern
India. It is a part and parcel of a larger movement,
I may say a National Movement to have a common
language for the whole of India ; for a common
language is an important element of nationality. It
is by a common language that you express your
thoughts to others ; and Manu rightly says that
everything is comprehended or proceeded from vak
or language- Therefore if you want to draw a
nation together there is no force more powerful than
to have a common language for all. And that is
the end which the Sabha has kept in view.
But how is the end to be attained ? We aim at
having a common language not only for Northern
India, but I will say, in course of time, for the
whole of India including the Southern of the
Madras Presidency, and when the scope of our
labours is so widened our difficulties seem to
grow apace. First of all we have to face what
may be called the historic difficulties. The
contests between the Aryans and the non-Aryans
in ancient, and between the Mahomedans and the
Hindus in later times have destroyed the linguistic
harmony of the country. In Northern India the
languages spoken by the Indian population are
mostly Aryan, being derived from Sanskrit ; while
those in the South are Dravidian in origin. " The
difference exists not only in words but in the
characters in which those words are written. Next
to this is the difference between Urdu and Hindi to.
which so much prominence is given in this province.
On our side we have also the Modi or the running
script character as distinguished from the Balabodha
or the Devanagari in which the Marathi books are
ordinarily printed.
There are, therefore, two great important elements
which we have to harmonise and bring together
under our common character or language before we
venture to go to the Mahomedan or Persian
characters. I have already said that though a
common language for India is the ultimate end we
have in view, we begin with the lowest step of the
ladder, I mean a common character for Hindus.
But here too we have to harmonise the two elements
now mentioned the Aryan or the Devanagari
character, and the Dravidian or the Tamil character.
It should ba noted that the distinction is not one of
character only inasmuch as there are certain
sounds in the Dravidian languages which are not to
be found in any Aryan language.
We have resolved to proceed step by step, and as
explained to you by the President we have at first
taken up in hand only the group of the Aryan
languages i.e., those derived from Sanskrit. These
are Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, Gujarathi and
Gurumuki. There are other sub-dialects, but I have
nan/ed the principal ones. These languages are all
derived from Sanskrit ; and the characters in which
they are written are also modifications of the ancient
characters of India. In course of time each of these
languages has, however, developed its own peculia-
rities in grammar, pronunciation and characters,
though the alphabet in each is nearly the same.
The Nagari Pracharni Sabha aims at having a
common character for all these Aryan languages, so
that when a book is printed in that character it
may be more readily intelligible to all the people
speaking the Aryan languages. I think we all agree
on this point and admit its utility. But the difficulty
arises, when a certain character is proposed as best
fitted to be the common character for all. Thus,
for instance the Bengalis may urge that the
characters in which they write their language are
more ancient than those adopted by the Gujarathi
or Marathi speaking people, and that Bengali
should therefore be selected as a common character
for all. There are others who think that the
Devanagari, as you find it in the printed books, is
the oldest character and therefore it is entitled to be
the common character for all the Aryan languages.
I do not think, however, that we can decide this
question on poor historic grounds. If you go to
ancient inscriptions you will find that no less than
ten different characters were in use at different
times since the days of Ashoka and that Kharoshtri
or Brahmi is believed to be the oldest of them all.
Since then all letters have undergone a great deal of
change ; and all our existing characters are modifica-
tions of some one or other of the ancient characters.
It would, I think, therefore be idle to decide the ques-
tion of common character on purely antiquarian basis.
To avoid this difficulty it was at one time
suggested that we should all adopt Roman
characters ; and one reason advanced in support
thereof was that it would give a common character
both for Asia and Europe.
Gentlemen, the suggestion appears to me to be
utterly ridiculous. The Roman alphabet, and
therefore Roman character, is very defective and
entirely unsuited to express the sounds used by us.
It has been found to be defective even by English
grammarians. Thus while sometimes a single
letter has three or four sounds, sometimes a single
sound is represented by two or three letters. Add to
it the difficulty of finding Roman characters or
letters that would exactly represent the sounds in
our languages without the use of any diaqritic
marks and the ridiculousness of the suggestion
would be patent to all.
If a common character is needed for us all, it
should be, you will therefore see, a more perfect
character than the Roman. European Sanskritists
have declared that the Devanagari alphabet is more
perfect than any which obtains in Europe. And
with this clear opinion before us, it would be
suicidal to go to any other alphabet in our search
for a common character for all the Aryan languages
in India. No, I would go further and say that the
classification of letters and sounds on which we
have bestowed so much labour in India and which
we find perfected in the works of Panini is not to
be found in any other language in the world. That
is another reason why the Devanagiri alphabet is
the best suited to represent the different sounds
we all use. If you compare the different characters
given at the end of each book published in the
Sacred Books of the East Series you will be
convinced of what I say. We have one sound for
one letter and one letter for each sound. I do not
think, therefore, that there can be any difference of
opinion as to what alphabet we should adopt. The
Devanagari is pre-eminently such an . alphabet.
The question is one of character or the form in
writing which the letters of the alphabet assume in
different provinces ; and I have already said that
this question cannot be solved on mere antiquarian
grounds.
Like Lord Curzon s standard time we want a
standard character. Well, if Lord Curzon had
attempted to give us a standard character on
national lines he would have been entitled to our
respect far more than by giving us a standard time.
But it has not been done ; and we must do it
ourselves giving up all provincial prejudices. The
Bengalis naturally take pride in their own character.
I do not blame them for it. There are others in
Gujarath who say that their character is easy to
write because they omit the head-line. The Maha-
rashtras on the other hand may urge that Marathi
is the character in which Sanskrit is written, and
therefore, it ought to be the common character for
the whole of India.
I fully appreciate the force of these remarks , But
we must come to a solution of the question and for
that purpose discuss the subject in a business-like
and practical manner. Whatever character we
adopt, it must be easy to write, elegant to the eye
and capable or being written with fluency. The
letters that you devise must again be sufficient to
express all the sounds in different Aryan languages
nay, must be capable of being extended to express
the Dravidian sounds without diacritic marks.
There should be one letter for every sound and ,cice
versa. That is what I mean by sufficient and com-
plete character. And if we put our heads together
at would not be difficult to device such a character
based on the existing ones. In determining upon
such a character we shall have to take into consi-
deration the fact, namely, which of the existing
characters is or are used over a wider area. For a
single character used over a wider area if suited in
other respects will naturally claim preference to be
a common character as far as it goes.
When you have appointed your committee for the
purpose and found out a common character, I think
we shall have to go to Government and urge upon
its attention the necessity of introducing in the
vernacular school books of each province a few
lessons in this standard character, so thar the next
generation may become familiar with it from its
school days. Studying a new charactei is not a
difficult task. But there is a sort oi reLictance to
study a new character after one's si-idies are
completed. This reluctance can be overcome by the
way I have suggested and herein Government can
help us. It is not a political question as such,
though in the end everything may be said to be-
political. A Government that gave us a standard
time and standard system of weights and measures
would not, I think, object to lend its help to a scheme
which aims to secure a standard character for all
Aryan languages.
When this common character is established it
Would not be difficult to read the books printed in
one dialect of the Aryan language by those who use
a different dialect of the same ? My own difficulty
in not understanding a Bengali book is that I cannot
read the characters. If a Bengali book is printed
in the Devanagari characters I can follow the author
to a great extent, if not wholly, so as to understand
the purport of the book ; for, over fifty per cent of
the words used will be found borrowed or derived
from Sanskrit. We are all fast adopting new ideas
from the West, and with the help of the parent
tongue, Sanskrit, coining new words to express the
same. Here, therefore, is another direction in which
we may work for securing a common language
for all and I am glad to see that by preparing a
dictionary of scientific terms in Hindi, the Sabha is
doing a good service in this line. I should have
liked to say something on this point. But as there are
other speakers to follow me, I do not think I shall
be justified in doing so and therefore resume my seat
with your permission.
http://ia360621.us.archive.org/0/items/bal...lauoft_djvu.txt