Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Walking Away or Ignoring Afghanistan is not an Option for India

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
    You're making the argument I used to make a long time ago. But I found out that this claim is incorrect because firstly

    the name Shansaabani is not in any Pashto literature or even translatable into Pashto. The root word wishnasp has no equivalent in Pashto.

    Now Ghor does sound a lot like "Ghar" in Pashto, but Ghor refers to a different word meaning than Ghar. In Farsi Ghor means depth. Now perhaps Ghor and Ghar are related words in the Indo-European sense, but they aren't linguistically the same when it comes to Pashto and Farsi. There's no such word as "Ghor" in Pashto. There is Ghorzang, and there is Ghar, but no Ghor.

    Lastly the name "Suri", there are Suris who are Ghilzai, but The name Suri is not exclusively Pashtun nor any indicator of Pashtun ancestry in and of itself.


    There's no evidence that the Shansabani Suris are the Ghilzai Suris. Thus this cannot be a legitimate claim.
    According to Pashto book “Pukhtana da tareeh pa rana ke” Sher Shah Suri states "I wish to shift the people of Ghor to India (plains)" in this reference by ghor he means Afghanistan(Pashtonistan). Puta Khazana mentions Amir karor, Malak ya gharsheen, Asad soori were the very first Pashto poets from Ghor. The fact that a Turkish Farsi speaker needed a translator to communicate with them proves they did not speak Farsi nor Turkish.
    ای وخته بېرته راشه يو افغان وزېږوه
    نو بيا يو احمد خان يا ميروس خان وزېږوه

    چې ننګ په وطن وکړئ داسي ځوان وزېږوه
    نويا خو خوشحال خان يا بادشا خان وزېږوه

    سپن اوشن بيرغ د ازادۍ کړي زمونږ پورته
    بيا داسې يو بادشا لکه امان وزيږوه

    چې جوړه کړي انګريز ته بيا غزا د ارنوۍ
    يو داسې لوی غازي ميرزمان خان وزيږوه

    سرو مال قربان کړي له وطن او له ناموسه
    په مينه د وطن کي افغانان وزيږوه

    ټپې د ازادۍ کړه بورا ته په خيالونو
    اوس راشه په شعرنو کي طوفان وزيږو

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Azmal View Post
      What does "his women" have to do with him?
      everything

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Azmal View Post
        According to Pashto book “Pukhtana da tareeh pa rana ke” Sher Shah Suri states "I wish to shift the people of Ghor to India (plains)" in this reference by ghor he means Afghanistan(Pashtonistan). Puta Khazana mentions Amir karor, Malak ya gharsheen, Asad soori were the very first Pashto poets from Ghor. The fact that a Turkish Farsi speaker needed a translator to communicate with them proves they did not speak Farsi nor Turkish.

        You mean Pukhtana Tarikh pa Rarnna Ki, Pashtuns in the Light of History. By Syed Bahadur Kakakhel? Sher Shah Suri was certainly Pashtun, but what is the author's source for the statement? And secondly is the word being used as "Ghor" or "Ghar" because if it's "Ghar" ....it makes more sense because, Ghar refers to higher elevation terrain, to lower elevation, plains.

        Do you have the actual word for word Pashto statement available?

        Pata Khizana uses a style of Pashto which existed during the 16th-17th Century, The Ghorids were 10th Century. If those poets were from Ghor they'd have a much more archaic form of Pashto.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by khushal View Post
          So why did they need translators then?

          Who need translators from who?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
            Who need translators from who?
            Azmal said this:
            3-Baihaqi who is considered as the most famous historian of the Ghaznavid era had written in page 117 that "Sultan Massud leaves for (jaroos ghoor) “jai darmeshi paat”... and sends his learned companion with two people from Ghor as interpreter between this person and the people of that region.
            If they needed interpreters, then what language did they speak.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by khushal View Post
              Azmal said this:


              If they needed interpreters, then what language did they speak.
              Well if their name is any indicator it seems they spoke a Middle Persian dialect. So it would make sense since Middle Persian is not mutually intelligible with Dari that was spoken at the Ghaznawids.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
                Well if their name is any indicator it seems they spoke a Middle Persian dialect. So it would make sense since Middle Persian is not mutually intelligible with Dari that was spoken at the Ghaznawids.
                The different dialects of farsi that existed at the time would have been able to understand each other especially of "learned men" as the author puts it. Just like farsiwan in Iran, in azarbajan, in afghanistan, in tajikistan and even in armenia are going to understand each other. They would not need interpreters especially if they are of learned men.

                Comment


                • Well Middle Persian is much older than Dari, I wouldn't classify it as "Farsi" it's just used as a Term by linguists. But we can find mutual intelligibility between Dari of the 10th century and Dari now, even though changes have happened, structurally they're the same. But Middle Persian would not necessarily be intelligible to a Dari of the 10th century.

                  About being learned men, Even Learned men don't know everything.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
                    You're making the argument I used to make a long time ago. But I found out that this claim is incorrect because firstly

                    the name Shansaabani is not in any Pashto literature or even translatable into Pashto. The root word wishnasp has no equivalent in Pashto.

                    Now Ghor does sound a lot like "Ghar" in Pashto, but Ghor refers to a different word meaning than Ghar. In Farsi Ghor means depth. Now perhaps Ghor and Ghar are related words in the Indo-European sense, but they aren't linguistically the same when it comes to Pashto and Farsi. There's no such word as "Ghor" in Pashto. There is Ghorzang, and there is Ghar, but no Ghor.

                    Lastly the name "Suri", there are Suris who are Ghilzai, but The name Suri is not exclusively Pashtun nor any indicator of Pashtun ancestry in and of itself.


                    There's no evidence that the Shansabani Suris are the Ghilzai Suris. Thus this cannot be a legitimate claim.
                    Sometimes "o" sound and the "a" sound are interchanged depending on dialect. For example in khost, the people there call their city "khast" and "kor" is changed to "kar." all the other words with that vowel sound are changed the same way.
                    Last edited by khushal; 04-30-2015, 02:47 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
                      Well Middle Persian is much older than Dari, I wouldn't classify it as "Farsi" it's just used as a Term by linguists. But we can find mutual intelligibility between Dari of the 10th century and Dari now, even though changes have happened, structurally they're the same. But Middle Persian would not necessarily be intelligible to a Dari of the 10th century.

                      About being learned men, Even Learned men don't know everything.
                      most authors say the changes between late Middle and Early New Persian were very gradual, and in the 10th-11th centuries, Middle Persian texts were still intelligible to speakers of Early New Persian.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by khushal View Post
                        Sometimes "o" sound and the "a" sound are interchanged depending on dialect. For example in khost, the people there call their city "khast" and "kor" is changed to "kar." all the other words with that vowel sound are changed the same way.


                        That's true, but even the locals of Ghor, are predominantly Farsi speaking say Ghor. I'm just suggesting that the Ghor-Ghar connection would be inconclusive.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by khushal View Post
                          most authors say the changes between late Middle and Early New Persian were very gradual, and in the 10th-11th centuries, Middle Persian texts were still intelligible to speakers of Early New Persian.


                          Well what stage would that have been? Because The Middle Persian- Dari transition would have been a considerable leap

                          For example Winashp is the Middle Persian of Shansabani, that's quite a difference.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
                            Well what stage would that have been? Because The Middle Persian- Dari transition would have been a considerable leap

                            For example Winashp is the Middle Persian of Shansabani, that's quite a difference.
                            I havent read too much about languages transitions but this is what it says:

                            Transition to New Persian
                            The modern-day descendant of Middle Persian is New Persian. The changes between late Middle and Early New Persian were very gradual, and in the 10th-11th centuries, Middle Persian texts were still intelligible to speakers of Early New Persian. However, there are definite differences that had taken place already by the 10th century:

                            Sound changes, such as
                            the dropping of unstressed initial vowels
                            the epenthesis of vowels in initial consonant clusters
                            the loss of -g when word final
                            change of initial w- to either b- or (gw- → g-)
                            Changes in the verbal system, notably the loss of distinctive subjunctive and optative forms, and the increasing use of verbal prefixes to express verbal moods
                            Changes in the vocabulary, especially the substitution of a large number of Arabic loanwords for words of native origin
                            The substitution of Arabic script for Pahlavi script.

                            Comment


                            • Interesting but how intelligible would they be? like Kandahari Pashto vs. Paktawal Pashto intelligible or

                              German vs. Norwegian intelligible?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Brown Skinned Savage View Post
                                Interesting but how intelligible would they be? like Kandahari Pashto vs. Paktawal Pashto intelligible or

                                German vs. Norwegian intelligible?
                                here is a more detailed explanation:

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X