Monday, January 23, 2006


There is a great -- really great -- piece by Ruchir Joshi on India's addiction to renaming in the Calcutta Telegraph. As many readers will be aware by now, Bangalore will be changing its name to Bengaluru.

Something about the name brought out the schoolboy in all three of us and the holiday was rife with jokes. Was the name-change proposed by a local Bong? If not, why on earth would IT-rich, culturally proud, ’Digas [Kannadigas] want ‘Bengal’ included in the name of their capital city? The second half, ‘luru’, with a couple of letters added or changed, led to all sorts of dormitory-humour, wisecracks unreproducable in a family newspaper such as this, except it suffices to say that the tweaked ‘luru’ could play one way in the Hindi we all spoke, and another in the Bangla with which we were all familiar.

On the flight back, a slightly more serious vein of thought asserted itself. I remember clearly how angry I became when Bombay was officially renamed Mumbai a decade ago, and again, when the same thing happened soon after to Madras and then, finally, to Calcutta. Usually this anger remains contained to a note I add when writing for newspapers and magazines unfamiliar with my preferences, a note which requests everyone to kindly leave alone the city names I use, such as Calcutta, Bombay or Madras. But now, with the imminent adding of Bangalore to this list, the whole issue rekindles itself for me and it’s about far more than just names.

Hm, I think I know the word he's thinking of in Hindi, though not Bangla.

Along the way, Joshi makes some great points about how place-names function in India, across a wide spectrum of languages:

While I am all for changing ‘Road’, ‘Street’ and ‘Avenue’ to Sarani, Marg and Vithi, happy with the exchange of Lansdowne for Sarat Bose and chortlingly happy with the kicking out of Harrington in favour of Ho Chi Minh and the cancelling of Camac to install Shakespeare, (or even ‘Sex Pyaar’ as one signboard notably proclaimed), to my mind the same principle does not apply to city names.

This is because, a city, like a country, is a much larger, a much more complex construct than a lane or a plaza. There is a reason why most people reading this column probably did not pause to think twice about my use of 'India' and 'Indian' in the previous paragraph but one: 'India', much more than 'Hindustan', 'Bharat', or 'Bharatam', is the name that is now truly representative of the country we live in; it is the one agreed name that diverse people from all over the country use regularly and without quarrel, and, since the spread of cricket and television, it is a name that is now freely used across city, small town and even village; also, not unimportantly, now that we see ourselves as deeply connected to the world, it is the name by which the international community knows us and recognizes us.

Similarly, what a ‘Calcutta’ or a ‘Bombay’ signifies is a typically subtle Indian way of eating your cake and having it too. What the old names say, which Mumbai and Kolkata don’t, is: ‘yes, we come from a colonial history, but also, yes, we have overcome that colonial past and are confident enough to keep whatever is useful from that past, whether it be the English language, our railway network, or, indeed, the names of two of our most famous cities. Just as the name India provides a nomenclatural umbrella to awesome diversity, so do the names of these urban leviathans provide each a name-shelter under which all who have contributed to that living city can live and continue to work.’

(First thought: "Sex Pyaar"? Too good.)
Second thought: Yes, exactly, exactly. And there are other good points; go read the whole thing.

Incidentally, if you haven't already, you should check out Sepia Mutiny's parody of the name change here, though commenter Raghu offers a defense of "Bengaluru" that is also worth considering as a counter-point:

Those of us who are objecting probably also need to examine why we're so distressed about the change. After all, law does not change names, it just changes spelling. Theres a sentiment that stirs beneath our rational, political arguments about the adequacy of the status quo and the dangers of linguistic nationalism and tubthumping - its our anxiety at the fact that our precarious culture, not fully Western but certainly not fully Kannadiga, just got pushed onto its back foot. Taking the names entirely on their own accoustic merits, Bengaluru is so soft and mellifluous, but Bangalore shakes off those drooping vowels and is crisper, more anglicized - it sounds like the city we want it to become for our comfort - and that's our linguistic chauvinism.


Ruchira Paul said...

I can hardly recognize my old haunts in Delhi by name any more -have to navigate by landmarks.

But some street names OUGHT to be changed, you will agree. Closer to my current home in Houston, the following drama unfolded just over two years ago. And the funny thing was that some of the holdouts claimed the name was meant as an "honor".

"BEAUMONT, Tex. - It is merely a four-mile stretch of asphalt on this East Texas city's outskirts, dotted with some ranch-style houses, a few decaying trailer homes and a shuttered gun shop, in the distance the rice fields that brought a small group of Japanese settlers here a century ago.

But the name of the country lane, Jap Road, has long angered many Japanese-Americans. Equally outraged are numerous people who live on Jap Road, which has 100 or so residences; they view criticism of their address as meddling in their affairs.

"I hear 'Jap' cars and 'Jap' bikes all the time," Buddy Derouen, 69, a retired petrochemical worker who lives on the road, in the community of Fannett, said in a recent letter published in The Beaumont Enterprise. "Why not Jap Road?"
The thought of outsiders' descending on Beaumont makes many here bristle. More than 100 residents of Jap Road and supporters of their effort to maintain its name gathered at an open-air bar on Wednesday evening to drink beer, eat barbecue and ponder how to thwart their opponents.

"We're not here to bash the Japanese," Wayne Wright, a retired petrochemical worker who is spearheading a movement to preserve the name, said in an interview before the meeting. "How can I be considered a bigot and a racist when I got a Puerto Rican son-in-law?"

Mr. Wright's wife, Polly, said she believed the name was originally intended to honor the memory of Yasuo Mayumi, a Japanese farmer who, according to local lore, settled in the area in 1905 before returning to Japan in the 1920's."

Read the whole story here. Sorry about the excessively long comment but this one is priceless.

4:37 PM  
Rage said...

I'm particularly annoyed at the repeated efforts by BJP types to rename Ahmedabad to Karnavati or some such nonsense. India is diverse and has a rich and multi-layered history. Deal with it, people!

Maybe they should rename "cricket" while they are at it...

5:44 PM  
Amardeep said...

Maybe they should rename "cricket" while they are at it...

It's "Krikut," damnit! Did you miss the memo? When you spell it "cricket," you speak with the voice of the evil oppressor.

10:57 PM  
Rishi Gajria said...

Love the article by Ruchir Joshi. Dont agree with Raghu's point of view. That argument can be turned on it's head with the other side being the chauvinists.
That was certainly the case in Bombay where initially signs were put up by the Shiv Sena in their strongholds claiming the city's name is Mumbai not Bombay with exclamation marks at the end. I still remember this when I lived in Kandivli(suburb in Bombay) in the mid 80s. When the name change occured, the Congress Party and the English press were the snakes who abdicated without even offering a counterpoint.

6:04 AM  
Rob Breymaier said...

The name change to Mumbai is certainly the most difficult to decide upon for me. As Rishi stated, the initial push for the change came from the Shiv Sena as a chauvinist exercise. But, some postcolonialists also found the name change welcome as a sign of a new, more independent Indian identity.

To some extent, the names changes that followed Bombay/Mumbai seem to just eb copycat moves. As if, since Bombay did it so should any city hoping to be taken seriously in the "new India".

I don't know enough about the local motivations for Bengaluru. But, it seems like this was not due to overwhelming local want of a name change. Instead, itseems more like the copycat behavior. Chennai does seem more locally inspired. Kolkata in between.

But, really, names are powerful, which is why Joshi has such strong feelings about the changes. And, while I sympathize with the argument made (I, for one, prefer Bombay but I also prefer Chennai. But, I'm also a white American who has never lived in India.). One could make a very similar counter argument that the new names are more representative of exactly the same features.

Moreover, they indicate an independence that Bombay and Bangalore never can. Why should India define itself in the eyes of others?

12:23 PM  
Archana said...

As a Kannadiga-American, Bengaluru only returns to what we actually say, whether we’re speaking Kannada or English. You’ll never catch my parents saying “Bangalore” unless they’re talking to Anglo friends. Returning to the uncorrupted spelling of Bengaluru vs. Bangalore only solidifies phonetics – I think Ruchir is making a mountain out of a molehill. Like Mumbai, Chennai, and Kolkata, renaming simply allows Indians in India and the diaspora to take pride in their place of origin and reclaim a piece of history tainted by colonialism. I don’t think anyone imagines that the “yoke of the oppressor” will be thrown off by a simple name change. However, as you well point out, India is a diverse country, and we must exercise caution to avoid renaming cities for pernicious political ends or to promote the divisive Hindu nationalist cause – e.g., renaming Allahabad as Prayag to return to a false notion of a purer Vedic time (

9:42 PM  
Rishi Gajria said...


"You’ll never catch my parents saying “Bangalore”"

What I gather from this is that the rest of India has to pronounce as the Kannadigas pronounce it.

Not too different from the sentiment amongst the Sena. Their common refrain
Mumbai konachi aahey - Who does Bombay belong to
Mumbai Maharashtra chi aahey - Mumbai belongs to Maharashtra

Besides, do you honestly believe these name changes were motivated by national pride or finding a new identity? I think they are all motivated by politics. The names wouldnt have survived 50 years or over if they were. KolKata is the most blatant example of regional and language chauvinism. Nothing to do with finding a new identity.
Just a way of getting stuck up on past history.

2:38 AM  
Rishi Gajria said...

And a great way to divert attention from actual governance.

2:39 AM  
Progressive Indian-American Woman said...

As a native of Bombay (not Mumbai) I find myself reluctant to use the name Mumbai when speaking in English or to non-Mumabikars.

I am with Ruchir Joshi on this one. I am not sure just what is gained by changing the names of these grand cities. Indeed, they are much more than the private enclave of any one religion-based or region-based group.

Here is a funny anecdote. I am a Maharashtrian married to a Gujarati and we both grew up in Bombay. On one occasion when I made a statement to the effect that we Maharashtrians are the original residents of Bombay, my husband took offense. "What do you mean?" he fumed. "Bombay belongs to us Gujaratis as well." He is right and I stand corrected.

Until the early 1960s (I am not sure of the exact year), there was a Bombay state that included parts of what is now Gujarat. Bombay is a truly cosmopolitan city - I was educated at a school where some of the teachers were from Kerala, I attended colleges founded by Sindhis who fled to Bombay from Pakistan at the time of Independence; I enjoy Bambaiyya street food - South Indian delicacies and North Indian chaat; the Bollywood film industry is based in Bombay. My best friend when I was in school was a Punjabi. My husband's best friend (a Gujarati) is married to a Sikh ....on and on.

Last week I had to call the anti-virus provider for tech support. I got a Vijay on the line. After helping me with my issue, he asked me -

"So are you from India?"


"From where?"

"Bombay. Where are you located?"

"Chennai. Have you visited Chennai?"

"Yes, I visited once a long time ago."

"I have never been to Mumbai" he said, deftly converting my Bombay to his Mumbai.

I suppose I am just out of touch - both by distance as well as time.

8:37 AM  
Rob Breymaier said...

I have a post on my site to show how the West reacted to the name change from Bombay to Mumbai. It's apparent from a the reports that the local context was hardly ever considered. The West saw the postcolonial issue first -- including some of the diaspora.

9:06 AM  
Archana said...

I totally hear Rishi's points, especially about governance and distraction from it. I just think Raghu's counterpoint simply resonates more with me - "it just changes spelling" and Bengaluru certainly has a better acoustic ring to it! Cheers...

1:03 PM  
Rishi Gajria said...

Rob Breymaier,

Whats the URL for that post?

3:46 AM  
Rishi Gajria said...



"I just think Raghu's counterpoint simply resonates more with me - "it just changes spelling" and Bengaluru certainly has a better acoustic ring to it! Cheers..."

Yes, it sounds nice but only when spoken in kannad and not in English. If you look at the spelling change that has been proposed, the first part Benga is stressed. While in Kannad, it is the end that makes the word melodic. This is just my opinion, I dont think English always translates our words well. I think that Bengaluru will be mispronounced(I hope mispronounced is a word) like other name changes. Mumbai in Gujarathi and Marathi and Mumbai in other tongues are two different cities. Have you ever heard Sanjay Manjrekar blurt out Kolkata. He's Indian!

Ruchir wrote a thoughtful article. My main gripe is the Regional and Language Chauvinism that motivates such name changes.

Regards :)

4:15 AM  
I've never been to Bengaluru said...

I have no problem with Bengaluru. I completely agree wit Raghu. Besides, Ruchir's point about being comfortable with our colonial past - perhaps that is exactly what te renaming of cities expresses: that we aren't yet fully comfortable wit our colonial past. Remember that these changes are coming about from some kind of identity politics or another, via the ballot box, oops, the voting machine. We English speaking Indians - and, of the desis too - do not fully understand the cultural milieu of the 'vernacular' Indian, and worse, are contemptous of it. Which says more about us, the citizens of Bangalore than them, the citizens of Bengaluru.

5:36 PM  
Anonymous said...

I stay out of the country and was unaware till recently that the Karnataka Government intends to change the name of Bangalore to pre-British era name of ‘BengaLuru’ because Prof. U. R. Ananthamurthy has recommended so. I am very saddened by this move of the Karnataka Government of the day. It is very unfortunate that the Karnataka Government is taking the advice of a man who has refused to kannadaize his name, yet, and walks around with English initials.

Note: 'La' and 'Lu' should be pronounced as in Kannada.
1 What is the objective behind changing the anglicized version of the name?
Bangalore is still ‘BengaLuru’ in Kannada and all Kannadigas when they are referring to the name of the city in Kannada call it as such. It is when somebody speaks in Hindi, Bengali, Urdu, Bhojpuri, Assamaese, Dakkani, French, Mandarin, English or any non-Dravidian and international language do they pronounce it differently as ‘Bangalore’ or ‘Benglaour’ or ‘Bangalooor’.
Name change from Bangalore to ‘BengaLuru’ will contribute to the development of Kannada language, says the Government.
The Government wants to introduce English at the First Standard in all its schools and embraces English as the path to salvation of the jobs problem faced by our youths. If the Government is concerned about the development of the Kannada language and want to see it being used in all walks of life in Karnataka, especially in public administration, go back to teaching all children everything in Kannada till the High School. Only in college should our students learn foreign languages and in foreign medium. Mere changing of name from Bangalore to ‘BengaLuru’ will not be doing any service to the development of Kannada language. If the Government still believes that the name change will contribute to the development of Kannada then the most urgent thing that the Government needs to do is come out with spellings for the city’s name in all the majors non-Dravidian languages, such as Hindi, Urdu, Bengali, Mandarin, French, etc. The latter two are emerging to be major trade partners of the Kannada state and are a potential threat to the Kannada language.
2 What is the Criteria for Stopping at Pre-British Period?
We are going back in time to rename our city, right? Yes. What is the basis of deciding where we should stop in our journey to backwardness? Why stop at the pre-British period? Why don’t we go all the way back to what the city was originally named by its founder Sri. Kempe Gowda Mahaprabhu? Why don’t we call our city by its christened name ‘Benda KaL Uru’? What’s wrong with ‘Benda KaL Uru’?
3 Insulting Sri Kempe Gowda Mahaprabu
We are insulting Sri. Kempe Gowda Mahaprabhu, the founder of Bangalore by changing the name of his city to ‘BengaLuru’. This is similar to taking all of the works of Rashtrakavi Kuvempu and putting Prof. U.R. Ananthamurthy’s name on them. How? Soon our children will be answering the question in schools who named our city as ‘BengaLuru’ with Prof. U. R. Ananthamurhty as the answer implying that this city was a bastard city and Prof. U.R. Ananthamurthy christened it. Is this the truth? Do we want to perpetuate lies?
4 Process of Naming Cities
How did Bangalore come to be called and spelt as ‘Bangalore’? Was it christened as such in the past by any powers-to-be (Sri. Kempe Gowda Mahaprabhu, Vijayanagar Kings, Tippu Sultan, Wodeyars of Mysore or British) through any Royal decrees? Did somebody make a law stating that the name of the city should be spelt in a particular way and pronounced as such? The original name of the city as given by its founder Sri Kempegowda Mahaprabhu of Yelahanka was Benda KaL Uru. Over time by usage just as Krishna becomes Kitty or Ramesh becomes Rammie or any other name gets altered so Benda KaL Uru slowly began to change to be called ‘BengaLuru’ by the time the British arrived. Poor British do not have the ‘La’ sounding consonant in their language and so they used the next closest consonant to it available in their language which was ‘la’. In fact, it’s only the Dravidian languages that have an alphabet to represent a consonant that sounds ‘La’. Non-Dravidian languages do not have this consonant in their languages. North Indians cannot pronounce ‘BengaLuru’ unless they have had some training in Kannada language. So, ‘BengaLuru’ began to be pronounced as Bangalore. What about the spelling? Well, according to English grammar proper nouns do not have defined spellings. Bangalore can be spelt as Bangalor or Bengalor or Benglor or Banglor depending on how one pronounces the name.
5 Karnataka Government the Grammarian?
So, now the Karnataka Government is also going to be Panini and don the mantle of a grammarian and teach our children and us how to spell the name of our city? By the way, when did the grammarians of the World decide that all proper nouns should be spelt in a specific way? Haven’t we been taught, and are we not teaching in our schools to our children that for a proper noun in English language there is no specific way to spell it? Bangalore can be Bengaluru or Bangalauor or Banglore or Bengalore or anything similar.
So, is the Karnataka Government going to prescribe spellings in all non-Dravidian languages? Is it not unfair to target one language, English, and prescribe spelling only for this language? This language which the Karnataka Government is so eagerly embracing and wants to introduce in First Standard at all of its schools. Is it fair to target this language when it has helped this city to become the global city, the IT capital of the World? Is it fair to attack this language in this manner when because of this language several million Kannadigas are surviving in the West, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc.? This decision of the Government is unfair to the English language. Is the Karnataka Government just?
6 Oxymoronic Language Policy
On one hand the Government hates English so much that it wants to change the natural English spelling, but on the other hand it loves it so much that it wants all its children to study this language from First Standard in its schools. This is an oxymoronic language policy.
7 ‘la’ vs ‘La’: Dravidian languages vs Non-Dravidian languages
We have always called our city ‘BengaLuru’ in our native tongue, Kannada. However westernized one may have been, when this person speaks in Kannada he/she always pronounced the name as ‘BengaLuru’. In all Dravidian languages (Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu ) Bangalore is called as ‘BengaLur’ (note the missing ‘u’). People speaking non-Dravidian languages cannot pronounce the word ‘BengaLuru’ and will not be able to in the future as well, just because the Karnataka Government enacted a law, because in the non-Dravidian languages there is no ‘La’ sounding consonant. To the people speaking non-Dravidian languages this change only means that they have to struggle a little more to memorize the new spelling of the City’s name. That’s it! Nothing else! So, what did we achieve? We forced all the non-Dravidian speaking people to memorize our city’s name differently. Isn’t this fascist – forcing other people to agree to our ways?
Delhi has remained Delhi. It is not changing its name to Dilli. Why? The pronunciation of both these words, Delhi and Dilli, is not much different for a person whose mother tongue is English. He would still pronounce both names very similarly. So, not much is going to be gained by changing the name. In the name change of Bombay to Mumbai and Madras to Chennai the pronunciation change is humongous, calling for entirely different syllables to be uttered. Whereas in the case of Bangalore to BengaLuru there is just one major syllable change required, the ‘la’ to ‘La’. The ‘Ba’ to ‘Be’ is phonetically insignificant. Non-Dravidian languages don’t have ‘La’ sounding consonant in their languages so they will be compelled to replace our ‘La’ with the ‘la’ and pronounce it as such. So, what did we gain by changing the spelling of the name? Nothing. The effect of changing ‘Bangalore’ to ‘BengaLuru’ to a non-Dravidian speaking person is phonetically insignificant. For this insignificant gain the price that we pay will be vast amounts World goodwill. The image of the city will take a massive beating. Hence, it is best left unchanged. Instead, by taking pride in the fact that we are a cosmopolitan town and our people are outward looking, World embracing, Kuvempu’s Vishwamanavas, who are as proud of their city being called Bangalore as much as they are of calling it BengaLaru, and are not parochial as Prof. U.R. Anathmurthy wants the World to think of us, we will be earning a lot of World goodwill and our Kannada people can get more jobs with more internationals wanting to come and do business in our land.
8 Was there a malafide intention behind changing ‘Benda Kal Uru’ to Bangalore?
Did the British or whoever modified ‘Benda KaL Uru’ do this to spite all Kannadigas? We do not know much about the people before the British, so for the time being let’s not worry about them. According to Prof. U.R. Ananthamurthy by the time the British came to Bangalore it was being called as ‘BengaLuru’ and therefore the Professor wants to take us back to Pre-British times. So, let’s examine if the British did the name change from ‘BengaLuru’ to ‘Bangalore’ intentionally? If the British wanted to change the name of the city to Jamestown, say, how difficult was it for them? Why would they resort to a silly ‘Be” to ‘Ba’ and ‘La’ to ‘la’ change? They would have gone the whole nine yards and changed it completely. If they can name a street as Queens Road or a township as Cooks Town of Frazer Town they could have very easily changed the name of ‘BengaLuru’, as well. Based on this deductive logic I don’t believe there was any such malafide intention by the British. Then who changed the name from ‘BengaLuru’ to Bangalore? Nobody. The non-Dravidian languages do not have ‘La’ sounding consonant and so these people took the next similar sounding consonant ‘la’ and used it. Wallah! ‘BengaLuru’ became the very familiar and easy to pronounce by the non-Dravidians, Bangalore! I am no linguist, but does it need a linguist to figure this out? Linguists are available by the dozens in all of the Universities that the Professor had been to. He could have asked any one of them before leading all Kannadigas to pre-British times. The British did not have any malafide intention to alter or butcher our city’s name.
9 Acceptance of modification made by our people
If we can accept modifications to names in our language such as Yamaraya Gowda to Javare Gowda, Brahmaiah to Bommaiah, Vijayapura to Bijapura, Kalburgi to Gulburga, etc., that happened naturally across several hundreds of years, by our own people, and we regard it as a natural development process of our language, and we are cool about it, why can we not accept a similar natural, unintended modification of our town’s name by people speaking another language? Because of the language of these other people our city is now being called the World IT Capital, and whose language we are so eager to teach from the First Standard.
10 Are we ashamed of the name Bangalore?
Let’s search our souls. Are we ashamed of our colonial past? If we are then it is pessimistic. There’s no reason to be ashamed of our past. Let’s accept our past and move on into the future. Let’s be optimistic. We may not be proud of our past, but that experience is what got us to where we are today. Because of no small role played by English language our city is the World IT capital. Without this history we would not be what we are today. Today, can we go back and change what happened to us in the past just because Prof. U.R. Ananthamurthy thinks so? Isn’t this is a silly effort at turning the clock backwards?
By trying to change the name of the City to ‘BengaLuru’ we will be making an attempt to wipe out our past as if we are ashamed of it, which would be the ultimate consolation to the British – insulting the natives after fifty nine years of quitting from their land. Are we still enslaved under their psychological domination over us?
11 What will happen to ‘Bengaluru’ over time?
It will continue to be Bangalore for all non-Dravidian speaking people as phonetically the syllable shift is not drastic and they don’t have ‘La’.
12 Cosmopolitan Heritage
Bangalore is a cosmopolitan town and its ‘cosmopolitanness’ needs to be preserved if we want to be World city. Going backwards and naming ourselves by misguided hackneyed names is certainly not the way to the future. We want the people of the World to come and stay amidst us just as they welcome us warmly. By taking such retrograde measures we are not sending the right messages to our friends across the seas, those who have the ability to lift our society from poverty, committing suicides and other ills to a better future.
13 Referendum
Bangalore no longer belongs to people who can pronounce it as ‘BengaLuru’. Today, Bangalore also belongs to people who cannot pronounce it in this prescribed way. These non-Dravidian speaking people have also contributed to Bangalore’s success in being called the IT capital of the World to a very large measure. In fact they came to set shop in Bangalore because they found Bangalore outward looking and embracing the World and not narrow minded and parochial. So, these non-Dravidian people also have a say in what this city should be named.
If a change must be made, a referendum must be held. Without a ballot we must not accept this change.

4:13 AM  
Anonymous said...

this is disguisting! whatever happened to these freakin people?a name has been carried along for eyars and some jerk comes along and decides he cannot pronounce the word and calls it bengaluru...every time we feel we are progressing, some dumb thing like this comes along! mr dharam singh must pay attention to the horrid mess the city has evolved into instead of wasting our time with such nonsense.

8:19 AM  
Anonymous said...

I guess we should change India to Bharat
It is kind of sad to note these name changes. Well I am proud to use the name Bengaluru. However the reason why these names are being changed is because we are feeling insecure about our own language and culture. Bangalore should be the name in English and Bengaluru in Kannada. We call India Bharat however the world knows us by India. Both Bharat and India are official names.
The same with all the city names and street names.
We know European countries by their Anglicised names but in their own language they are known differently. For eg. Germany in English and Deutschland in German.
If our education system is in our mother tongues there would be know complications.
People are doing this because it is a feeling of insecurity about their culture and language.

6:35 PM  
Anonymous said...

I see most of the people posting their views here are base out of America. What puzzles me more than the name changes is what gave you people staying here in far land comment how things are in India.

If you really believe you have the right then come to the land and correct things you are cribbing about online.

8:42 PM  
Anonymous said...

I was born in Karnataka and lived there for the first 21 years of my life.

Its absurd that the Karnataka government is force-feeding Kannada as the first language. I know..I had to take tuitions to learn "higher Kannada" for many years.

This latest development shows the pettiness and extremism thats prevalent even now in this 21st century.

Bangalore is Bangalore and always will be Bangalore to me.

F*** the BJP.

"If you really believe you have the right then come to the land and correct things you are cribbing about online."
LOL thats suicide. You dont know what happens to people who oppose the BJP.

6:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home