Talk:Pakistani English

Come on

This is just stupid. I'm Pakistani and I've noticed almost no difference between the standard English of my country and that of India. It's the same dammnit. It's just English. I love my country too and I don't like it when westerners mix us up all the time with India, but sometimes this attempt to completely differentiate India and Pakistan by Pakistanis is getting too out of hand. What are we going to have next, different articles on Pakistani and Indian Punjabis? I mean look at the history described in this article, being on the fringes? Lahore was one of the many mainstream urban centers of the old colonial India, back then. Peshawar was an important frontier town kept within colonial jurisdiction. Karachi was an important seaport ranking with Bombay and Calcutta. Quetta was an essential military post. Hardly fringe regions if you ask me. Punjab was very clearly an integral part of the empire. So was NWFP. Sindh was actually part of Bombay Presidency. It's possible to accept that we have some things in common without calling us the same, ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.255.203.224 (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I am from India and idk why Pakistanis start to originate everything from "call to Muslim" type of stuff. This seems ridiculous, Term begin to be used in 1999 and that seems like a fair historical point to call the origin as in from thereon literature for distinction is starting specifically for PE. But someone just wants to start the origin from when Muslims were addressed, for better or worse begin the origin from 1st English text by a Muslim sounding name. 103.173.120.246 (talk) 19:40, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I just checked the source for that origination sentence and it's damn website which doesn't source its sentence from any reliable source, just reverts to wiki for Sir Syed and Pakistan independence struggle Lmao 103.173.120.246 (talk) 19:45, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I have lived in Pakistan and Britian and also come across many people from India, I find pakistani English in major cities to be more heavily influenced by contemporary British english, especially in terms of the accent. In India however (Bombay English being a prime example, they seem to have their 'own english' in terms of accents and terminology, this is possibly due to english having developed as a common language in India much before pakistan. I think it's fair to keep both articles separate. Khokhar (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, the scholars are not hearing what you are: compare References in scholarly literature to "Indian English" and references in the scholarly literature to "Pakistani English". That generally means that while there probably are some distinctive features of the English spoken in Pakistan, these features are probably neither clear nor stable yet. The formation of Pakistani English as a distinct dialect of English will probably take more time. One way to establish that there are special features of Pakistani English is to look at the different corpora of English (such as the Oxford Corpus, the International Corpus of English (at University College London) as well as some others. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you might be right, but I stand by my comments as I was speaking from personal experience, there will probably be clearer distinctions identified but as Pakistan is still a relatively young country; it'll take some time. Khokhar (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

South Asian English

From my point of view it makes more sense to have just one article South Asian English with separate sections, perhaps, on the various local dialects, instead of separate articles on "Indian English," "Pakistani English," "Bangladeshi English," "Sri Lankan English," .... In other words, I would prefer "Indian English" to be redirected to "South Asian English" (and all the other regional Englishes as well) instead of the reverse. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I think this article can be expanded to full length, just needs a little attention. --lTopGunl (talk) 21:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Not reading again

Obviously you have not read the links again, not a book, there are two acedemic peer reviewed articles which use the term and showcase its differences. If you want something to be so, fine, but they fact is that you have acedemic articles saying that Pakistani English is different.

Sparten (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I did take a look at the articles. They compare "Pakistani English" to "standard British or American English." What is the point of that? What they need to compare it to is standard Indian English (as described, for example, in the Oxford Corpus above), for which the comparisons with the British and American standards have already been done long ago. I don't see anywhere how a "Pakistani" construction is different from the corresponding Indian one. That is why I am in favor of a single page South Asian English. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Fowler&fowler that it would be good to have a generic South Asian English article, with a section for Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and the rest. For no other reason, it seems a bit myopic to have South Asian English redirect to Indian English. Why not get a brief start on the SAE page with just lead and a section for each variety with links to the specific pages. Then maybe work on merging them together. Who knows, maybe it would be an opportunity for cooperation on WP where the politicians have failed. But maybe I'm just dreaming .... after all, we'd not only have the nationalists on both sides to battle each other but then there is the WP battle royale between joiners and splitters. YBG (talk) 06:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It is inappropriate to create an article called South Asian English given that the use of Bollywood Urdu is called Hindi and the emotional attachments to various issues, not least, languages is very close to heart. Moreover the very basic fact of totally different pronunciations z as j, hard r as d and the sound of kh (as in Khan) voiced as in Khanna etc. all lend the two types of English are very much apart and cannot be lumped together. As a British citizen, of Pashtun background in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, I am able to appreciate the kind of diversity of regional languages in Pakistan - these different languages have Arabic/Farsi and Turkic linguistic heritages in common. The literature, culture, poetry, folk stories, emotional attachemnt to the Ummah and of course the creation of Pakistan in common,which are extremely powerful denominators in forging an identity that has huge impact on the kind of English spoken/written there. If, despite Anglo-Saxon origins and constant flow of Britons into Australia, Australian/Newzealand English is recongnised as such then the dichotomy between Pakistan and India must be obvious to all but some blinkered individuals. Take note that everyday/Bollywood Hindi is colloqual Urdu but Hindus nationalists refuse to compromise and call it at least Hindustani - please readup Urdu-Hindi controversy to ascertain insights into this issue. Incidently, Hindi, Hindu and Hindustan are of Arabic-Farsi origin and thus defacto Urdu words. Just to re-iterate I am fluent and literate in Pushto, Urdu, varietes of Punjabi (thet, Potowahri, Seraiki, Hindko etc.) in addition to working knowledge of Arabic, Farsi and Turkish. And my academic interests include linguistic/cultural anthropology. Moarrikh (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree, I created a disambiguation page at South Asian English which would be the most appropriate thing as of yet. Anyway you are replying to a 3 year old comment :) --lTopGunl (talk) 18:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pakistani English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316003619/http://bsl.co.in/india/news/investors-lose-rs-44-lakh-crore-in-four-days/416306/ to http://bsl.co.in/india/news/investors-lose-rs-44-lakh-crore-in-four-days/416306/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)