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.
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.
What about in the second official language of India, English? :P
The constitution uses “India” in English.
But yes they’re the English names…
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.
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.