Indian English

It is amusing how several words and idiomatic forms, derived from Indian literary and vernacular languages have made their way into the every-day English we speak today. Over the long history of the language in India, the implication of many English words and the context in which they are used has changed considerably. Following are some of the most noticeable and interesting instances of such usage, as pointed out by wikipedia:

• Use of "blood pressure" or "BP" to refer particularly to high blood pressure, as in "I have BP!" to mean "I have high BP or hypertension".

• Use of ‘no’ or ‘na’ as a tag question, as in “He's here, no?” or “You are lying, na?”

• The word "marriage" used to mean "wedding", as in "I am attending my cousin's marriage next month”.

• The word "healthy" as a euphemism for fat people, as in "His build is on the healthy side" to refer to an overweight person.

• 'B.A. fail' for someone who was admitted to college, took college classes, but did not pass the final examinations, as opposed to someone who did not go to college! 'Higher Secondary fail' and 'M.A. fail' are used in a similar fashion.

• Creation of rhyming double-words, as in "No more ice-cream-fice-cream for you!", "Let's go have some chai-vai.” or "There's a lot of this fighting-witing going on in the neighborhood".

• The word "hero" is used to mean a male protagonist in a story, especially in a movie. The protagonist need not have any specifically heroic characteristics! Thus, "Look at him; he looks like a hero", meaning "he is as handsome as a movie star."

• The word "dialogue" to refer to "a line of dialogue" in a movie. ("That was a great dialogue!" means "That was a great line!"). "Dialogues" is used to mean "screenplay". In motion picture credits, the person who might in other countries be credited as the screenwriter in India is often credited with the term "dialogues".

• Use of "engagement" to mean not just an agreement between two people to marry, but a formal, public ceremony (often accompanied by a party) where the engagement is formalized with a ring and other local rituals. Indians will not speak of a couple as being "engaged", until after the engagement ceremony has been performed.

As Binoo K John says in his book 'Hazaar fundas of Indian English', "savour the sorry and soaring love affair between India and English"!

The Curious Case of 221B - Partha Basu

My fascination with Sherlock Holmes refuses to die with the Canon (the fifty-six short stories and four Sherlock Holmes novels written by Conan Doyle). So I turn to this "brilliant retelling that turns the Holmesian canon on its head, even as it adds to it".

The book starts with Jit's story in Deogar, a small town near Calcutta. Jit, a young man, stumbles upon some letters and notebooks addressed to his father, penned in secret by Dr.Watson. The notebooks divulge Holmes’ failures and his fallacious theories regarding some of the most illustrious cases. Watson's narratives go on to elucidate how Holmes committed a 'Blunder in Bohemia' rather than preventing a 'Scandal in Bohemia'! They talk about the 'Reappearance of Frances Carfax', the 'Tale of the sad cyclist' and the 'Judgement at Abbey Grange', among other accounts.

The narratives are laced with Emma Hudson's synopses of the original cases to make it easier to comprehend for those who haven't read the Canon. However, those already familiar with the original work will derive much more pleasure from the book for the feeling of déjà vu that it provides every now and then.

Although the stories lack the powerful element of drama so peculiar to the original stories, they make one ruminate whether the solutions to the original cases were really as 'elementary' as Holmes made them out to be.

Read the book if you are one of those who always wanted Watson to have some share of the limelight enjoyed by Holmes.

Don't read it if the purist in you can't see Holmes being defeated in his own game or if you want to retain that legendary image of the detective in your mind forever!

Why so serious??

I recently came across this video where Andy Roddick imitates Serena Williams, duly cheered up by the crowds. It made me think about the inevitable backlash had the same episode occurred in India.

So why are we such a sombre nation?

Every witticism seems offensive to someone or the other. The self-appointed moral police are always armed and ready to counter anything even remotely displeasing to any section. The most common argument in favour of curtailing open banters is that they hurt the sentiments of people and thereby breed contempt in the society, or they pose a threat to our culture and values.

But, is our culture and our values so fragile that they won’t be able to endure a joke or a pun?

We are obsessed with political-correctness at all times, more so if the people involved are public figures. Politicians, in particular, are expected to be poker-faced creatures with no sense of humour as is evident by the “cattle-class” controversy involving Shashi Tharoor. No wonder we don’t come across playful exchanges of insults as between, say, Winston Churchill and George Bernard Shaw. It also explains the dearth of good stand-up comedians in the country.

It is time for an honest introspection if we want to grow up as a nation because as the noted American author, Richard Bach, said- “The first prerequisite of an advanced being is a sense of humour.”