Jump to content

Talk:Languages with legal status in India/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Original Research

I am afraid, I hadn't really paid attention to this article, but the entire article is full of original research. There had been some concerns about this in July 2007, but since the main author user:Lexmercatoria, who apparently was a lawyer, left, people assumed it was OK (or that is what I thought myself). The article, however, is a gross violation of Wikipedia policy. Almost every other sentence is an interpretation of the Constitution for which the citation is the constitution itself. Wikipedia is very clear about only using secondary sources, and unfortunately, this article doesn't use any; it is written like a paper in a law journal. The article will require a major cleanup. Not sure who will be up for it, but fixing it is not going to be easy, in my estimation. Perhaps, I will ask someone experienced like user:Venu62, who wrote Political integration of India. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. But it's easy enough to fix. Junk the present article, go back to something like this version (the last before all the OR crept in), merge in the bits of this article that are worth salvaging (i.e., the list of official languages of states and union territories), and move on from there. Most of the article as it stands simply cannot be cited to secondary sources, because it isn't borne out by reliable secondary sources. -- Arvind (talk) 18:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, part of the problem, then, is that that particular version states in its lead, "The Constitution of India has stipulated the usage of Hindi and English to be the two languages of communication for the federal Central Government." This is accurate enough, but it doesn't specify what the page name needs defining, the "Official language(s) of India." In other words, there are three questions that an article like this needs to clarify: (i) does the expression the "Official language of the Union" mean exactly the same thing as language of communication for the federal Central Government (ii) Does "Official language of India" (in its consensus usage) mean the same thing as "Official language of the Union?" and (iii) (a) if the answer to question (i) is no, then what is the difference? (iii)(b) If the answer to question (i) is yes, and that to question (ii) is no, then why have reliable tertiary sources, foreign governments, and international organizations (see here) interpreted them to be identical? Look forward to your reply. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
You are really annoying everybody here. Look in the constitution, where some articles tells "the communication from Union to States" and so on.. Please tell me, what is meant here? Are Union and States something like "gods"? (i) Can we touch them? (ii) Can we not? --Kalarimaster (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
See my post in a separate section below (soon). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Official language of India

Dear FMT, Could you please explain how the term "Official language of India" differs in meaning from "Official language of the Union?" Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it depends on context. For example, claiming that something is the official language of 'India', might be taken to mean that it is also the official language of the state Karnataka, but clearly this is not the case. But Hindi is certainly an official language of any Union government entity in Karnataka. I think Union in general means independent of a specific state or derived from union government, whereas India has a much broader meaning. The government of the state of Karnataka is certainly part of India, but it is to some extent detached from the Union itself. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 16:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Why should the "Official language of the Union" also not mean exactly the same thing? After all the States are a part of the Union, and article 1 of the Constitution begins with "Name and territory of the Union: 1. (1) India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States." In other words, every objection to the term "Official language of India" will also apply to "Official language of the Union." If there is a distinction between the two terms, could you point to it in the Constitution? I don't mean the examples of State versus Union tasks/functions, but an explicit statement that Union is different from India? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I am not taking any side, still trying to understand the problem. I certainly dont mean to muddy the waters. Is it that mentioning Hindi the official language of India is a misstatement as it might imply to an uneducated reader that Hindi is also the official language of states where it is not. If that is the case, how India=>Union change will solve this issue, even if we agree to do so? Docku: What up? 17:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
F&F, Union is an ambiguous term, and in many contexts Union = India. But when we speak of official languages it generally refers to official agencies. See if we clarify that it is the official language of the Union than it becomes very clear that it is not the official language of the states. But if we say official language of India, then it might be interpreted as being the official language of any official entity in India. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 18:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
To Docku and FMT: Two things: (a) it is possible that a unversed reader might think that Hindi is also the Official language of the States, but, equally, an unversed reader is not likely to even know the meaning of "Union." We certainly don't want them to go away with "Hindi is the Official language of the trade union." But, more seriously, the "union" includes the states; how in the world is a reader versed or unversed supposed to figure out that "Official language of the Union" doesn't mean "Official language of the States?" (b) As it currently stands, the first sentence of the article is, "The Official language of India is Hindi, its subsidiary Official language is English; States in India can legislate their own official languages." I don't think any reader who finishes that sentence is going to think that Hindi is the Official language of the States.
The Official language of the Union is not just the language of communication between the different departments of the Federal government. The official language is used on interstate road signs, on signboards in airports and railway stations, in all manner of public discourse of the Union with its citizens. It is used in postage stamps, currency bills and coins. What inter-departmental communication is the Government of India engaging in when it prints the name "Bharat" or the price of the stamp in Hindi? Rather, the Union (i.e. India) is communicating with its citizens, who purchase those stamps. The Official language is used in information that international organizations provide to citizens of their member nations. The Government of India is not even directly involved in that communication. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
PS Sorry, I just realized that Docku is saying the same thing, and that I had already agreed with him.  :) I need some coffee! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

What is needed in an article like this

An article with a title like "Official languages of India" needs to establish a number of points. I think the following are essential:

  • Is there a consensus language(s)—in the secondary literature— that best fits the title "Official language(s) of India?" if not, how do we deal with the 15 references in User:Fowler&fowler/Official_language(s)_of_India that state, for the most part, "Hindi is the official language of India?" I do understand the multi-lingual nature of India, but this question is important; other multi-lingual nations, such as, Spain, South Africa, Philippines, Canada, New Zealand, have similar issues. But a consensus answer (in the secondary literature, if there is one) needs to be explored for many Wikipedia purposes, not least the infoboxes, that got us here in the first place.
  • Does the term "Official language of India" mean only "Official language of the Union?" Or does it mean more? Does the term "Official language of the Union" mean only "The language of communication between the different divisions of the Federal Government?" In particular, where does Article 351 (and its effects in education etc) fit in this context:

In my opinion, solutions that do not deal with these issues (at the very least) will not help; it will keep the page in a perennial state of dispute and disrepair that it has been in for quite some time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Here, "Official language of the Union" means the administration language of India, since there are paragraphs in the article, where Union and States communicate. This is only possible with living languages.
    Hindi with its "constitutional rights for development" seems not to be connected with the fact, that it's a language of the Union. However, this could/should be mentioned in the Hindi article, since it isn't located in the Official Languages section of the constitution. I find Mr Mallikarjun's quite interesting. He tells us, that there is explicitly "no national language". --Kalarimaster (talk) 09:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Kalarimaster, Again no original interpretations of the Constitution. That is for law journals and supreme court justices (who don't always agree). If you think "Official language of the Union" means "language of the Central administration" then please provide secondary sources that say so, and not just one, but a preponderance, in the same way I have provided in my 15 sources that seem to think it is the same as "Official language of India."
Don't you think I have read Mallikarjun's article (if I am recommending it here)? Of course, it mentions national language; I have already referred above to the compromise made over it in the Constituent Assembly in 1950. But Mallikarjun doesn't refer to it in the third line of the lead for heaven's sake! Mallikarjun describes the historical context and morevoer doesn't link it to a Wikipedia page national language, which is too general to mean anything (since it included "official language" as one meaning of "national language." And what, BTW, is the title of Mallikarjun's article? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I have several secondary sources for Union government = union as stated in the "Official languages" section, the most obvious thing in India, but I won't create such a page like your "national language POV propaganda agenda" site. Let's face them eye on eye in the dispute resolution, if you are willing to open one as proposed at Talk:india. --Kalarimaster (talk) 19:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Kalarimaster, please stop messing around, Wikipedia isn't a propaganda platform. --dab (𒁳) 09:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by "messing around"? --Kalarimaster (talk) 11:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Archives

Is there any reason the archives for this page begin at /Archive 3 rather than /Archive 1? And can it be fixed? It's messing up the Archive box. -- Arvind (talk) 22:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Sigh... I thought I could fix this by a few moves - I moved /Archive 3 to /Archive 1 and /Archive 4 to /Archive 2, but I've since hit a wall because it seems I can't move over redirects. Essentially, these pages need to be moved:
And the counter in the Miszabot template needs to be changed to "5" from "7". If an admin is watching this page, could they please do the needful. -- Arvind (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Done, Arvind. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 16:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Anti-English POV?

Well, let’s check it: almost all (if not all) the websites of official Indian state governments and Indian central government are primairly in English; English is the official language of the capital territory of Delhi, 7 states and 3 territories (being the sole official language in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Sikkim). Many Indian universities use English as a way of instruction. And many business, too. In any part of India, we can see billboards advertising in both Hindi (or local language) and respectively in English. Court proceedings are in English, as the same way that many parliament discussions and resolutions.

So, why it seems the article as the way it is written now wants to downplay the role and the importance of English (saying many and many times that “English is not the official language of India”) as the main language of all India together with Hindi? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.232.230.231 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The contributor who seems to be downplaying the importance of English seems to be driven by a misguided sense of patriotism. Even though patriotism might be considered a laudable attribute in certain circles, I would like to bring to the kind attention of the said person the principle that in the context of an encyclopedia, truth/facts shall take precedence over opinion(s).Anonymus1984AD (talk) 19:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be a downplaying of the usage of English in this article, while there are several documents available suggesting that English is one of major languages spoken in India [1]. While, it is okay to be patriotic, the essence of an encylopaedic reference is for the rest of the world not to be meant for reflecting personal preferences of misguided patriotism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Showmethedoor

References

  1. ^ http://www.indiatribune.com/index.php?option=com_content&id=9705:india-worlds-second-largest-english-speaking-country&Itemid=471

Maharashtra

Maharashtra abloished Enlgish long ago. Only Marathi is the official language now. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Or have they unofficially abolished Marathi? I heard one minister taliking about making Hindi as the official language of maharastra state. Hindi is killing the Marathi language (in the same way as it killed so many other north Indian languages). And the irony is that the Marathi people are unaware about it. They are busy chasing the UP and Bihari people. Marathi film world is dead. Slowly other areas will follow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.88.164 (talk) 19:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC) Shut the anti-hindi crap please. Ministers mostly are un-aware of things they themselves say... --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

expansion proposal

I propose to add a "Official Language Policy - Origin and evolution" section detailing the Constituent assembly debates on language, the first official language commission (Kher commisssion), its report, the Pant parliamentary committee, its recommendations, Nehru's assurances of 1959&1963 and the official languages act of 1963, tamil nadu anti hindi agitations of 1965, Shastri's assurance of feb 65 and its codification by the amendment of 1967. I added this material to Anti-Hindi agitations of Tamil Nadu and i think it also belongs here. question is how much should be added and where it should be added. any suggestions?--Sodabottle (talk) 04:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

sounds like a relevant proposal. go for it. am sure u will receive enough support and opposition. --CarTick 04:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

just wondering

dont know the history as to why this article was created in the first place. though, i believe, it can be merged with Languages of India. --CarTick 21:49, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


The suggestion to merge it with languages of India is worth considering. Also since so much is being talked about the constitution and the language the constitutional provisions regarding linguistic minorities also needs to be talked about, including the role of Commissioner for Linguistics Minorities

K N Unni (talk) 11:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

asif bugti — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.183.187.64 (talk) 07:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

urdu official in west bengal

http://zeenews.india.com/news/west-bengal/urdu-declared-official-language-in-bengal_767905.html

http://m.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/official-language-status-for-urdu-in-some-west-bengal-areas/article3274293.ece/

http://news.oneindia.in/2012/04/03/urdu-declared-official-language-in-west-bengal.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.63.143.27 (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

List uses Report of the Commissioner for linguistic minorities: 50th report as main source

Report of the Commissioner for linguistic minorities: 50th report (July 2012 to June 2013) is used as the main source of the list. I've corrected/removed/updated places where other languages were mentioned using sources older that this one. ‑Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Today's edit

@Magentic Manifestations:, you have no edit summary for today's edit [1]. The diff isn't very clear. Can you explain what changes you have made? - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

See User_talk:Magentic_Manifestations#Edit_summaries. Had no idea about this post. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
My bad! I have merged the section union-state govt commn. along with the administration section which talks about usage of languages for administrative commn. Have also added Gujarat high court verdict on national language as an info. Pl. let me know the disconnect here!Magentic Manifestations (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Official versus National

The article is very direct that while Hindi and English are "official languages", they are not "national languages". However, both the official language and national language page are rather nebulous on what the distinction is (""National language" and "official language" are best understood as two concepts or legal categories with ranges of meaning that may coincide, or may be intentionally separate.") If the distinction is considered to be worth making in the first two sentences of this article, then it's probably worth expanding on what the difference between an "official language" and a "national language" is from the Indian perspective, and why that distinction mattered to the Gujarat High Court. -- 160.129.138.186 (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


Urdu in Jhardkand

The article about Jharkhand does not even mention Urdu among its official languages, here it is listed as additional official. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.176.28 (talk • contribs)

A reliable source has been given. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Importance of English versus Hindi

header retitled by me Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Mostly user behaviour-related discussion

Hi, I see repeated undoing, without any discussion by an user: Filpro, who is induging in edit-warring apart from using unparliamentary language while undoing any discussion on the same on his User: Talk page by using remarks like "Piss Off!". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Filpro

The user already appears to have been cited by someone else before via "Discretionary Sanctions Alert" for similar unproductive actions on that same user's talk page.

Kindly community, take appropriate steps to prevent such vandalism and avoidance of discussion by this user on this page, apart from repeated removal of sources from this and other related pages which appear to not present an NPOV by the user. (Particularly in how some of these pages appear to inflate the importance of Hindi, which is significantly debated in jurisprudence too apart from the legal standpoint of being important only in some particularly narrow contexts related to the Central or Union government of India.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.227.108.193 (talk) 10:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

This matter has been resolved. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The actual dispute is quoting the IP from above "Particularly in how some of these pages appear to inflate the importance of Hindi, which is significantly debated in jurisprudence too apart from the legal standpoint of being important only in some particularly narrow contexts related to the Central or Union government of India."

This issue has been resolved long time ago at India at Talk:India/Archive_12#Secondary_sources: for instance. There have been more later but this is what is the most accurate to say, Hindi, with the largest number of speakers, is the official language of the government English is used extensively in business and administration and has the status of a "subsidiary official language" from the article. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 2 February 2017

Per User_talk:Bishonen#India_Topic_Ban, there's a consensus that the other side of the edit war was right content-wise. So, requesting to restore to that instead: 04:48, 29 January 2017 version Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

"Additional official language"

What's the justification for this? As for one type of example, it looks like Hariyana gave Punjabi equal status as Hindi and English, so "additional" is unnecessary; these languages should be moved to the first column. In other cases maybe this moniker does fit, i.e. languages official only to parts of the state, or given a lesser status than other languages. Other thoughts? ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ тʌʟк 02:52, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

(Okay, it looks like Haryana gave Punjabi 'second(ary)/additional language' status, so it seems like moving languages with official status only in parts of the state to a third column would be better.) ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ тʌʟк 17:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Languages with official status in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:34, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


French and Pondicherry

French is an official language of Pondicherry. You can read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherry

Yes this is right, however is has not been constitutionally amended. Therefore it is not official language, i.e. working language of the government. Same as with Portuguese in Goa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.39.226.226 (talk) 14:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

national language of india

national language of india is "hindi" because it is the only language which anyone could understand and speak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asranjan07 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Do Not Distort the official language status

As per the honourable High court of Gujarat all 22 languages as mentioned in the constitution have equal footing. Please do not distort the constitution or the article. Though the majority of the population speaks Hindi in North hardly Hindi this must not be mistaken that Hindi alone is the official language.

It is not distorted, the lead section highlights clearly that India has 22 official languages. Shellwood (talk) 17:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


The union of India has not 22 but only 2 official languages, as specified in Article 343 along with Official languages act, 1963. Indian states have far more than 22 official languages. Scheduled languages and official languages are not the same thing. Nowhere in any law or the constitution is it mentioned that scheduled languages have been conferred official status, either of the Union or the states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.73.40.18 (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Reminder to update map soon (Jk and Ladakh UT)

With the creation of the two UTs, a reminder to update the map. Also remember to add gilgit baltistan in ladakh.

Afaik no official languages have been declared in either of the UTs, so we'll have to wait for their announcement.

Hindian1947 (talk) 22:04, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2020

There are twenty two official languages of India. Hindi in Devanagari script and English in Roman script are the official languages of the Indian Union and the states have their own official languages. [1]Rrakesh711 (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rrakesh711:  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. GoingBatty (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


Please view the citation mentioned in https://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/languagebr.pdf on the languages of India

References

  1. ^ "Linguistic Recognition in India" (PDF).
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aasim 05:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2020

India don't have any official languags. 2409:4072:71A:3417:2D33:A70A:441A:CA80 (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. –Austronesier (talk) 17:19, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2020

There are 22 official languages in india. According to India Constitution but You had shown Hindi and English is an National languages of India.

First of all there no national language for India only official languages are there.

The other languages including Tamil and others must be added to the list pls do it

2402:8100:2891:4AC4:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done The article already says that India has no national language. Hindi and English are the official languages at the Union level. The 22 scheduled languages (which are official languages at the state level) are listed and duly mentioned in the appropriate sections. –Austronesier (talk) 09:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Mismatch between map content and captions/intent

The map at the head of the page purports to show "States and union territories of India by the most commonly spoken official language.", but a good chunk of state boundaries are not visible. For example between Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Fundamental_metric_tensor (talk) 18:00, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Good article!

Without any claim to competence in this area, and therefore making no comment on accuracy, I just wanted to say that I found this article excellent in its present form - very informative and clearly presented. Thanks to all! --Northtowner (talk) 09:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I think map should be updated

The map on this page don't have Maithili language it must be located on map as Maithili is the part of 8th schedule of Constitution of India so I request you to update the map Karanjeet kumar (talk) 17:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2021

Change Article 343(1) of the Indian constitution specifically mentions that, "The official language of the Union shall be Hindi in Devanagari script. The form of numerals to be used for the official purposes of the Union shall be the international form of Indian numerals." to Article 343 of the Indian constitution states "(1) The official language of the Union shall be Hindi in Devanagari script. The form of numerals to be used for the official purposes of the Union shall be the international form of Indian numerals. (2) Notwithstanding anything in clause (1), for a period of fifteen years from the commencement of this Constitution, the English language shall continue to be used for all the official purposes of the Union for which it was being used immediately before such commencement." Further, under article 344 it is specified how the President shall authorize Hindi as the official language after the period of fifteen years. However after fifteen years in 1965 when the move was made to make Hindi the official language a series of protests broke out throughout India. To consider public sentiments, it was declared that English would continue to be used as official language of the Union. It was also declared that declared that every state would have complete and unfettered freedom to continue to transact in the language of its choice. So in effect India does not have a national language, but rather an official language for business of the union which could be English or Hindi.

Citations: Indian constitution - https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/COI_1.pdf India After Gandhi by Ramachandra Guha (Chapter 18, section 3) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_After_Gandhi Tinkerbeast (talk) 10:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

@Tinkerbeast: The lede section was disfigured a few weeks ago, and I have restored the earlier version. It does not include the long quote regarding the status of English, but I think your other point (in effect India does not have a national language) is addressed now. –Austronesier (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
I've left a warning on the user's talk page, who vandalised the lead. — DaxServer (talk to me) 15:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

There is no National language of india

Ther is not any National language of india 152.57.4.200 (talk) 10:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Lead Map

@Haoreima: Regarding this edit. I believe official would be a better term instead of most common, since in most of the Hindi belt region, Hindi is only the official language, but in reality dominated by other languages that are considered dialects Hindi by the government of India, but not by linguists, not to mention sub-regions like Mithila, Boroland, were the language is different from the perceived dialect or state official language. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk Many state level predominant languages did not get official language status of their own states. Meghalaya, Sikkim, Arunachal and Nagaland use only English as their official language and not any native tongues. So, the usage of the term "official language" in the description of the map will be still complex and inaccurate because the map shows native tongues of the said 4 states I had mentioned. --Haoreima (talk) 14:39, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
@Haoreima: Yes, the map seem problematic and should not be part of this article, not to mention a lot of states have co-offical languages. As for Sikkim, there was a bill to be passed that would declare Nepali, alongwith Bhutia and Lepcha as official languages [2]. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

India

There is no national language in India.[4][5][6] However, article 343(1) of the Indian constitution specifically mentions that, "The official language of the Union shall be Hindi in Devanagari script. The form of numerals to be used for the official purposes of the Union shall be the international form of Indian numerals,"[6] while the clause 3 of Official Languages Act, 1963 mentions the, "Continuation of English Language for official purposes of the Union and for use in Parliament", thus denoting Hindi and English as the official languages of the Union.[7] The business in Indian parliament can only be transacted in Hindi or in English. English is allowed to be used in official purposes such as parliamentary proceedings, judiciary, communications between the Central Government and a State Government. There are various official languages in India at the state/territory level. States within India have the liberty and powers to specify their own official language(s) through legislation. In addition to the official languages, the constitution recognizes 22 regional languages, which include Hindi but not English, as scheduled languages.

Language region map of India 2001:8F8:1D71:2B94:5931:E1C8:DD70:BC39 (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Languages_with_legal_status_in_India/Archive_4&oldid=1228572441"