|
|
Post by arnewise12 on May 20, 2009 1:47:27 GMT 3
Hi, I wonder why the mamluck turks that rules northern India didnt develop a turkic language but instead created a hybrid of persian and sanskrit words
why didnt they put in turkic words in it why only persian and arabic
|
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on May 20, 2009 7:16:11 GMT 3
You probably meant Mogols or Mughals. They in fact didn't "create" Urdu; it evolved by itself. It's actually alsmost the same as Hindi just written with Arabic script.
As for Turks in India they in fact were actively using and promoting their language and Chagatay Turkic remained the official language of Mughal dynasty until its fall.
The Russian traveler to India in the 15th, Afanasii Nikitin was fluent in several Turkic dialects and wrote that he was mainly communicating with locals in India in Turkic and that was complitely enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 20, 2009 12:56:55 GMT 3
Actually Arnewise is partly right, Urdu started evolving much before the Mughals, it actually started during the Ghaznavids, even before the Delhi Sultanate. What we call "Urdu" is indeed almost the same with Hindi, with lots of Arabo-Persian loanwords with some Turkic as well, though I guess the Turkic element isn't that numerious.
And yes, it wasn't "developed" by the Turkic rulers, it evolved naturally among the soldiers and merchants living in Northern India, which included Turks, Persians and Indians.
|
|
|
|
Post by schiirschach on Jun 26, 2010 19:42:56 GMT 3
AS for the Mughals, they were highly influenced by Persian culture and I think Persian used to be the official language of the Mughal Sultanate (and also the Delhi Sultanate) for a quite a while.
Urdu grammar is much the same as Hindi but it employs a lot of Persian words and possibly some Turkic as well.
Like any other language, it was not created but evolved through the assimilation of people of different cultures.
Needless to say Urdu is very poetic and extremely polite language.
|
|
