Read on Twitter
I'm glad we're speaking about the hegemony of standardised Telugu (EG, WG, etc.) and its verdict of which language is which is impure. I've said this so many times and I'll say it again: there is no pure language. A thread.
Linguistic purists have always commented about Telangana as a subversive, impure & crass language. I ask: point to me one language that is devoid of influence by other languages?
Poet Kaloji says it best: "for them, people of Andhra, 'road' is correct, but 'sadak' is wrong."
Poet Kaloji says it best: "for them, people of Andhra, 'road' is correct, but 'sadak' is wrong."
If linguistic purism is what people respect so much, why isn't the Sanskritisation (loan words) of Telugu given as much flak? (Kausalya Supraja Rama is a fully Sanskrit song but we're ok with accepting it as Telugu?) Is the problem here only with Dakhni Urdu-ness?
How unfriendly and hostile do you have to be to feel aversive to picking up words from a language/culture that's so embedded around you and in your culture as well?
Code-switching is a real problem with Telangana people - in the public sphere, we're made to be watchful about the words we use. Words like "zarra" are omitted and we start saying soft "ch" sounds where we say "jh".
Telugu lessons were tough to follow because the language and cultural markers in books were not as relatable. I have no tolerance for anyone who says Telangana people can't speak Telugu. At least we aren't purists.
Please take your Brahminical, sanskritised language impositions elsewhere. It's only for gatekeeping and retaining control over knowledge systems and we won't have any of it.
