Once we admit the role of divisive politics before elections in the States, it is but natural that abusive language will follow to excite the electorate. The taunt played a special role in the last General Election. Now its much worse. Why are these speakers not under a leash by the party? The different parties give tacit support. They realise electoral win is the ultimate barometer of success and winners are winners.What they said, virulent abuse etc. become insignificant.. Where is ethics in political behavour ? Buried deep and obfuscated by electoral win!

It is not a language 'problem' as some people suggest, it is an ethical problem. One may say that ethics has no place in today's Indian politics.
But if we are interested in Checking India's fast march towards becoming a banana republic ( inspite of elections and ISRO) we have to reintroduce ethics into politics.
The problem with Jyoti's ( and others) utterances is not that these are careless or because of the rural background. The problem is that these are well planned and thought out utterances for 'vote bank' politics. When Modi insults the whole rural women of India in an effort to defend the Sangh Parivar game plan he is neither being careless nor he is doing this because of his 'chaiwala' background.

I wish the editorial writers would have the sense to check their facts--and it is so simple in days of Google search!
The quote attributed to Uma Bharati "belongs" actually to Sadhvi Rithambara. I imagine one could easily check the archives of, say India Today, where there was a detailed report on the happenings of that fateful day.

अप्रणीत apraṇīta : (page 16)

आसीदिदं तमोभूत- मप्रज्ञातमलक्षणम् Ms.1.5.

अप्रणीत apraṇītaअप्रणीत a. Unconsecrated, vulgar, profane.-तम् Frying clarified butter without consecrated water.

अप्रतर्क्य apratarkyaअप्रतर्क्य a.

2. अयज्ञिय ayajñiya : (page 29)

अयज्ञिय ayajñiyaअयज्ञिय a. 1 Not fit for sacrifice (as माष).-2 Not fit to perform a sacrifice (as a boy not invested with
the sacred thread).-3 Profane, vulgar, common;
अयज्ञियो हतवर्चा भवति Av.12.2.37.

अयज्यु ayajyuअयज्यु a. Ved. 1 Profane, impious.-2 Obstructor

3. अयज्यु ayajyu : (page 29)

with
the sacred thread).-3 Profane, vulgar, common;
अयज्ञियो हतवर्चा भवति Av.12.2.37.

अयज्यु ayajyuअयज्यु a. Ved. 1 Profane, impious.-2 Obstructor or destroyer of sacrifices.

अयज्वन् ayajvanअयज्वन् a. Not sacrificing according to the rites; godless, impious;

4. अशान्त aśānta : (page 275)

a. 1 Not quelled, violent, wild, restless, anxious; नास्ति बुद्धिरयुक्तस्य न चायुक्तस्य भावना... अशान्तस्य कुतः
सुखम् Mb.-2 Not sacred, irreligious, profane.

अशाब्द aśābdaअशाब्द a. Not conveyed by the word; अशाब्द इति चेत् स्याद् वाक्यशब्दत्वात् ।

5. अशिष्ट aśiṣṭa : (page 275)

अशिष्ट aśiṣṭaअशिष्ट a. 1 Ill-bred, ill-behaved, rude.-2 Unrefined, barbarous, not respectable, unworthy; ˚आलापेन Pt.4.
-3 Atheistical, profane.-4 Not sanctioned by any
recognized authority.-5 Not left; शिष्टानशिष्टान्नि तिरामि-
वाचा Av.2.31.3.-6 Not prescribed in any work of
authority; ˚ता, ˚त्वम् rudeness.

6. उपविद्या upavidyā : (page 461)

Knowing. f. 1 Acquisition.-2 Investigating, inquiring into, know-
ledge, practical knowledge.

उपविद्या upavidyāउपविद्या 1 Profane science, inferior kind of know- ledge.-2 Practical knowledge.

उपवेदः upavēdḥउपवेदः 'Inferior knowledge', a class of writings subordinate to the Vedas. There

7. लाकाक lākāka : (page 1376)

क्षतारोपणमन्वभूताम् Ku.7.88.-4 Temporal, secular (opp.
आर्ष or शास्त्रीय); न पैतृयज्ञियो होमो लौकिके$ग्नौ विधीयते Ms.3.
282.-5 Not sacred, profane (as a word or its sense);
वाक्यं द्विविधं वैदिकं लौकिकं च T. S.; (see Mbh. quoted under
लोक 8).-6 Belonging to the world of; as in ब्रह्मलौकिक.
-काः (pl.) 1 Ordinary men, men of the

8. सु su : (page 1686)

sulphur.-3 a kind of rice. (-कम्) the
white lotus.-गम a. 1 easy of access, accessible.-2
easy.-3 plain, intelligible.-गरम् cinnabar.-गहना an
enclosure round a place of sacrifice to exclude profane
access. ˚वृत्तिः f. the same as above.-गात्री a beautiful
woman.-गृद्ध a. intensely longing for.-गृह a. (-ही f.)
having a beautiful house or abode, well-lodged; सुगृही

. अतिवादः ativādḥ : (page 46)

lower world.-तम् (सूक्ष्मशरीरम्) = अतिवाह. q. v.

अतिवादः ativādḥअतिवादः 1 Very harsh, abusive or insulting language, reproof; यः परेषां नरो नित्यमतिवादांस्तितिक्षते ।
देवयानि विजानीहि तेन सर्वमिदं जितम् ॥ Mb.1.79.1. अतिवादां-

2. अधिक्षेपः adhikṣēpḥ : (page 63)

cf.
अधिक्षिपदब्जनेत्र a. Having eyes which eclipse the lotus.

अधिक्षेपः adhikṣēpḥअधिक्षेपः 1 Abuse, insulting, insult; प्रज्ञा˚ Dk.52 insult to, reflection on, the understanding; भवत्यधिक्षेप
इवानुशासनं Ki.1.28.-2 Laying upon; fixing; throwing.
-3 Dismissal.

3. अपकारः apakārḥ : (page 136)

Wickedness, violence,
oppression, enmity.-4 A mean or degraded action.
-Comp.-अर्थिन् a. meaning to harm, malevolent,
malicious.-गिर् f. (-गीः),-शब्दः abusive words,
menacing or insulting speech; भर्त्सनं त्वपकारगीः Ak.

अपकारक apakāraka कारिन् kārinअपकारक कारिन्

4. अभिवादः abhivādḥ वादनम् vādanam : (page 183)

and (3) repeating
the form of salutation (अभिवाद) which includes
the name or title of the person addressed, followed
by the mention of the person's own name. For
the different ways of performing obeisance and the
merit arising therefrom see Ms.2.12-126.-2 Abuse,
insulting or scurrilous speech (for अतिवाद).

अभिवादक abhivādakaअभिवादक a. (-दिका f.) 1 Saluting; saluter-2

5. अभिशंसक abhiśaṃsaka शंसिन् śaṃsin : (page 185)

अभिशंसक abhiśaṃsaka शंसिन् śaṃsinअभिशंसक शंसिन् a. Accusing, charging, calum- niating, insulting, abusive; मिथ्याभिशंसिनो दोषो द्विः समो
भूतवादिनः Y.3.284.

अभिशंसनम् abhiśaṃsanam

6. उपनृत् upanṛt : (page 452)

सहेलम् Śi.4.68.

उपनृत् upanṛtउपनृत् 4 P. To dance before somebody; dance with insulting gestures.

उपनृत्यम् upanṛtyamउपनृत्यम् A place for dancing.

7. उपमर्दः upamardḥ : (page 456)

तावदुपमर्दसहासु भृङ्गं लोलं विनोदय मनः सुमनोलतासु S. D. (where उ˚ also means rough
handling or enjoyment).-2 Destruction, injury,
killing.-3 Reproach, abuse, insult, harsh or insulting
treatment; Mk.1.-4 Unhusking.-5 Refutation of a
charge.-6 Stirring, shaking.

उपमर्दक upamardakaउपमर्दक a. Crushing, destroying.

8. उल्लापः ullāpḥ : (page 48)

उल्लापः ullāpḥउल्लापः 1 Speech, words; श्रुता मयार्यपुत्रस्योल्लापाः U.3. जीवितनिरपेक्ष इव अस्या उल्लापः Nāg.2.-2 Insulting words,
taunting speech, taunt; खलोल्लापाः सोढाः Bh.3.6.-3
Calling out in a loud voice.-4 Change of voice by
emotion, sickness &c.-5 A hint, suggestion.

9. क्षिप kṣipa : (page 625)

Rv.3. 23.3,9.97.57.

क्षिप kṣipaक्षिप a. [क्षिप्-क] Throwing, striking, hitting.-पः 1 Throwing, casting.-2 Reviling, insulting.-पा 1 Sending.-2 Throwing.-3 Night.

क्षिपकः kṣipakḥक्षिपकः (f. क्षिपिका) [P.VIII.3.45.Vart.6.]

10. देवयानी dēvayānī : (page 836)

the change
until Śarmiṣṭhā, so far lost her temper that she, slapped
Devayānī's face, and threw her into a well. There
she remained until she was seen and rescued by
Yayāti, who, with the consent of her father, married
her, and Śarmiṣṭhā became her servant as a recom-
pense for her insulting conduct towards her. Devayānī
lived happily with Yayāti for some years and bore
him two sons, Yadu and Turvasu. Subsequently her
husband became enamoured of Śarmiṣṭhā, and Deva-
yānī, feeling herself aggrieved, abruptly left her
husband and went home to her father, who at her

11. धर्षिन् dharṣin : (page 857)

A
harlot, a disloyal or unchaste woman.

धर्षिन् dharṣinधर्षिन् a. 1 Proud, arrogant, overbearing.-2 Assau- lting, seducing, outraging.-3 Insulting, ill-treating.-4
Audacious, impudent.-5 Cohabiting.-णी A harlot,
an unchaste woman.

धवः dhavḥधवः 1 Shaking, trembling.-2 A man.-3 A hus- band,

12. भीम bhīma : (page 12)

the
battle, smashed the thigh of Duryodhana with his
unfailing mace, Some of the principal events of his
earlier life are his defeat of the demons Hiḍimba and
Baka, the overthrow of Jarāsandha, the fearful vow
which he uttered against the Kauravas and particu-
larly against Duhśāsana for his insulting conduct
towards Draupadī, the fulfilment of that vow by
drinking Duhśāsana's blood, the defeat of Jayadratha,
his duel with Kīchaka while he was serving as head-
cook (बल्लव) to king Virāṭa, and several other exploits
in which he showed his usual extraordinary strength.

13. ययातिः yayātiḥ : (page 136)

son of Nahuṣa;
ययातेरिव शर्मिष्ठा भर्तुर्बहुमता भव Ś.4.7. [He married
Devayānī, daughter of Śukra, and Śarmiṣṭhā, dau-
ghter of the king of Asuras, was told by her father
to be her servant as a sort of recompense for her
insulting conduct towards her on a previous occasion.
(See Devayānī.) But Yayāti fell in love with this
servant and privately married her. Aggrieved at
this, Devayānī went to her father and complained of
the conduct of her husband, on whom, therefore, Śukra
inflicted premature infirmity and

Back to the Search Page
|
Back

1. अनुव्याहारिन् anuvyāhārin : (page 19)

mentioning, along with something else.
-2 A curse, imprecation.

अनुव्याहारिन् anuvyāhārinअनुव्याहारिन् a. Cursing; execrating.

अनुव्रज् anuvrajअनुव्रज् 1 P. 1 To follow, go after; तां व्रजन्तीमनुवव्राज K.132,21; attend

2. अपध्यानम् apadhyānam : (page 141)

च विप्रेण न्यपतद्धरणीतले Mb.

अपध्यानम् apadhyānamअपध्यानम् 1 Evil thoughts, thinking ill of, cursing mentally; तदपध्यानात् पिशाचतामुपगतम् K.29.-2 Medita-
tion upon things which are not to be thought of. (Jain).

अपध्वंस्

3. अशस् aśas : (page 274)

sorrow; एकौघभूतं तदशर्म कृष्णाम्
(प्रपेदे) Ki.3.35;12.25.

अशस् aśasअशस् a. Ved. 1 Not blessing, not praising.-2 Cursing, hating; रुद्रा अशसो हन्तना वधः Rv.2.34.9.

अशस्त aśastaअशस्त a. 1 Inexpressible, untold.-2 Not esteem- ed, hated,

4. शपथः śapathḥ : (page 1532)

[शप्-अच्] 1 A curse, an imprecation.-2 An oath.-3 A corpse (wrong reading for शव).

शपथः śapathḥशपथः [शप्-अथन् Uṇ.3.112] 1 Cursing.-2 A curse, an imprecation, anathema.-3 An oath, swearing,
taking or administering an oath, asseveration by oath
or ordeal; आमोदो न हि कस्तूर्याः शपथेनानुभाव्यते Bv.1.12;
Ms.8.19.-4 Conjuration,

5. शापः śāpḥ : (page 1544)

-निवृत्तिः f. the end of a curse; शापान्तो मे भुजगशयना-
दुत्थिते शार्ङ्गपाणौ Me.112; R.8.82.-अम्बु,-उदकम्
water used in formularies of cursing.-अस्त्रः 'having
a curse for a weapon', a sage, saint; त्राणाभावे हि शापास्त्राः
कुर्वन्ति तपसो व्ययम् R.15.3.-उत्सर्गः the utterance of a

While in college, I prepared a list of famous but common F-word. One hundred and fifty ways to interpret it in American society, both male and females using it. Someone made photo copies and I found my creation was sold like hot cake.

Indians have used cuss words since their glorious Aryan days. Lucky for them, these words are, all of them, in Sanskrit or Prakrit, both dead as a door nail.

A mature society ought to take cursing, act of cursing in private or in public, seriously. Not till then, its evil force would become harmless.

The only alternative is to stop media from ever writing editorials. A waste of time and energy. Idiots!

...and I am Sid Harth

Who’s Swearing Now? The Social Aspects of Conversational Swearing, by Kristy Beers Fägersten

This book first published 2012 Cambridge Scholars Publishing

12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2012 by Kristy Beers Fägersten

All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-3793-8, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-3793-4

Our use of language is deeply political. It’s the difference in
language between the Obama government’s Countering Violent Extremism and
the Bush administration’s War on Terror, which essentially refer to the
same thing. With regards to Russia’s pivot towards language, there a
several points of tension. Firstly, the very critics who are quick to
decry acts such as a ban on English loan words as nationalist or even
xenophobic are often the same people who lament the homogenisation that
comes with globalisation. The defence of one appears to be acceptable
and the other not, even though the sentiments behind protecting one’s
own culture — be it language or your local butcher — can often emerge
from the same place.

The fact is that the world’s languages are disappearing and fast; the
oft-cited figure is at a rate of one every two weeks. With each one, a
culture is lost along with its customs, its ways of seeing the world,
its humour. Yet what’s tragic about Russia’s rhetoric regarding language
preservation is that it doesn’t extend to the others in danger of
extinction on its territory. According to the UNESCO Atlas of the
World’s Languages in Danger, there are more than 100 languages in Russia
that are vulnerable, definitely endangered, severely endangered or
critical endangered. Most of these are in Siberia and the Caucasus. Many
are at death’s door because of government neglect, others because of
the supremacy — not of English — but of another language closer to home:
Russian.

“Equating the Russian language with Russian identity is a fallacy”

Anyone who’s read George Orwell’s 1984 will be well versed in the
politics of language. Real-life attempts to limit language can often
seem to resemble Orwell’s fictional tongue Newspeak — in essence a
mind-control tool designed to restrict free thinking. The idea of
language shaping opinion can be traced back to American linguist
Benjamin Lee Whorf, who, in the early 20th century, proposed that
language preceded thought. According to this model, the grammar and
vocabulary of a certain language determines its speakers’ cognition and
behaviour. Although, Whorf’s claims have been largely debunked — his
theorising about Native Americans’ conception of time has been shown to
be well wide of the mark — his ideas have experienced something of a
renaissance in recent years, albeit without such dramatic claims. Unlike
Whorf, contemporary researchers no longer think that if a concept is
non-existent in a certain language then speakers will be unable to grasp
it. It is, however, widely accepted that language effects one’s
perception of the world. For example, some languages such as Guugu
Yimithirr, spoken by Australian aboriginals, use cardinal points (north,
south, east, west) instead of terms such as “left” and “right” when it
comes to directions. As a result, speakers of these languages have
developed an almost compass-like set of cognitive skills when it comes
to navigation.

Russian poet Alexander Pushkin is known for his liberal use of swearwords

The professed thinking behind the law is that such a ban will not
only ennoble Russian culture but also position Russia as the antithesis
of the decadent west. A ban on foreign words meanwhile can be seen as a
form of linguistic protectionism, intended to safeguard Russian culture
from external influences, thereby helping advance Putin’s second pillar
of nationalism.

Russia is certainly not the first country to react defensively to the
hegemony of English. Last year, French philosopher Michel Serres called
on his fellow citizens to go on strike in protest against the
“invasion” of English words. This March, Gambian president Yahya Jammeh
announced plans to throw off the shackles of the colonial past by
discontinuing the use of English as an official language. Because of
what it represents — imperialism — the dominance of the English language
is a sore point for many across the globe.

Profanity, purity and politics — the battle for the Russian language

A law banning swear words in the arts in Russia has come into effect in July 2014. Maryam Omidi discusses the implications.

In general, censorship in India, which involves the suppression of speech or other public communication, raises issues of freedom of speech, which is nominally protected by the Indian constitution.

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of expression but places certain restrictions on content, with a view towards maintaining communal and religious harmony, given the history of communal tension in the nation.[1]

According to the Information Technology Rules 2011, objectionable content includes anything that “threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states or public order".[2] Analysts from Reporters Without Borders rank India 131st in the world in terms in their Press Freedom Index,[3] falling from 80th just 11 years earlier.[4] In 2011, the report Freedom in the World by Freedom House gave India a political rights rating of 2, and a civil liberties rating of 3, earning it the designation of free.[5] The rating scale runs from 1 (most free) to 7 (least free).