> Hindi and Urdu, by any reasonable linguistic definition are not separate languages.
For any non-Indian person reading this, please note that this statement is 100% false. I am an outsider to Hindi speaking and Urdu speaking region. I have no dog in any political fight here but I have studied Hindi all my academic life and can assuredly tell you this statement is utter rubbish.
But this might not be a fault of OP. A lot of people have this feeling because of Bollywood. Both Bollywood and Hindustani music is a cross of both Hindi and Urdu. If you never study Hindi or Urdu but watch a lot of Bollywood movies you will end up learning a bit of both the languages. But that does not mean they are same.
You are 100% wrong. The Bollywood Hindi is actually the real Hindi. It's not a mix of 2 languages. It's just one language - Hindi. Just like Hollywood English is simply English. The Hindi that is taught in text books in India is an artificial Hindi constructed 100 years ago by replacing Hindi words of Persian origin with words rooted in Sanskrit. So far this artificial language has stayed inside text books. If you actually speak text book artificial Hindi on the street, people will think you are crazy
> constructed 100 years ago by replacing Hindi words of Persian origin with words rooted in Sanskrit
That is untrue I have a master degree in Hindi. Bollywood Hindi is not Hindi in any sense. For example it does not match to a Navbharat Times to typical classic of Hindi literature.
> Which part of India wouldn't you say
> "Zara kitaab dena"
Essentially everywhere from railway signs to classrooms to essays and everywhere. Bollywood is heavily influenced by Urdu but in general Hindi speaking heartland of UP one would perfectly ignore the Urdu influence.
>Essentially everywhere from railway signs to classrooms to essays and everywhere.
These are official government sanctioned institutions practicing text book Hindi. I have used it in classrooms too. This language is never used in the streets. Differing choice of nouns perfectly intelligible to each other doesn't even constitute a different dialect, much less a different language. There are cultural and scriptural differences and an effort to use more Sanskrit words in Hindi literature starting 150 years ago and an effort to use Persian words by Mughal courtiers words going back even further. I know several people from the Hindi heartland and absolutely noone uses pustak in place of kitaab or ullas in place of khushi, unless they want to be laughed at. That language belongs to classrooms, dramas and to a lesser extent Hindi literature. Just listen to this interview of mayawati.
She uses awaaz, nafrat and afsos as well as English words and claims to be speaking Hindi. Is she wrong? Is she not from the heartland? Is she actually speaking Urdu? If you use these words like of Dil instead of hriday in an academic exam you will lose points, but that is an exercise in linguistic politics that any true student of language has no time for.
I understand that Hindi and Urdu are taught as distinct languages in India and there is an ongoing effort to bifurcate the nouns used in both systems but this effort has been largely unsuccessful amongst actual speakers of Hindi. They have succeeded with news anchors, plays, newspapers etc. But not anywhere else.
For any non-Indian person reading this, please note that this statement is 100% false. I am an outsider to Hindi speaking and Urdu speaking region. I have no dog in any political fight here but I have studied Hindi all my academic life and can assuredly tell you this statement is utter rubbish.
But this might not be a fault of OP. A lot of people have this feeling because of Bollywood. Both Bollywood and Hindustani music is a cross of both Hindi and Urdu. If you never study Hindi or Urdu but watch a lot of Bollywood movies you will end up learning a bit of both the languages. But that does not mean they are same.