Pakistan Census 2017 (pashtun Population)

[Razor]

Friend of Baluch is right. Pashtuns still use the term Hindi or Hindki for the aborigines of Peshawar valley. The so called Seraiki people of Dera Ismail Khan, Mianwali etc and Potoharis are also called Hindki by us.

Hindki as in Indus River or as in Dravidian?? Your Friends seem to think its one and the same.

Whatever you may call the Hindki or Seraiki people, they are native to the Indus valley. That doesn't make them Dravidian.

[Razor]

I
You really know nothing about history, do you? Punjab has been Muslim for 1200 years? lol, let's consult your Baba Babur once again:


You can take a guess as to where he was when he said that (hint: it wasn't Hindu dominated South India).



The only influence of the Mughals we've confirmed in this thread is hating Indians, so unless you want to accept that your self-hate is the only cultural legacy you have inherited from the Mughals, I suggest you find some actual examples of Mughal influence on your culture.



You sound like a spoiled kid here. Who cares what you said with zero evidence? Prove your claims or shut up. You don't get to make claims here and expect us to believe them like a blind Pakistani nationalist would.

Even though the first time may have almost killed you, let me quote your Baba-i-Punjab Babur once again regarding the Indian cultural sphere:


Now, face what the founder of your Mughal culture said regarding your ancestors, or go away.

I didn't even mention Punjab.

You and FriendsofBaloch are obsessed with Punjabis to the point that its pathetic and you are completely devoid of any facts on the region or the people or the culture or even the language. Its amazingly pathetic to realise how much time you guys have spent on racist nonsense that contradicts everything else known about the region. Good luck with your pathetic goals.

[Razor]

Lol, look at this cheapskate, desperate paki guy trying to beg people to think of them as "Mughal". It will never happen.

You think that calling other people "Indian" is insulting to them but it isnt, it is only insulting to you because you are an insecure paki with no identity and an inferiority complex against your own ancestors, history and culture. It is just laughable when a paki tries to call somebody else "Indian". Indian is what you are, not us.

And who cares about "Hindu nationalists"? You're a descendant of some low caste Hindu yourself but like a typical paki suffering from Dravidian inferiority complex you try to make up a fabricated history and want to identify with the superior peoples and cultures that slaughtered and ruled your ancestors even though you have no connection to them and these foreign invaders humiliated and ruled your people. What a pathetic low life and self hater you are,

"Mughals" lol...! You're not a "Mughal" you fool, you're a Jat, an Indian, and since 1947, a "paki" thanks to the "Britishers" ..

Stinking pakis werent even Muslims when Babur invaded your Bundjab and slaughtered your ancestors. Most of you Dalits started converting to Islam long after the period of the 'Great' Mughals had ceased to exist. Why do you think Aurangzeb had to end up trying to become the opposite of Akbar? It was too late for him by then anyway. Idiot, lol. The actual Mughals were tiny in number and ruled India with the collaboration of Hindus and even intermarriage with smelly Hindu Rajputs. Just like your inferiority complex suffering Hindu nationalist brothers from the other side of the British invented Radcliffe line that try to rewrite that part of their history, you clearly know nothing about the Mughal empire and are trying to fabricate history too because you are ashamed of your native culture and identity.

Silly Jat settler that was brought to Kashmir and settled there by Ranjeet Singh, you have no clue about anything not even your own identity, lol, and you will never convince anyone that you are anything but a retarded Indian with a deep self-loathing and pathetic, snivelling fetish for the foreign conquerors of your weakling people.

You're a typical weirdo South Asian "brown sahib" and are no different from all those grotesque mentally colonized Indians and pakis that collaborated with the British during colonial rule over them and still to this day try to emulate, act, talk like their former British masters while putting themselves and their own people down, lol... The only difference is the colonial ruler of your stinking people you want to be thought of as being on par with is the "Mughals" rather than the more recent "Britishers" which is the more typical foreign "saheebs" your servile people try and emulate

Subcontinentals are such a deeply colonized and weak race of people. None of them want to claim themselves and own up to what they really are! They want to be "Mughals" or "British" or whatever other tiny number of foreign invader attacked, humiliated and ruled them for centuries.

You don't seem to understand the English language, so its pointless to argue with you.

Still amazing to see how much racist bile you have built up in that tiny brain of yours.

Meanwhile Pakistani identity, history and culture are synonymous with Indus Valley, Mughals and all the native identities of the region including Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun, Balochi and Kashmiri.
You don't look at any of those components of Pakistan and pretend they belong to anyone else other than Pakistani people. Sorry about your pathetic life. You wouldn't even repeat this nonsense on any other forum let alone in real life. Keep your vile views on display. It suits you and your persona.

[Friends of Baloch]

Hindki as in Indus River or as in Dravidian?? Your Friends seem to think its one and the same.

Whatever you may call the Hindki or Seraiki people, they are native to the Indus valley. That doesn't make them Dravidian.

So called Indo-Aryans are basically raped Dravidians. All Indo-Aryan languages have traces of Dravidian in them, just like Dravidian genes run thick through your paki veins as they do any fully Dravidian black skinned Tamil.

In fact, Punjabi language is a Dravidian substratum moreso than any other Indo-Aryan language is. Punjabi has retained more of it's original Dravidian phonology, retroflex consonants and morphology than other "North Indian" languages. This explains quite a bit why Punjab has always had the highest demographic of "untouchables" and "shudras" of any Indian region and why Punjabi has always been considered an inferior language because it is a group of dialects mainly spoken by Dalits and Hindu "low castes".

Even some of your fellow pakis are also now facing the truth about the Dravidian root of Punjabi.

Punjab Notes: Safdar Shah’s Punjabi Grammar and Nuzhat’s stories for children
Mushtaq SoofiApril 21, 2017
Punjab Notes: Safdar Shah’s Punjabi Grammar and Nuzhat’s stories for children - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

Dr Safdar Ali Shah is a poet, author, research scholar and linguist. He has a number of books to his credit some of which are Khabaan di Mutyaar (Punjabi poetry), Quest for Peace, Colonialism, English and Punjabi, The Sikh Heritage of Pakistan (co-author), The Hindu Heritage of Pakistan (co-author), The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan (co-author) and Sufi Poetry of Pakistan.

Dr Shah currently works at the National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, as Director Publishing and Student Affairs. He has an abiding interest in the Punjabi language and literature. “Punjabi Grammar”, his latest book, published by his university from Islamabad, had added to his already impressive repertoire. It fulfills the requirements of those who are in any way keen to understand and learn Punjabi as everyday speech and vehicle of creative expression. It’s neither the first book on Punjabi grammar nor the last. But it’s highly relevant because it deals with the grammatical structure as well as with the brief history and literature of the language.

“This book not only provides the details on the structure of the language, but also introduces the readers to some of the history and richness of the literature and culture that finds its strength in the ‘folk-character’ of Punjabi to which Dr Shah refers,” writes Lars Dyrud, the Principal Researcher, Sociolinguistic Survey of Punjabi, Pakistan (published 2011), Northland Community and Technical College, Minnesota, USA, in the blurb.

Dr Shah’s book which addresses the contemporary needs of language learning deserves such an accolade. His book seems accessible to both scholar and lay reader. He elucidates the hazy facets of the language structure and related issues in a lucid manner. The book is divided into different chapters in order to deal with diverse aspects of the language such as phonology, morphology and syntax which contain hidden in their innards the baffling secrets of stable but imperceptibly changing dynamics of incredibly complex abstract construct called language.

Language has contradictory nature; it can be as simple as breathing and it can be as difficult as looking for a needle in a haystack. Highly illuminating in fact is Dr Shah’s scholarly and researched introduction which takes a look at the trajectory of Punjab’s civilisation march. In order to understand the origins and development of the Punjabi language, one needs to know the complex evolution of Punjab’s society spanning over thousands of years. Any effort to fully analyse the highly stratified, layered and caste ridden society of the subcontinent will flounder if we ignore deliberately or out of ignorance the open secrets of Harappa civilisation which visibly underpins what is generally referred to as Indian civilisation. It’s in fact more of Pakistan’s heritage than that of contemporary India.

The core of a language cannot be discovered without discovering its speakers, Dr Shah rightly stresses. He explains briefly the ancient history of Punjab in which lie hidden the roots of its language. As to the origin of the Punjabi, three theories are prevalent: 1) it evolved from spoken Sanskrit 2) It sprang from the Vedic language 3) It predates Vedic and classical Sanskrit. It is indigenous language of Harappa and is organically linked to the group of Munda and Dravidian languages.

First two theories have been debunked by serious linguists and historians of the language in the aftermath of ample archeological evidence provided by excavations done on the Harappan sites. The vocabulary that the Punjabi language shares with the Vedic language and classical Sanskrit in no way proves that they gave birth to it because “the difficulty is that Sanskrit does not share a common syntax with these (so-called Indo-Aryan) languages,” writes Dr Shah.

He agrees with Asif Khan, Ainul Haq Faridkoti and others who with lot of painstaking research proved the non-Aryan origins of Punjabi.

Dr Safdar Shah has done a commendable job as his ‘Punjabi Grammar’ not only provides the readers with effective tools for learning Punjabi but also offers a valuable insight into an otherwise umbra filled cultural world of contemporary Punjab.

“Sattay Khairan”, a small book of stories for children, written and illustrated by Nuzhat Abbas, has been published by Punjab Lok Lehar, Sahiwal. Lok Lehar, headed by Qaswar Mubarak Butt, is a cultural body dedicated to promoting the Punjabi language, literature and culture.

Oxford-based Nuzhat Abbas is a well-known figure. She is a writer, vocalist and cultural activist. Her specialisation is child education in mother language. She is actively involved in helping expat parents acquire printed and audio-visual material so that they could teach their children Punjabi at home. It is now universally acknowledged (though not in Pakistan, especially in Punjab) that mother tongue plays a crucial role in developing a child’s communication skills and mental growth at an early age. It shapes his/her identity and creates sense of belonging. The book has an interesting format; the stories in Punjabi are printed in two scripts, Nastaliq (derived from Arabic) and Shahmukhi (derived from Landay) along with their English translation.

Gurmukhi part has been done by Sukhdev Sidhu and English translation is by Pratima Bhatia Mitchell. It caters to a range of diverse needs of Punjabi community. This small lovely book can be a source of delight for our children if we want them to know who we are and what is the wisdom bequeathed to us by our forefathers. Sattay Khairan should be on your child’s table.

[maneatinglizard]

I didn't even mention Punjab.

Indus Valley is a geographic region. Its synonymous with Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir valley and KPK.

Stupid, mentally ill, troll, or blind Pakistani nationalist?

You and FriendsofBaloch are obsessed with Punjabis to the point that its pathetic and you are completely devoid of any facts on the region or the people or the culture or even the language. Its amazingly pathetic to realise how much time you guys have spent on racist nonsense that contradicts everything else known about the region. Good luck with your pathetic goals.

Nobody's obsessed with Punjabis, and I haven't said a single racist thing here. What's really pathetic is that a blind Pakistan lover like you comes to a Pashtun forum and tries to sell us this fantasy that Punjabis and Sindhis aren't a part of the Indian cultural sphere of influence, and that you guys are actually inheritors of Mughal culture, an empire whose leaders humiliated and looked down upon your ancestors. What's also pathetic is that you haven't provided one single iota of evidence that you've actually taken anything from Mughal culture, or even know what Mughal culture is. And it's also pathetic that you clearly live in the West, so you know first hand that no one outside your little green Paki bubble can tell the difference between you and your Indian compadres, nor cares to even try, so you troll Internet forums trying to convince anyone who'll listen that you're not the same. Because deep down, you know what everyone else knows, and you know that the blind hatred for Indians your loser government propaganda feeds you makes no sense, but because you're not mentally strong enough to overcome the brainwashing, you blindly and foolishly toe the nationalist line, secretly hating yourself all the while, wishing you weren't born an Indian from a country of Indians that hates Indians.

[Traveller]

So called Indo-Aryans are basically raped Dravidians. All Indo-Aryan languages have traces of Dravidian in them, just like Dravidian genes run thick through your paki veins as they do any fully Dravidian black skinned Tamil.

In fact, Punjabi language is a Dravidian substratum moreso than any other Indo-Aryan language is. Punjabi has retained more of it's original Dravidian phonology, retroflex consonants and morphology than other "North Indian" languages. This explains quite a bit why Punjab has always had the highest demographic of "untouchables" and "shudras" of any Indian region and why Punjabi has always been considered an inferior language because it is a group of dialects mainly spoken by Dalits and Hindu "low castes".

Even some of your fellow pakis are also now facing the truth about the Dravidian root of Punjabi.

Punjab Notes: Safdar Shah’s Punjabi Grammar and Nuzhat’s stories for children
Mushtaq SoofiApril 21, 2017
Punjab Notes: Safdar Shah’s Punjabi Grammar and Nuzhat’s stories for children - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

Dr Safdar Ali Shah is a poet, author, research scholar and linguist. He has a number of books to his credit some of which are Khabaan di Mutyaar (Punjabi poetry), Quest for Peace, Colonialism, English and Punjabi, The Sikh Heritage of Pakistan (co-author), The Hindu Heritage of Pakistan (co-author), The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan (co-author) and Sufi Poetry of Pakistan.

Dr Shah currently works at the National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, as Director Publishing and Student Affairs. He has an abiding interest in the Punjabi language and literature. “Punjabi Grammar”, his latest book, published by his university from Islamabad, had added to his already impressive repertoire. It fulfills the requirements of those who are in any way keen to understand and learn Punjabi as everyday speech and vehicle of creative expression. It’s neither the first book on Punjabi grammar nor the last. But it’s highly relevant because it deals with the grammatical structure as well as with the brief history and literature of the language.

“This book not only provides the details on the structure of the language, but also introduces the readers to some of the history and richness of the literature and culture that finds its strength in the ‘folk-character’ of Punjabi to which Dr Shah refers,” writes Lars Dyrud, the Principal Researcher, Sociolinguistic Survey of Punjabi, Pakistan (published 2011), Northland Community and Technical College, Minnesota, USA, in the blurb.

Dr Shah’s book which addresses the contemporary needs of language learning deserves such an accolade. His book seems accessible to both scholar and lay reader. He elucidates the hazy facets of the language structure and related issues in a lucid manner. The book is divided into different chapters in order to deal with diverse aspects of the language such as phonology, morphology and syntax which contain hidden in their innards the baffling secrets of stable but imperceptibly changing dynamics of incredibly complex abstract construct called language.

Language has contradictory nature; it can be as simple as breathing and it can be as difficult as looking for a needle in a haystack. Highly illuminating in fact is Dr Shah’s scholarly and researched introduction which takes a look at the trajectory of Punjab’s civilisation march. In order to understand the origins and development of the Punjabi language, one needs to know the complex evolution of Punjab’s society spanning over thousands of years. Any effort to fully analyse the highly stratified, layered and caste ridden society of the subcontinent will flounder if we ignore deliberately or out of ignorance the open secrets of Harappa civilisation which visibly underpins what is generally referred to as Indian civilisation. It’s in fact more of Pakistan’s heritage than that of contemporary India.

The core of a language cannot be discovered without discovering its speakers, Dr Shah rightly stresses. He explains briefly the ancient history of Punjab in which lie hidden the roots of its language. As to the origin of the Punjabi, three theories are prevalent: 1) it evolved from spoken Sanskrit 2) It sprang from the Vedic language 3) It predates Vedic and classical Sanskrit. It is indigenous language of Harappa and is organically linked to the group of Munda and Dravidian languages.

First two theories have been debunked by serious linguists and historians of the language in the aftermath of ample archeological evidence provided by excavations done on the Harappan sites. The vocabulary that the Punjabi language shares with the Vedic language and classical Sanskrit in no way proves that they gave birth to it because “the difficulty is that Sanskrit does not share a common syntax with these (so-called Indo-Aryan) languages,” writes Dr Shah.

He agrees with Asif Khan, Ainul Haq Faridkoti and others who with lot of painstaking research proved the non-Aryan origins of Punjabi.

Dr Safdar Shah has done a commendable job as his ‘Punjabi Grammar’ not only provides the readers with effective tools for learning Punjabi but also offers a valuable insight into an otherwise umbra filled cultural world of contemporary Punjab.

“Sattay Khairan”, a small book of stories for children, written and illustrated by Nuzhat Abbas, has been published by Punjab Lok Lehar, Sahiwal. Lok Lehar, headed by Qaswar Mubarak Butt, is a cultural body dedicated to promoting the Punjabi language, literature and culture.

Oxford-based Nuzhat Abbas is a well-known figure. She is a writer, vocalist and cultural activist. Her specialisation is child education in mother language. She is actively involved in helping expat parents acquire printed and audio-visual material so that they could teach their children Punjabi at home. It is now universally acknowledged (though not in Pakistan, especially in Punjab) that mother tongue plays a crucial role in developing a child’s communication skills and mental growth at an early age. It shapes his/her identity and creates sense of belonging. The book has an interesting format; the stories in Punjabi are printed in two scripts, Nastaliq (derived from Arabic) and Shahmukhi (derived from Landay) along with their English translation.

Gurmukhi part has been done by Sukhdev Sidhu and English translation is by Pratima Bhatia Mitchell. It caters to a range of diverse needs of Punjabi community. This small lovely book can be a source of delight for our children if we want them to know who we are and what is the wisdom bequeathed to us by our forefathers. Sattay Khairan should be on your child’s table.

Punjabi is clearly an Indo-Aryan language as can be seen by it's close links to other Indo-Aryab languages such as Urdu and Hindi.

[maneatinglizard]

Punjabi is clearly an Indo-Aryan language as can be seen by it's close links to other Indo-Aryab languages such as Urdu and Hindi.

The claim comes across as yet another desperate attempt at creating an "indigenous Pakistani" identity that isn't related to India. Like how this Razor fool keeps on harping about Indus Valley culture.

[Friends of Baloch]

Punjabi is clearly an Indo-Aryan language as can be seen by it's close links to other Indo-Aryab languages such as Urdu and Hindi.

Yes, it is an 'Indo-Aryan' language with a Dravidian substratum and 'Munda' (aboriginal) connection, just like most (if not all) other Indo-Aryan languages have. But 'Punjabi' retains more of the original Dravidian substratum than other 'Indo-Aryan' languages do. This is not a new discovery by the way and has been known for decades, it is just a fact that is now increasingly becoming clear and accepted by language scholars as alluded to in the article.

[salman47]

Punjabi is clearly an Indo-Aryan language as can be seen by it's close links to other Indo-Aryab languages such as Urdu and Hindi.

Same can be argued for Urdu: Urdu is clearly an Iranian language as can be seen by it's close links to other Iranian languages such as Parsi and Pashto.

p.s. fact of the matter is, Urdu adopted the grammatical rules and tonnes of words from both Parsi and Pashto(Being ruled for a very long time by Pars and for short time by Afghan. In Pakistan adopting Parsi/Pashto/Arabic words is highly popular).
Regardless it does not make it 'non-Indian' language.

[Razor]

Nobody's obsessed with Punjabis, and I haven't said a single racist thing here. What's really pathetic is that a blind Pakistan lover like you comes to a Pashtun forum and tries to sell us this fantasy that Punjabis and Sindhis aren't a part of the Indian cultural sphere of influence, and that you guys are actually inheritors of Mughal culture, an empire whose leaders humiliated and looked down upon your ancestors. What's also pathetic is that you haven't provided one single iota of evidence that you've actually taken anything from Mughal culture, or even know what Mughal culture is. And it's also pathetic that you clearly live in the West, so you know first hand that no one outside your little green Paki bubble can tell the difference between you and your Indian compadres, nor cares to even try, so you troll Internet forums trying to convince anyone who'll listen that you're not the same. Because deep down, you know what everyone else knows, and you know that the blind hatred for Indians your loser government propaganda feeds you makes no sense, but because you're not mentally strong enough to overcome the brainwashing, you blindly and foolishly toe the nationalist line, secretly hating yourself all the while, wishing you weren't born an Indian from a country of Indians that hates Indians.

How do you keep track of the 20 definitions of India that you are obsessing about all the time? Its completely meaningless and I literally don't get your point. I also don't hate Indian people. I dislike the fact that they are using a misnomer to identify themselves.

I don't think you understand anything about Mughal Culture and you definitely don't understand what "Influence" means if you think modern Indians influenced Muslim cultures of Indus Valley. You honestly want me to believe that North and South Indians who never controlled Indus valley have had some sort of cultural influence over the region? You really are desperate and obsessed.

[Razor]

Yes, it is an 'Indo-Aryan' language with a Dravidian substratum and 'Munda' (aboriginal) connection, just like most (if not all) other Indo-Aryan languages have. But 'Punjabi' retains more of the original Dravidian substratum than other 'Indo-Aryan' languages do. This is not a new discovery by the way and has been known for decades, it is just a fact that is now increasingly becoming clear and accepted by language scholars as alluded to in the article.

You have an unhealthy obsession with Punjab. I am sure in a few years you will reason that Punjabis are not actually human either. Grow up and stop being a pathetic loser.#

Your sources are complete bull**** to say the least. What extensive research of Harrapan language is even possible when its undecipherable? This must be stage two of your Punjab obsession. To unlink Punjabi identity with the Indus valley and make it Dravidian. Lol. You really are one of the most obnoxious people I have ever encountered online. Congratulations on that honor.

[Razor]

The claim comes across as yet another desperate attempt at creating an "indigenous Pakistani" identity that isn't related to India. Like how this Razor fool keeps on harping about Indus Valley culture.

Your claims come across as desperate attempts to imagine a Dravidian link with Indus valley to create a shared subcontinent identity that doesn't exist.

I didn't say indigenous Pakistani, but the Indus valley states have a lot more in common with each other than the Ganges region, South India or East India. Its your problem if you are so blinded with your Punjabi hate.

Besides the British era, there is no other "historical India".

Shared native languages? Nope. Indus valley has its own languages.
Shared language tree? Nope. No Dravidian languages in Indus Valley states.
Shared religion? Nope. Indus valley has been Muslim for a millennium
Shared pre-islamic religion? Nope. Hinduism want even a defined religion before Arab invasions. Any attempt to say so is pure revisionism.
Shared culture? Nope. Indus Valley states have their own cultures and are heavily influenced further by Mughal culture, which is non existent in South and East India.
Shared ancient history? Nope, Indus valley civilization never extended to North, South or East India.
Shared Pre-Islamic history? Nope. Persian, Arab, Greek empires never extended into most of North India, East or South India.
Shared cuisine? Nope, Besides the various cuisines like Punjabi, Sindhi etc, Indus valley states have never been vegetarian like the Ganges region.

Shared tectonic plate: Yes.
Shared Mughal history and influence with North India: Yes

You cannot define an identity on a shared tectonic plate.
Mughal culture was a product of various Central Asian states, Turkic states and Islam. Nothing about this is "Indian" or even indigenous to Pakistan/Indus valley. All I said was we adopted this culture and language.

[Friends of Baloch]

Your sources are complete bull****

No, the only bullsh!tter here is you. You are just a typical self-loathing South Asian loser and an uneducated, spastic Indian with a Dravidian inferiority complex that thinks he is a "Mughal". Cant get any more ignorant and retarded than you.

The article about the original Dravidian root of your Bundjabi language comes from your country's biggest and most widely read newspaper and quotes actual scholars of linguistics based at universities in your own stinking country, lmao... So who the fck are you to say anything? You're not a linguist, historian and author like Dr Safdar Ali Shah of the National University of Sciences and Technology in Islamabad is, you're just a school boy, lmao... maybe not even a school boy.. but just a boy!

Now since you're a self-loathing Indian that only wants to hear what"Indus valley region" people have to say, here's another university professor and linguistic scholar from Pakiland on the Dravidian substratum of the Indo-Aryan languages spoken in Pakiland.



Languages of the Proto-Historic Indus Valley

- Dr. Tariq Rahman, Beaconhouse National University, Lahore · School of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences: January 1996

The Language of the Indus Valley

Unfortunately the few symbols on the ceramics of the Kot Dijian culture have not been deciphered. F.A.Durrani, following B.B. Lal and
B.K.Thapar, suggests that these symbols may be the beginning of writing in the Indus Valley.14 There are, however, nearly 4,000
specimens of a script from the Indus Valley Civilization carved on stone, fragments of pottery and other objects.15 They have not been
deciphered satisfactorily but a history of the attempts at such decipherment is available in Asko Parpola's most recent book on the
subject.16 The script, or at least the pictographs, appear to have been uniform but that is not proof that the language too was one. In
fact, as in all parts of the world, the language must have been divided in dialects or area-bound varieties. It is possible, however, that
these were varieties of a language belonging to one language family. The question then is what that language family was?
Beginning from Sir John Marshall, who was the first to suggest that the language of the Indus Civilization was Dravidian 17, most
scholars have taken the 'Dravidian hypothesis' seriously. Piero Meriggi, a scholar who contributed towards the decipherment of the
Hittite hieroglyphs, opined that Brahvi, the Dravidian language spoken even now in part of Balochistan, must be the original Harappan
language 18. However, Brahvi has changed so much and become so Balochified, as Elfenbein points out 19, that it cannot give clear
evidence of any sort in this case. Another scholar, the Spanish Jesuit Henry Heras, 'turned more than 1,800 Indus texts into "Proto-
Dravidian" sentences' 20 but his decipherment and linguistic theories were not accepted. Later Soviet scholars headed by Yurij V.
Knorozov, carried on a very rigorous computer analysis of sign distribution in the Indus texts coming to the conclusion that it belonged
to the Dravidian language family 21. However, Kamil Zvelebil, also a Russian scholar came to the conclusion that 'the Dravidian affinity
of the Proto-Indian language remains only a very attractive and quite plausible hypothesis.22 Indeed, the plausibility of the hypothesis
is such that many people, such as Iravatham Mahadevan, a scholar of old Tamil epigraphy, have used it to offer readings of the Indus
script 23. F.C.Southworth and D.Mc Alpin used the Dravidian roots to reconstruct the language of the Indus Valley.24 Walter A.
Fairservis, another specialist in this area, stated with considerable certainty that 'the Harappan language was basically an early
Dravidian language'.25 Even Parpola, after much careful and detailed sifting of the evidence, opines 'that the Harappan language is
most likely to have belonged to the Dravidian family'.26

The Dravidian Influence on Pakistani Languages

If the Harrapan language family was Dravidian, then the first languages of the area of present-day Pakistan was not Indo-Aryan but
Dravidian. Such a claim has been made in an extreme and unsubstantiated form by Ainul Haq Faridkoti, a Pakistani philologist, in his
several publications.27 Other scholars have used the theory of linguistic 'transfer' or 'interference' to explain the presence of Dravidian
elements in the languages of present-day Pakistan which are generally said to be the daughters of Sanskrit, an Indo-Aryan language.
'Transfer' or 'interference' refers to the influence of the rules of one's first language on another language one learns later. Thus, if
Pakistanis learn English, they speak it more or less according to the rules of their first language. As they get more and more exposed
to the rules of English, they will speak like native speakers. However, some characteristics of the mother tongue of the speaker will
remain which is what we call a Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi or Urdu accent. 28
Sometimes an old language dies out and all its speakers learn a new language. But the way they use this language is influenced by
the rules of their old language. The new language, then, has a 'substratum' of the old language. If we apply this theory to old Indo-Aryan
we can hypothesize that the Harappan language, which was probably Dravidian, influenced old Aryan. Thus Pakistani languages have
a Dravidian substratum. The evidence for the presence of this substratum, according to Bertil Tikkanen, is the presence of retroflex
consonants which do not exist in Iranian or European members of the Indo-European family of languages.29 Another clue may be the
existence of consonantal clusters in the beginning and end of words in Iranian, European , Dardic languages and even Sanskrit. Thus
Sanskrit has /p r e m/ which means love. But Hindi-Urdu speakers call it /p i r e m/. They insert the vowel /i/ between the two word-
initial consonants /p/ and /r/ because their own rules of pronunciation (called phonological rules) do not allow word-initial consonantal
clusters. Similarly, speakers of Urdu, Punjabi and Sindhi separate consonants in word such as 'school', 'stool' and 'small' etc.30 It may
be that this splitting of consonantal clusters comes into some of the languages of South Asia from languages older than Sanskrit. This,
however, is a suggestion by the present author which needs much research by linguists for substantiation.

The Language of Gandhara

According to A.H.Dani 'the new cultural trends of the centuries were identified in the swat, Dir, and Peshawar valleys, and because of its original location in that area, it was termed "Gandhara Grave Culture"'. 45 This region was inhabited by the Dasas who worshipped the snake and must have spoken the Indus Valley's Dravidian languages(s) before the Aryans established their supremacy here. 46 By the first millennium B.C, however, 'the Aryanization of most of the population of the northern areas of the subcontinent was complete'. 47 The elite used Sanskrit as we have seen but the common people used what scholars have called 'North-Western Prakrit' or the 'language of Gandhara'. 48 This language, opines Gankovsky, was probably made up of elements from the languages of the 'local pre-Indo-European population and Indo-Aryan tribes, as well as the Dardic and East-Iranian ethnic elements'. 49

-

Languages of the Proto-Historic Indus Valley. Available from: ResearchGate | Share and discover research [accessed Oct 07 2017].

[Razor]

^^

I hope everyone on this forum realises that you are a Hindu shill on a Dravidian promotional campaign. How incredibly insecure and pathetic that you are claiming and hijacking heritage on behalf of Dravidians. This has to be the most pathetic sight I have encountered.

Indus language is undeciphered. Only an momentous retard will claim it to be Dravidian. That includes Hindu nationalist and apparently, "Friends of Baloch" too. The researcher mentions all sorts of 'hypothesis'. Its not actual evidence. The reason being that the language has never been translated.

I am not even surprised at your hindi skills at this point. This must be the only way you are coping with your own Dravidian heritage.

[Friends of Baloch]

No, the only Dravidian here is you, paki boy! lol..

Look at how pathetic and squeamish you are.

Your own Paki linguists and historians working at universities in your own country have affirmed the Dravidian substratum of your bud bud ding dong paki languages like Bundjabi and Sindhi which utterly shatters the made up false beliefs you have and so you have again chimped out again and start calling other people "Indian" as if that is supposed to mean something to anyone here, lol... What a fcking moron you are!

Go and b!tch in a dark corner somewhere else you little mentally insecure weakling and keep trying to console yourself that you arent a Dalit paki but are some "Mughal" or something. Nobody is ever going to take you seriously.

Linguistic scholars and researchers from Britain, Russia, Spain, Pakiland, Italy, India, Finnland and more have all been named and cited in Tariq Rahman's academic paper published way back in 1996 as affirming the Dravidian substratum of 'Indo-Aryan' languages spoken in your smelly "Indus valley region" and you think you can come here with your own self-made fairy tales and convince anyone that they are all wrong and you are right?

What a deluded, mentally handicapped and desparate Dravidian retard in denial you are.

Here, let's read the excerpts from Dr. Rahman's academic paper again. Dr. Rahman from Beaconhouse National University, Lahore that is, lol.

And make a list of all the other linguistic scholars he cites while you're at it and where they come from!

You pathetic Dravidian in denial,



Languages of the Proto-Historic Indus Valley

- Dr. Tariq Rahman, Beaconhouse National University, Lahore · School of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences: January 1996

The Language of the Indus Valley

Unfortunately the few symbols on the ceramics of the Kot Dijian culture have not been deciphered. F.A.Durrani, following B.B. Lal and
B.K.Thapar, suggests that these symbols may be the beginning of writing in the Indus Valley.14 There are, however, nearly 4,000
specimens of a script from the Indus Valley Civilization carved on stone, fragments of pottery and other objects.15 They have not been
deciphered satisfactorily but a history of the attempts at such decipherment is available in Asko Parpola's most recent book on the
subject.16 The script, or at least the pictographs, appear to have been uniform but that is not proof that the language too was one. In
fact, as in all parts of the world, the language must have been divided in dialects or area-bound varieties. It is possible, however, that
these were varieties of a language belonging to one language family. The question then is what that language family was?
Beginning from Sir John Marshall, who was the first to suggest that the language of the Indus Civilization was Dravidian 17, most
scholars have taken the 'Dravidian hypothesis' seriously.Piero Meriggi, a scholar who contributed towards the decipherment of the
Hittite hieroglyphs, opined that Brahvi, the Dravidian language spoken even now in part of Balochistan, must be the original Harappan
language 18. However, Brahvi has changed so much and become so Balochified, as Elfenbein points out 19, that it cannot give clear
evidence of any sort in this case. Another scholar, the Spanish Jesuit Henry Heras, 'turned more than 1,800 Indus texts into "Proto-
Dravidian" sentences' 20 but his decipherment and linguistic theories were not accepted. Later Soviet scholars headed by Yurij V.
Knorozov, carried on a very rigorous computer analysis of sign distribution in the Indus texts coming to the conclusion that it belonged
to the Dravidian language family 21. However, Kamil Zvelebil, also a Russian scholar came to the conclusion that 'the Dravidian affinity
of the Proto-Indian language remains only a very attractive and quite plausible hypothesis.22 Indeed, the plausibility of the hypothesis
is such that many people, such as Iravatham Mahadevan, a scholar of old Tamil epigraphy, have used it to offer readings of the Indus
script 23. F.C.Southworth and D.Mc Alpin used the Dravidian roots to reconstruct the language of the Indus Valley.24 Walter A.
Fairservis, another specialist in this area, stated with considerable certainty that 'the Harappan language was basically an early
Dravidian language'.25 Even Parpola, after much careful and detailed sifting of the evidence, opines 'that the Harappan language is
most likely to have belonged to the Dravidian family'.26

The Dravidian Influence on Pakistani Languages

If the Harrapan language family was Dravidian, then the first languages of the area of present-day Pakistan was not Indo-Aryan but
Dravidian. Such a claim has been made in an extreme and unsubstantiated form by Ainul Haq Faridkoti, a Pakistani philologist, in his
several publications.27 Other scholars have used the theory of linguistic 'transfer' or 'interference' to explain the presence of Dravidian
elements in the languages of present-day Pakistan which are generally said to be the daughters of Sanskrit, an Indo-Aryan language.
'Transfer' or 'interference' refers to the influence of the rules of one's first language on another language one learns later. Thus, if
Pakistanis learn English, they speak it more or less according to the rules of their first language. As they get more and more exposed
to the rules of English, they will speak like native speakers. However, some characteristics of the mother tongue of the speaker will
remain which is what we call a Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi or Urdu accent. 28
Sometimes an old language dies out and all its speakers learn a new language. But the way they use this language is influenced by
the rules of their old language. The new language, then, has a 'substratum' of the old language. If we apply this theory to old Indo-Aryan
we can hypothesize that the Harappan language, which was probably Dravidian, influenced old Aryan. Thus Pakistani languages have
a Dravidian substratum. The evidence for the presence of this substratum, according to Bertil Tikkanen, is the presence of retroflex
consonants which do not exist in Iranian or European members of the Indo-European family of languages.29 Another clue may be the
existence of consonantal clusters in the beginning and end of words in Iranian, European , Dardic languages and even Sanskrit. Thus
Sanskrit has /p r e m/ which means love. But Hindi-Urdu speakers call it /p i r e m/. They insert the vowel /i/ between the two word-
initial consonants /p/ and /r/ because their own rules of pronunciation (called phonological rules) do not allow word-initial consonantal
clusters. Similarly, speakers of Urdu, Punjabi and Sindhi separate consonants in word such as 'school', 'stool' and 'small' etc.30 It may
be that this splitting of consonantal clusters comes into some of the languages of South Asia from languages older than Sanskrit. This,
however, is a suggestion by the present author which needs much research by linguists for substantiation.

The Language of Gandhara

According to A.H.Dani 'the new cultural trends of the centuries were identified in the swat, Dir, and Peshawar valleys, and because of its original location in that area, it was termed "Gandhara Grave Culture"'. 45 This region was inhabited by the Dasas who worshipped the snake and must have spoken the Indus Valley's Dravidian languages(s) before the Aryans established their supremacy here. 46 By the first millennium B.C, however, 'the Aryanization of most of the population of the northern areas of the subcontinent was complete'. 47 The elite used Sanskrit as we have seen but the common people used what scholars have called 'North-Western Prakrit' or the 'language of Gandhara'. 48 This language, opines Gankovsky, was probably made up of elements from the languages of the 'local pre-Indo-European population and Indo-Aryan tribes, as well as the Dardic and East-Iranian ethnic elements'. 49

-

Languages of the Proto-Historic Indus Valley. Available from: ResearchGate | Share and discover research [accessed Oct 07 2017].