Debate Mansion

   

Renaming Cities..

Post Reply New Post

Page 1 of 3

Page 1
Page   of 3
Page 2 Page 3

Lady In Pink

IF-Veteran Member

Lady In Pink

Joined: 30 May 2005

Posts: 6544

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 9:59am | IP Logged

From Bombay to Mumbai, From Madras to Chennai, From Calcutta to Kolkata, Bangalore is next in line--its name is, apparently, being changed to BengalooruConfusedOuch

Here is the link to the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4524098.stm

So , my question is, that what is being achieved by renaming all these cities?

 I for one have always preferred the old names to the new--Bombay, Madras, Calcutta....no matter what the world calls them now, i still find myself using the old names......am I the only one?Embarrassed

Should Bangalore's name really be changed to Bengaluru...why, or why not?

At this rate, in the upcoming years, all the cities in India will have new namesConfused. I see absolutely no reason behind it....

Your viewsSmile

-Eisha

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Renaming Cities.." in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

sareg

IF-Dazzler

sareg

Joined: 10 January 2006

Posts: 3976

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 10:24am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Mrs.Eishu.SRK

At this rate, in the upcoming years, all the cities in India will have new namesConfused. I see absolutely no reason behind it....

Dont forget, Bharat,  secularism greatest gift to India( less popularly known as Bharat)Wink

Before East India company, I dont know of references to India, in India(now I might be wrong, but would love to see Indian references to India prior to pre-1700)



Edited by sareg - 16 November 2006 at 10:31am

ChameliKaYaar

IF-Rockerz

ChameliKaYaar

Joined: 19 February 2006

Posts: 9814

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 10:34am | IP Logged
Again like any other debatable topic. this has 2 sides. I will take the side of changing the names of the cities. I am in favor of changing the names of our cities to old names which reflect our culture. It is one more step towards emancipation from the influence of British Raj. It really does not change much of anything. I still sometimes find myself referring Mumbai to Bombay and Kolkatta almost always as Calcutta. Chennai is way different from Madras so I have gotten into the habit of calling this city as Chennai. But I am a proponent of maintaining our cultural heritage. If it means that we change Patna to Patliputra so be it.

seema_17

IF-Rockerz

seema_17

Joined: 17 December 2005

Posts: 5093

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 10:48am | IP Logged

Originally posted by ChameliKaYaar

Again like any other debatable topic. this has 2 sides. I will take the side of changing the names of the cities. I am in favor of changing the names of our cities to old names which reflect our culture. It is one more step towards emancipation from the influence of British Raj. It really does not change much of anything. I still sometimes find myself referring Mumbai to Bombay and Kolkatta almost always as Calcutta. Chennai is way different from Madras so I have gotten into the habit of calling this city as Chennai. But I am a proponent of maintaining our cultural heritage. If it means that we change Patna to Patliputra so be it.

i agree some of the names do sound better... but y did they have to change bombay to mumbai... i liked bombay better Ouch



Edited by seema_17 - 16 November 2006 at 10:48am

Lady In Pink

IF-Veteran Member

Lady In Pink

Joined: 30 May 2005

Posts: 6544

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 10:59am | IP Logged

Originally posted by abhijit shukla

You forgot Puna- Pune; Baroda - Vadodara.

Thanks for mentioning the new names....i had no clue they were named something else before....when did these ones get changed?Embarrassed

Originally posted by quote


A sense of self respect and self affirmation of having come out of millanium old slavery.

I will take the side of changing the names of the cities. I am in favor of changing the names of our cities to old names which reflect our culture. It is one more step towards emancipation from the influence of British Raj.

After 60 years of independence? Isnt it the people and their deeds which reflect the culture of a city/country?Ouch


Originally posted by A.S


Mohammad Ali also changed his name (used to be Malcom if I am not mistaken, I might wrong) He changed to reflect the fact that his encestors - like Kunta Kinte were Muslims before being enslaved and converted to Christianity.

Mohhamad Ali as in the boxer? his name was Cassius Clay..

@Sareg: I didnt quite get what you were saying. Please dont take my post as an offence, I wasnt generalizing India, its just that the recent news put me thinking. I find it equally puzzling whether the name changing occurs in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh , or any part of the world!!! . As if learning one name in geog wasnt torturous enoughWacko



 

 



Edited by Mrs.Eishu.SRK - 16 November 2006 at 11:00am

IdeaQueen

IF-Dazzler

IdeaQueen

Joined: 23 August 2006

Posts: 3152

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 11:08am | IP Logged

Originally posted by abhijit shukla

You forgot Puna- Pune; Baroda - Vadodara.
A sense of self respect and self affirmation of having come out of millanium old slavery.
Shrilanka used to be Ceylon; Zimbabway - Rhodashia. Same principle.
Mohammad Ali also changed his name (used to be Malcom if I am not mistaken, I might wrong) He changed to reflect the fact that his encestors - like Kunta Kinte were free Muslims before being enslaved and converted to Christianity.
I hope Ahmedabad becomes Karnavati some day....sounds so darn classic: Karnavati; aaaaaahhhh.

I agree Abhijit ji!!! Its a matter of self respect !!!! Hyderabad to Bhagyanagar(this is in que)!!! But naming the places is also a political game in India.If people try to name the cities with their historical names its called saffronisation!!!

Cheers,

Mythili

ChameliKaYaar

IF-Rockerz

ChameliKaYaar

Joined: 19 February 2006

Posts: 9814

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 11:14am | IP Logged
Originally posted by mythili_Kiran

Originally posted by abhijit shukla

You forgot Puna- Pune; Baroda - Vadodara.
A sense of self respect and self affirmation of having come out of millanium old slavery.
Shrilanka used to be Ceylon; Zimbabway - Rhodashia. Same principle.
Mohammad Ali also changed his name (used to be Malcom if I am not mistaken, I might wrong) He changed to reflect the fact that his encestors - like Kunta Kinte were free Muslims before being enslaved and converted to Christianity.
I hope Ahmedabad becomes Karnavati some day....sounds so darn classic: Karnavati; aaaaaahhhh.

I agree Abhijit ji!!! Its a matter of self respect !!!! Hyderabad to Bhagyanagar(this is in que)!!! But naming the places is also a political game in India.If people try to name the cities with their historical names its called saffronisation!!!

Cheers,

Mythili

Totally..... and it is not saffronization.. It is really getting back to our old cutlure. Somebody in this thread questioned about the fact whether after 60- years of independence we still depend upon these small things to consider ourselves liberated. My answer is that this is not a "small" thing.. to me it is as cultural as associating myself to Taj Mahal or Konark temple. I would probably continue to refer to these cities by their old names for quite a while but calling them by their new names does give a feeling of belonging closer to my culture. My POV.

sowmyaa

IF-Dazzler

sowmyaa

Joined: 23 August 2004

Posts: 3658

Posted: 16 November 2006 at 11:18am | IP Logged
I think it's good to rename to preserve our own cultural names. But after these many years of independance? Confused I don't know why it took so many years to change the names given by angrez? Like mythili said, it has also to do with politics. But then our bharat/hindustan is only called India. To me it is not that important at this stage to change the names of the city and states. Our generations have been raised with these names and it would have made more sense if we had changed the names as soon as we got independence.

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Save Pedestrian Infrastructure in Indian Cities tanveer.indian 0 1041 26 July 2009 at 9:58am
By tanveer.indian
cities or villages farri.muslimah 8 615 10 March 2009 at 1:37pm
By ThE_kHan07
Renaming our cities-loosing international identity

2 3

raj5000 23 1410 18 December 2008 at 1:03pm
By karandel_2008
How can we tackle pollution in cities? WillSmith456 0 301 06 March 2007 at 10:25am
By WillSmith456
Slums in India's cities: solutions changabula 0 716 10 January 2007 at 3:44am
By changabula

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.