• shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    *with their anglicized names

    India, for example, has been traditionally referred to as Bharat (depending on language root) domestically and among the 100s of languages and dialects used there the name India is never used. Similar to Deutschland and Germany.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      What about in the second official language of India, English? :P

      The constitution uses “India” in English.

      But yes they’re the English names…

      • shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        It does out of a sense of pragmatism rather than any deeper association to national identity. English is not an indigineous language to India and was enforced upon the populace for a few hundred years. Indian people do refer to themselves as Indian when speaking English, but not when they’re speaking an actual Indian language, which I assume is similar for countries like Germany etc.

        • FishFace@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          45 minutes ago

          Did you think someone was unaware that India’s use of English stems from colonialism? Because otherwise I don’t understand what you’re saying.

          The purpose of my comment (to clarify) was that English is a commonly used (even official) language in India, and that the name when using that language is India, rather than Bhata, because your comment to me implied that “India” just wasn’t used by the citizens of India when conversing with fellow citizens at all.