मेघदूत: "नीचैर्गच्छत्युपरि च दशा चक्रनेमिक्रमेण"

G C Lichtenberg: “It is as if our languages were confounded: when we want a thought, they bring us a word; when we ask for a word, they give us a dash; and when we expect a dash, there comes a piece of bawdy.”

Albert Einstein: “I am content in my later years. I have kept my good humor and take neither myself nor the next person seriously.” (To P. Moos, March 30, 1950. Einstein Archives 60-587)

Martin Amis: “Gogol is funny, Tolstoy in his merciless clarity is funny, and Dostoyevsky, funnily enough, is very funny indeed; moreover, the final generation of Russian literature, before it was destroyed by Lenin and Stalin, remained emphatically comic — Bunin, Bely, Bulgakov, Zamyatin. The novel is comic because life is comic (until the inevitable tragedy of the fifth act);...”

Werner Herzog: “We are surrounded by worn-out, banal, useless and exhausted images, limping and dragging themselves behind the rest of our cultural evolution.”

John Gray: "Unlike Schopenhauer, who lamented the human lot, Leopardi believed that the best response to life is laughter. What fascinated Schopenhauer, along with many later writers, was Leopardi’s insistence that illusion is necessary to human happiness."

Justin E.H. Smith: “One should of course take seriously serious efforts to improve society. But when these efforts fail, in whole or in part, it is only humor that offers redemption. So far, human expectations have always been strained, and have always come, give or take a bit, to nothing. In this respect reality itself has the form of a joke, and humor the force of truth.”

विलास सारंग: "… . . 1000 नंतर ज्या प्रकारची संस्कृती रुढ झाली , त्यामध्ये साधारणत्व विश्वात्मकता हे गुण प्राय: लुप्त झाले...आपली संस्कृती अकाली विश्वात्मक साधारणतेला मुकली आहे."

Sunday, May 03, 2015

आम्ही नेटकेची ना लिहू...There Is No Such Thing as ‘Proper Marathi’

विलास सारंग: "… मराठी साहित्यात समुद्राच वास्तव किती सातत्याने दुर्लक्षित केलं आहे, हे माझ्या विवेचनाच सार होतंआपण वास्तवाच्या -वाङमयीन सामग्रीच्या- केवढ्या मोठ्या भांडाराला मुकतो आहोत, हे माझ्या लेखात निर्देशित केलं आहे...मराठी वाङमयातील समुद्राची अनुपस्थिती मराठी समाजाच्या संरचनेशी कशी निगडीत आहे, हे माझ्या लेखात स्पष्ट केलेलं आहे."
 ("वाङमयीन संस्कृती व सामाजिक वास्तव", 2011, पृष्ठ 66-67)

विलास सारंग: "… एक आश्चर्याची गोष्ट म्हणजे 'महाभारता'वर आधारलेली सोफिस्टिकेटेड सांस्कृतिक मूल्यावर उभी राहिलेली एकही प्रभावी नाट्यकृती (इतक्या शतकांत) निर्माण झाली नाही, जिने जनमानसावर सर्वकष मोहिनी टाकली आहे. इ. स. 1000 नंतर ज्या प्रकारची संस्कृती रुढ झाली , त्यामध्ये साधारणत्व व विश्वात्मकता हे गुण प्राय: लुप्त झाले...आपली संस्कृती अकाली विश्वात्मक साधारणतेला मुकली आहे."
('वाङ्‌मयीन संस्कृती व सामाजिक वास्तव', 2011)

विलास सारंग: "…मला कधी वाटतं, १८९० साली हरिभाऊनी जरा विचार केला असता: 'आपण कशाला ब्रिटीश वाङमयाचं शेपूट पकडून राहायचं?' आपलं कथाकथन विकसित करायचं. एवढं काही कठीण नाही. काफ्काच्या 'मॅटॅमॉर्फसिसचं पहिल वाक्य घ्या. 'पंचतंत्रातल्या एखाद्या गोष्टीत ते फिट बसलं असतं. एवढी फँट्सी झाली. उरलेल्या कथेत वास्तववाद आहेच…इ. स. १९०० पासून आजवर पाश्च्यात्यांनी  आपल्या  वाङमयाकडे ढुंकून  बघितलेलं  आहे का? त्यांना आपल्या कथासाहित्यात  वेगळ, नवीन काही आढळल  नाही … " 
  ('लिहित्या लेखकाचं वाचन', 2011)

विलास सारंग, सदानंद रेग्यांच्या मृत्यू नंतरचा लेख, 1982: "...मराठी कवितेच्या कोंदट, कोत्या, ‘इनब्रीडिंग’ने कोळपलेल्या वातावरणात सदानंद रेग्यांची कविता हा एक मोकळा वारा होता. हा वारा आता वाहायचा थांबला आहे."

"...And so now every night, the last thing we do, me from my bedroom and Luke from his, is to send each other an instant message, and we always end it “LOL.”

“LOL, Dad!”

“LOL, Luke!”

And it doesn’t matter what it means. It means laughter or love, or whatever it might mean at that moment to us."

 “Essay-level writing as a basic skill is no longer the norm. Speaking is, however, and that style has influenced our writing. Get over it, grammarians...”
भालचंद्र नेमाडे, लोकसत्ता, August 14 2015:

"...मराठीच्या व्याकरणातील क्लिष्टता काढली तर मराठी माणसाचा मेंदू किती तरी हलका होईल, असे सांगत त्यांनी मराठीत शुद्धलेखनासाठी केल्या जाणाऱ्या आग्रहावरच आपला टीकेचा आसूड ओढला. ऱ्हस्व-दीर्घ असे वेगवेगळे प्रकार ठेवण्याऐवजी ते एकच का असू नये, असा विचार त्यांनी मांडला..."

George Orwell wrote a famous essay 'Politics and the English Language' in April 1946. It's probably one of the most quoted document on the subject of language.

Will Self says about it:

"...Orwell's essay, Politics and the English Language, is frequently cited as a manifesto of plainspoken common sense - a principled assault upon all the jargon, obfuscation, and pretentiously Frenchified folderol that deforms our noble tongue. Orwell - it's said by these disciples - established once and for all in this essay that anything worth saying in English can be set down with perfect clarity such that it's comprehensible to all averagely intelligent English readers.The only problem with this is that it's not true - and furthermore, Orwell was plain wrong...

As for most people who bother with the matter admitting that English is in a bad way - hardly. Since 1946, when Orwell's essay was published, English has continued to grow and mutate, a great voracious beast of a tongue, snaffling up vocabulary, locutions and syntactical forms from the other languages it feeds on. There are more ways of saying more things in English than ever, and it follows perfectly logically that more people are shaping this versatile instrument for their purposes.

The trouble for the George Orwells of this world is that they don't like the ways in which our tongue is being shaped. In this respect they're indeed small "c" conservatives, who would rather peer at meaning by the guttering candlelight of a Standard English frozen in time, than have it brightly illumined by the high-wattage of the living, changing language.

Orwell and his supporters may say they're objecting to jargon and pretension, but underlying this are good old-fashioned prejudices against difference itself. Only homogenous groups of people all speak and write identically. People from different heritages, ethnicities, classes and regions speak the same language differently, duh!..."

Ms. Madhuri Purandare (माधुरी पुरंदरे)'s set of two books 'Lihave Netake' (लिहावे नेटके )  was published in c 2010. 

(according to  J.T. Molesworth's dictionary: नेटके= Neat, handsome and according to Google Translate it means compact.)

Bookganga.com says: "नेटके लिहिणे, नेमके बोलणे ही भाषेची मूलभूत कौशल्ये आहेत. अनेकदा तीच दुर्लक्षित राहतात आणि मग भाषा फार सैलपणे वापरली जाते. शालेय मुलांना लहानपणीच मराठी भाषेची लज्जत चाखत ती अचूकपणे आत्मसात करता यावी, या उद्देशाने माधुरी पुरंदरे यांनी ‘लिहावे नेटके’ हा पुस्तकसंच विकसित केला आहे."

( Compact/ neat/ handsome/precise writing and speaking are the fundamental skills of a language. Often they are ignored and the language gets used loosely. To facilitate school going kids to appreciate and accurately  learn Marathi, Madhuri Purandare has developed the 'Lihave Netake' book-set.)

 Ms. Purandare elaborates her experience of  how a class of school teachers studied these books here

"...आता शिक्षिकांचा आत्मविश्‍वास वाढताना स्पष्ट दिसू लागला होता...त्यांचे साप्ताहिक अभ्यासवर्ग नेमाने आणि उत्साहाने सुरू होते. पुस्तकांच्या आकाराचे दडपण आता उरले नव्हते. ‘अभ्यास करताना थांबूच नये, पुढे पुढे जात राहावं असं वाटतं’; ‘दुकानांच्या अशुद्ध पाट्या, वर्तमानपत्रांमधला चुकीचा मजकूर, टीव्हीच्या बातम्यांमधल्या चुका पूर्वी दिसायच्या नाहीत. आता सारख्याच दिसतात आणि त्रास होतो,’ अशा प्रतिक्रिया यायला लागल्या होत्या..."

The key sentence there is what teachers felt as they studied the books :

"...दुकानांच्या अशुद्ध पाट्या, वर्तमानपत्रांमधला चुकीचा मजकूर, टीव्हीच्या बातम्यांमधल्या चुका पूर्वी दिसायच्या नाहीत. आता सारख्याच दिसतात आणि त्रास होतो..."
(...incorrect nameplates of shops, erroneous content in newspapers, errors in TV news were not noticed earlier. But now they were always noticed and were annoying...)

 How can nameplates of shops be incorrect? A shop keeper is running a business and as long as she is achieving her business goals, her nameplate is OK.

Personally I haven't seen a single incorrect nameplate on a shop in Maharashtra. However, occasionally, I have felt and experienced the arrogance, stupidity and the absence of mercantile mentality behind those nameplates.  

If TV news is 'erroneous', most likely it is MEANT to mislead or misinform or not give the complete picture. That is the problem of the medium and not the language. Most of the time Marathi TV news is 'bad' and not because of the language they use but because what they choose as news and the way they report it.

In short, Ms. Purandare's books sound like pedantry and Orwellian conservatism to me.

I wish to quote Oliver Kamm on the subject. 

"There Is No ‘Proper English’...Pedantry is poor manners, certainly, but also poor scholarship. If someone tells you that you “can’t” write something, ask them why not. Rarely will they have an answer that makes grammatical sense; it is probably just a superstition that they have carried around with them for years."

"Language sticklers typically depict themselves as defenders of tradition against the insidious forces of cultural relativism. This is nonsense. In fact, the pedantic urge is a modern invention of rather dubious lineage. Prescriptive style guides like Strunk and White’s “Elements of Style” are the direct descendants of 18th-century grammarians who first defined what it was to speak “proper English.” In fact, these grammarians really just meant the dialect that grew up in and around London; their manuals were intended to teach propriety to an emerging merchant class."

I feel the most important issues facing Marathi are summed up in the quotes of the late Vilas Sarang at the top of this post and, maybe, just maybe, excessive pedantry among Marathi speaking people is partly responsible for them.

Emoji are the ideograms or smileys used in Japanese electronic messages and Web pages, the use of which is spreading outside Japan. What if they start appearing in Marathi texts? Will they annoy students of Ms. Purandare's book?

Artist: Cameron Harvey, The New Yorker, April 2015


After I published the post, I learned on May 5 2015 that "Microsoft plans to introduce a range of new emoji with Windows 10 including a controversial 'middle finger' hand sign.". 

I wonder where this will fit in 'neat Marathi'.

courtesy: Daily Mail


aJp said...

True to a certain extent. I can understand the newspapers, magazines and novels written in marathi but official government circular are at times difficult to grasp. Maybe some amount of simplification in the said case would help people to uderstand.
But there is something known as the 'boli bhasha' or spoken language and 'lekhi' or written text. Words can be pronunced in a particular way for ease. The listner should be able to catch the meaning. But if the words are spelt or the usage is incorrect or new words are added for convienience and everyone starts doing it then it would create a lot of confusion. There has to be syntax and vocabulary. The rhasva and dirgha in marathi and other such rules are very important. One can pronunce the word exactly the way it should be in marathi which makes it different from English, where you can get it wrong.
I am not very good in marathi but I do feel that there is something like a proper language (atleast written), maybe spoken differntly in different regions.

अवधूत डोंगरे said...

इमोजीवालं कार्टून सुंदर आहे. मार्मिक आहे.

अवधूत डोंगरे said...

ही कमेन्ट प्रकाशित करण्यासाठी नाही:
चित्रं अपलोड केल्यावर तुम्ही 'किप ओरिजीनल साइझ' असा पर्याय ठेवता की काय, हे मला नक्की ताडता येत नाहीये. पण अपलोड केल्यावर इमेजला सिलेक्ट केल्यानंतर स्मॉल, मीडियम, लार्ज असे काहीतरी पर्याय दिसतात, तर त्यातलं काही निवडलं तर ते पोस्टच्या चौकटीची जी रुंदी आहे त्याला साजेसं राहील. आता कधीकधी चित्रं मोठ्या आकाराचं असलं की एकदम उजव्या समासात घुसतं. तसंही चित्रं मोठं करण्यासाठी त्यावर क्लिक करून पाहाता येतंच, त्यामुळं नोंद वाचत असताना ते त्या मुख्य मजकुराला साजेसं चिकटवणं दिसायला बरं वाटेल, असं वाटतं. सोईचं वाटलं तर पाहा, कटकटीचं असेल तर राहू दे.

Aniruddha G. Kulkarni said...

Thanks Avadhoot for you suggestions on technical matters but I am going to stick to what I do today....

अवधूत डोंगरे said...

आणखी एक मुद्दा: सारंगांच्या लिखाणात मराठीत लिहितानाच्या काही अडचणींची साधार/रास्त मांडणी येते. हे चांगलं वाटतं. उदाहरणार्थ, आपलं-आपण कथाकथन विकसित करायचा मुद्दा, त्यात आपोआप फँटसी येऊ शकली असती, हा मुद्दा खरंच चांगला आहे. पण त्याचा संबंध 'पाश्चात्त्यांनी आपल्या वाङ्मयाकडे ढुंकून बघण्या'शी लावण्याची गरज त्यांना का वाटावी! हे त्यांचं नंतरच्या लेखनात वाढत गेलेलं दिसतं. लिहितानाच्या लेखकाच्या समस्या/प्रश्न आणि लेखन कसं स्वीकारलं जातं या दोन क्षेत्रांचा संबंध नसतो असं नाही, पण यातल्या सूक्ष्म छटा समजून घ्यायला हव्या, असं वाटतं. सारंगांच्या लिखाणात काही वेळा या छटा येतात, पण अनेकदा ते ही दोन क्षेत्रं एकमेकांवर लादतात. त्यामुळं ब्रिटिश वाङ्मयाचं शेपूट आपण पकडायची गरज नव्हती, असं वाटणारे सारंग त्याच परिच्छेदात पाश्चात्यांच्या ढुंकून पाहण्या/न-पाहण्याला खास स्थान देताना दिसतात. तसं मग आफ्रिकी/पूर्व आशियाई/ लॅटिन अमेरिकी असे आणखीही लोक आहेत, त्यांचा नि आपला कसा-काय संबंध आहे किंवा नाही हेही तिथं नोंदवणं योग्य राहील.

Aniruddha G. Kulkarni said...

Interesting....his post illness phase is riddled with inconsistencies and brilliance ,both....I am discovering....