New Delhi, September 14 (Daily Kiran) : The concept of ‘pure’ Hindi has traditionally been controlled by a select group of editors and textbook creators. However, in today’s digital age, new words and phrases are being crafted by everyday users on social media platforms.
On Hindi Day, prominent author Naveen Chaudhary reflects on the language’s rich history, stating, “Hindi is a blend of Sanskrit, Prakrit, Apabhramsha, Persian, Arabic, Turkish, and English. Many everyday words like ‘aam’ (mango), ‘kursi’ (chair), and ‘kitab’ (book) come from other languages, and we don’t consider them ‘impure.’ Language flows like a river, carrying both earth and water. When it stagnates, it becomes a stagnant pond. The insistence on ‘purity’ attempts to turn the language into a museum artifact. True purity in Hindi lies in its adaptability.”
Chaudhary views Hinglish as a natural evolution of daily communication. He notes, “We live in a time where we think in Hindi at home but interact in English at work and school. This makes academic Hindi difficult to use in everyday conversation. Hinglish, rather than being a corruption, represents a new linguistic system that reflects the true voice of India’s urban, bilingual middle class. We don’t say, ‘Mitra, kya hum chitra dekhne chalein?’ Instead, we say, ‘Bhai, film dekhne chalega kya?’ This is now the accepted, everyday language.”
He emphasizes that Hinglish is not replacing Hindi but is emerging as a new dialect within it, similar to how different registers like Khadi Boli, Braj, or Awadhi have existed within Hindi. The distinction now lies in class, medium, and generation rather than geography. This change is a testament to Hindi’s continuously evolving and receptive nature, akin to its historical adoption of Persian and Arabic words.
Discussing contemporary terms like ‘Gen Z,’ Chaudhary explains, “Our lives are influenced by the internet. From work to lifestyle, digital media shapes our trends, with English as the default language. While there are shifts in the market, globally, English remains dominant. Memes, captions, and global culture are all created in English. Hindi words lag behind because there is no organized cultural engine to promote them—no Hindi ‘internet slang factory’ or institution to champion new terms. Yet, words like ‘jhakas,’ ‘setting,’ ‘panga,’ and ‘jugaad’ have already entered the national lexicon through films.”
In his message to Hindi speakers, Chaudhary points out a discomforting truth: “The relationship between language and power remains class-based. The structure of higher positions still revolves around the systems established during British rule, which has perpetuated English dominance. Attempts to break this dominance have faced political backlash. Today, English is not just a language; it’s a gateway to jobs, justice, and opportunities.”
Chaudhary highlights the contradictions surrounding Hindi: “If Hindi-speaking citizens cannot seek justice in their language in court, it signifies a failure not just of language but of equality. Although there have been some changes, such as obtaining court decisions in one’s language, speaking Hindi in high administrative circles has become a symbol of inferiority. No major language in the world is considered inferior in its own country. Until technical, administrative, and judicial frameworks take Hindi seriously, slogans of ‘Hindi pride’ will remain superficial.”
He asserts, “This is fundamentally a political issue. The contradiction arises from the difference between language politics and language culture. When a foreign leader speaks a Hindi word or a YouTuber uses a Hindi song in a reel, they adopt Hindi as ‘cultural capital’ without political baggage. However, within India, Hindi often gets entangled in the politics of linguistic identity, linked to fears of imposition in non-Hindi speaking states.”
Chaudhary concludes that the real issue is not Hindi itself but how politicians present it as a tool of dominance over other languages. When Hindi is viewed not as a competitor but as “another Indian language” spoken widely, opposition will diminish. It is essential to differentiate between love for language and imposition. This is the true lesson to learn.
Leave a Comment