Fakeer:
Bro, like I said, if YOU (A Pashtun) find the word offensive then we should not be using it. If Faraz Mir or anyone else comes in here just to criticize then I have a problem.
I agree with what you said about the history. I use Pashtun/Pakhtun because it is more correct.
What is your opinion on Indian “Pathans”?
The eyelids of a Rajputs eyes are lowered only in death.
There are Indian Pathans?!!
rajput fury:
ive read about the indian pashtuns too.wat i know about them is that …in 1747 or 1745 cant remember the exact date ..when the pashtun king “AHMED SHAH ABDALI” conquered delhi at that time pashtun moved to delhi .and the reasn why pashtuns are thr is because the pashtuns fought the mughals since 16th century.maybe thats when the pashtuns moved to india.
and yeah i agree pashtuns shud be either called pashtuns or pakhtuns…but thrs no harm calling us pathans..
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
[This message has been edited by fakeer (edited April 24, 2002).]
Fakeer, did the Arabs name Bataan in the Philippines also intending to describe a frontline?
Does the war ship Batan mean frontline if it is in English then yeas as it as an Arabic word.
Bataan in American means the Philippean island we had to fight the fascist Japanese to liberate in the 40's. That is why the ship is named after the island. I know the Arabs traded and interacted in the southern Pacific, especially along coastlines.
Pathans, Pakhtuns or Pushtuns? I thought Imran Khan who claims great lineage wrote a book on The Pathans. I really don't know enough about the topic, and frankly was surprised to hear that Pathans is a denigrating word. I would like to read more about it. So any references on it?
Andhra: It might be old to you. I just found it no more than 2 weeks ago. I just don't get the time to read as much as I would like to. I know that there are many characterisations of different ethinicities in India and Pakistan. Bhooka Bihari or Bengali, Buddu Panjabi, or Panjabi tugga, chutta madarasi, and I will avoid how others view Andrha Pradeshi. I do wonder if these arose largely in the British Era of divide and rule or they existed before that. I doubt the Afghans or the Mogul rulers perpetuated these slurs. Anyone knows the historical background to this?
[This message has been edited by OldLahori (edited April 25, 2002).]
Why to you take it as a 'Slur' to be called simple minded and 'loving life to the full' people?
I was just pointing out that the Foreigner who wrote the article knows jack about the sub-continental culture.
Andhra: What is labeling all panjabis 'simple minded', if not a slur? Kaplan may not know jack about the sub-continent, but I expected you to have been educated beyond carrying generalized biases against different enthnicites. And I will restrain myself from making an anti-anybody remark.
[quote]
Originally posted by Faraz Mir:
**
[QUOTE]
Please stop using old colonial elitest words like "pathan". It's Pushtun or Pukhtun. The word pathan should be banned from the dictionary of Punjabis and Mohajirs.**
[/quote]
Dude, Pathan is a word Urdu. Pushtun is a word in Pathan language. There is no discrimination us!. It's people like norrow-minded and self-centered who love to create tension between two communities, countries and above all World
Take Your Best Shot At Me
[This message has been edited by Pakistani Tiger (edited April 25, 2002).]
dude i guess ur confused…
pathan is an arabic word..
pashto has 5000 years old history while urdu has not even 200 years..
so do u think pashto language took words from urdu
Pushto is considered older than Urdu linguistically in the sense it contains more 'sounds' that are related to the proto Indo-european language. Example: consider the numbers in German and Pushto; the similarity in sounds is unbelievable.
Who cares what is an urdu word or not? Pakistan does not revolve around some third-rate artifical language.
And I don't need to be Pushtun to point that the word "Pathan" is silly to use in the year 2002.
[quote]
Originally posted by OldLahori:
Pushto is considered older than Urdu linguistically in the sense it contains more 'sounds' that are related to the proto Indo-european language. Example: consider the numbers in German and Pushto; the similarity in sounds is unbelievable.
[/quote]
well u can say the same about persian as well.
persian has strong roots in Avestan (spellings?) language of the Zorastarians which is very closely related to Sanskrit which is related to many of the Pakistani and indian languages in different ways. I am given to understand that Pushto is much closer to Sanskrit than Panjabi for example.
OLD LAHORI I’M REALLY SORRY TO SAY THAT TO YOU …BUT I’M REALLY LAUGHING AT YOU RIGHT NOW…
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/hehe.gif
PASHTO AND SANSKIRT …NO WAY
fakeer: You may very well be right. This is outside my area of expertise. However, Pashto is part of Indo-Iranian group of Languages which are a sub-group of Indo-European. Old Persian and Vedic Sanskrit are closely related. I pasting an article from Encyclopedia Brittanica. I have asked someone who is fairly knowledgeable in languages and he tells me that I am partly correct in that Pashto has inherited a lot from Vedic Sanskrit, it is incorrect to compare the distance of it and Panjabi. It is not that simple. Pashto falls under the Eastern Iranian Languges category which are a subset of Indo-Iranian languages.
Languages of the family
Indo-Iranian
Indo-Iranian comprises two main subbranches, Indo-Aryan (Indic) and Iranian. Indo-Aryan languages have been spoken in what is now northern and central India and Pakistan since before 1000 BC. Aside from a very poorly known dialect spoken in or near northern Iraq during the 2nd millennium BC, the oldest record of an Indo-Aryan language is the Vedic Sanskrit of the Rigveda (Rgveda), the oldest of the sacred scriptures of India, dating roughly from 1000 BC. Examples of modern Indo-Aryan languages are Hindi, Bengali, Sinhalese (spoken in Sri Lanka), and the many dialects of Romany, the language of the Gypsies (Rom).
Iranian languages were spoken in the 1st millennium BC in present-day Iran and Afghanistan and also in the steppes to the north, from modern Hungary to East (Chinese) Turkistan. The only well-known ancient varieties of Iranian languages are Avestan, the sacred language of the Zoroastrians (Parsis), and Old Persian, the official language of Darius I (ruled 522–486 BC) and Xerxes I (486–465 BC) and their successors. Among the modern Iranian languages are Persian (Farsi), Pashto (Afghan), Kurdish, and Ossetic. For more information, see Indo-Iranian languages.
Indo-Iranian languages
Encyclopædia Britannica Article
group of languages constituting the easternmost major branch of the Indo-European family of languages. Indo-Aryan (Indic) languages are spoken by some 800 million persons in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and other areas of the Himalayan region. In addition, languages of the Indo-Aryan group are spoken by about 5,000,000 people in Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Oceania: the Gypsy, or Romany, dialects that are distributed about parts of Asia, the Middle East, Europe, and North America are of Indo-Aryan origin. Speakers of Iranian languages number in the tens of millions and live in areas extending from Pakistan to Iran, Afghanistan, Transcaucasia, and Central Asia. Among the Indo-European languages, only Linear A and Linear B and Hittite possess records that go back farther in time than those of Indo-Iranian.
The Indo-Iranian tongues have been used as both administrative and literary languages. Old Persian was the administrative language of the early Achaemenian dynasty dating from the 6th century BC; and an eastern Middle Indo-Aryan dialect was the language of the chancellery of the Mauryan emperor Asoka in India in the mid-3rd century BC. As literary languages, the Indo-Iranian languages were used in the texts of some of the world's great religions: Indo-Aryan for Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism, and Iranian for Zoroastrian and Manichaean texts. The oldest Zoroastrian texts are in dialects included under the name Avestan. Commerce, conquest, and religion spread the influence of these languages. Indo-Aryan languages, for example, penetrated deep into Southeast Asia; names in Indonesia and other areas and Sanskrit texts in Cambodia reflect this influence.
The close relation between the Iranian and Indo-Aryan groups has never been doubted. They share characteristic features that set them apart as a subgroup of Indo-European. The long and short varieties of the Indo-European vowels e, o, and a, for example, appear as long and short a: Sanskrit manas- “mind, spirit,†Avestan manah-, but Greek ménos “ardour, force.†(In the following examples, a macron () indicates a long vowel; a breve () indicates a short vowel. The spellings used in this article for Indo-Aryan and Iranian forms are traditional transliterations for the most part. In some cases, more accurate phonetic symbols are used. These can be found in the International Phonetic Alphabet.) In instances in which some Indo-European languages have an a sound, Indo-Iranian has i as a reflex of Indo-European sounds called laryngeals—e.g., Greek pater “father,†Sanskrit pitr -, Avestan and Old Persian pitar-. After stems ending in long or short a, i, or u, an n occurs sometimes before the genitive (possessive) plural ending am (Avestan - am)—e.g., Sanskrit martyanam “of mortals, men†(from martya-); Avestan mašyanam (from mašya-); Old Persian martiyanam.
In addition to several other similarities in their grammatical systems, Indo-Aryan and Iranian have vocabulary items in common—e.g., such religious terms as Sanskrit yajña-, Avestan yasna- “sacrificeâ€; and Sanskrit hotr -, Avestan zaotar- “a certain priestâ€; as well as names of divinities and mythological persons, such as Sanskrit mitra-, Avestan miqra- “Mithra.†Indeed, speakers of both language subgroups used the same word to refer to themselves as a people: Sanskrit arya-, Avestan airya-, Old Persian ariya- “Aryan.â€
The Indo-Aryan and Iranian language subgroups also differ from each other in a number of linguistic features, among them that Indo-Aryan has an i sound representing an Indo-European laryngeal sound not only in initial syllables but generally also in interior syllables; e.g., Sanskrit duhitr - “daughter†(cf. Greek thugáter). In Iranian, however, the sound is lost in this position; e.g., Avestan dugdar-, dudar-. Similarly, the word for “deep†is Sanskrit gabhira- (with i for i), but Avestan jafra-. Iranian also lost the accompanying aspiration (a puff of breath, written as h) that is retained in certain Indo-Aryan consonants; e.g., Sanskrit dha “set, make,†bhr , “bear,†gharma- “warm,†but Avestan and Old Persian da, bar, and Avestan garma-. Further, Iranian changed stops such as p before consonants and r and v to spirants such as f: Sanskrit pra “forth,†Avestan fra ; Old Persian fra; Sanskrit putra- “son,†Avestan puqra-, Old Persian pu s a- (s represents a sound that is also transliterated as ç). In addition, h replaced s in Iranian except before non-nasal stops (produced by releasing the breath through the mouth) and after i, u, r, k; e.g., Avestan hapta- “seven,†Sanskrit sapta-; Avestan haurva- “every, all, whole,†Sanskrit sarva-. Iranian also has both xš and š sounds, resulting from different Indo-European k sounds followed by s-like sounds, but Indo-Aryan has only ks; e.g., Avestan xšayeiti “has power, is capable,†šaeiti “dwells,†but Sanskrit ksayati, kseti. Iranian was also relatively conservative in retaining diphthongs that were changed to simple vowels in Indo-Aryan.
Iranian differs from Indo-Aryan in grammatical features as well. The dative singular of -a-stems ends in - ai in Iranian; e.g., Avestan mašyai, Old Persian cartanaiy “to do†(an original dative singular form functioning as infinitive of the verb). In Sanskrit the ending is extended with a—martyay-a. Avestan also retains the archaic pronoun forms yuš, yu zm “you†(nominative plural); in Indo-Aryan the -s- was replaced by y (yuyam) on the model of the 1st person plural—vayam “we†(Avestan vaem, Old Persian vayam). Finally, Iranian has a 3rd person pronoun di (accusative dim) that has no counterpart in Indo-Aryan but has one in Baltic.
The original location of the Indo-Iranian group was probably to the north of modern Afghanistan, in the present-day states of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakstan, where Iranian languages are still spoken. From there, some Iranians migrated to the south and west, the Indo-Aryans to the south and east. From geographical references in the earliest Indo-Aryan literary document, the Rigveda, it is clear that the earliest settlement of Indo-Aryans was in the northwest of the Indian subcontinent. Migration did not take place at once; there was doubtless a series of migrations. The date of entry of the Indo-Aryans into the subcontinent cannot be precisely determined, though the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC is plausible and generally accepted.
There is heated controversy concerning the precise linguistic position of the language of the Indo-Iranian family first attested in Middle Eastern cuneiform texts of c. 1450–1350 BC. Some borrowed words and proper names appearing in these Hittite-Hurrian documents have been interpreted as belonging either to Indo-Iranian, to an Indic subgroup of Indo-Iranian that had not yet fully split, or to Indo-Aryan proper. Complete scholarly agreement on this issue has not been reached.
The identification of the Harappan peoples of the Indus Valley, whose writing has not yet been satisfactorily deciphered, also awaits further research; with it may come a possible answer as to whether Indo-Aryans encountered these people or whether their civilization had passed by the time the Indo-Aryans arrived on the subcontinent. Whatever the answers to these problems may be, the reasons for the split of the Indo-Aryans and Iranians are not known.
In the following presentation regarding Indo-Aryan documents as evidence for linguistic history, it should be borne in mind that almost all dates are approximations.
pashtu is more closer to farsi than to sanskrit.
Avestan haurva- “every, all, whole,†Sanskrit sarva-<<
Sounds credible!!!
Infact the Word 'Hindu' resulted from Pharisees(Iranians) prononcing 'Haptha Hindu' instead of 'Saptha Sindhu'!!! to describe India.
Reza Khan I think Farsi is close to Sanskrit.
Infact the old language in Iranian 'Avesta' is strikingly similar to Sanskrit.
ALso Avesta shares quite a few Gods with Vedas.
If you look at the map you will see it is natural that Iranians and Indians share a few things in their language.
Hindu is an Arabic word for Indian. Not farsi one. It might be that since the early Official language in Iran (after arabs got successful and won the war) was arabic the word got into it.
About farsi close to sanskrit, i knew about that.
[This message has been edited by reza khan (edited April 26, 2002).]