Talk:Wallah

Disambiguation?

I've deleted the disambiguation hatnotes here, because this isn't a dab page; it serves better as a concept page, just as it is. I've also cancelled the redirect from the Wallah (disambiguation) page, and added the hatnote content there. I trust everyone is OK with that. Swanny18 (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

With three links, it doesn't really make much of a difference whether you have them in a dab page or in a hatnote. I would have probably left them in a hatnote, but the current situation is fine as well. Although with such small dab pages (only one entry other than the primary topic, the rest of the links being in the "see also" section) you might expect some editors to object. But I wouldn't. – Uanfala 19:30, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Voilà!

I often hear, and more importantly, see written by Anglo people, 'wallah!' instead of 'voilà!'. The context makes clear that they are saying 'Look at that/me!', and not calling on Allah to witness that they are telling the truth.

This solecism appears to have resulted relatively recently, with so much attention being given to Moslem matters in the West. Anyone else noticed this? Since how long? 203.220.68.86 (talk) 23:19, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Is it pan-Indian? Did it exist outside Hindustani before British colonisation?

The intro doesn't spell out exactly which languages use the suffix, instead vaguely saying it is "used in a number of Indo-Aryan languages, like Hindi/Urdu, Gujarati, Bengali or Marathi". This leaves me a little dissatisfied and wishing for more information for a few reasons:

• I'm not sure what the word "like" is intended to mean in that sentence. Does it merely mean "including" or is it gesturing at some commonality of those languages from which the reader is meant to be able to infer which other Indo-Aryan languages do or do not feature the suffix?
• I know the suffix is also used in modern Kannada, which is Dravidian, not Indo-Aryan.
• Given the above, I kind of suspect that "wallah" is an outright pan-Indian suffix now, usable in any Indian language; if so it would be nice to see that said explicitly.
• The intro leaves unclear whether there is a long history of the word being used in the multiple Indo-Aryan languages listed, or whether it only spread from Hindustani to other languages via English after its adoption by British colonials. That is, naively, I see two possible histories: 1. it was a word in many Indian languages, and got adopted by Brits or 2. it was a word specifically in Hindustani, got adopted by Brits and thereby become part of Indian English, and then from there became adopted by other Indian languages just like many other English words. It would be nice to know which history is the correct one!

ExplodingCabbage (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2025 (UTC)