6 ms·

In a similar vein, there's also "I'll revert back" as a more formal "I'll get back to you".

by yaseer 1y ago

gulabjamuns 1y ago
We have a knack of placing only wherever we like, even at the beginning of a sentence. Only we understand what the sentence means :) "Only I'll do it tomorrow". "He only wanted milk."
- signal11 1y ago
  This is a feature of many Indian languages. Word order doesn’t matter or doesn’t matter as much. गाय वह चऱायेगा, वह गाय चऱायेगा, चऱायेगा वह गाय all mean “he will take the cow out to graze” irrespective of word order, but of course there can be subtle shifts in meaning. (Apologies for any typos / potentially bad translation). Eg चऱायेगा वह गाय could be “he WILL graze the cow” if vocal stress is applied to चऱायेगा. A lot of “Indian English” traits make more sense if one understands a few Indic languages. Southern Indic languages have their own super interesting traits as well, eg Tamil speakers often insert “simply” into sentences, this reflects usage in Tamil.
_yy01 1y ago
I am Indian and I was confused when I first saw that phrase in a corporate setting. Only revert I knew was git revert.
- sevensor 1y ago
  What I’m learning from this thread is that there are at least as many ways of speaking English in India as there are in the UK. I’d noticed this with pronunciation (one colleague propels P and T sounds with explosive force, but none of the other Indians I work with do this), but I hadn’t picked up on grammar and vocabulary differences.
  - _yy01 1y ago
    Apparently this revert thing is common across Indian corporate, but non-existent in other places, eg: academia.
  - schoen 1y ago
    Maybe a difference of aspiration? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant Aspiration is contrastive in some Indian languages but not in English. (It's regular in most native speakers' English, but never distinguishes words by its presence or absence.) I could imagine that some Indian language speakers would learn to pronounce English /p/, /t/ consistently as [p], [t] and others consistently as [pʰ], [tʰ], even though English native speakers would have this difference in realization conditioned by other things. The [pʰ], [tʰ] versions would probably sound "louder" or "stronger" when they occur in unusual contexts in English (I guess, I don't have enough control over aspiration in my speech to record a useful sample; maybe I could synthesize it?).

In a similar vein, there's also "I'll revert back" as a more formal "I'll get back to you".

by yaseer 1y ago

In a similar vein, there's also "I'll revert back" as a more formal "I'll get back to you".

We have a knack of placing only wherever we like, even at the beginning of a sentence. Only we understand what the sentence means :) "Only I'll do it tomorrow". "He only wanted milk."

signal11 1y ago
This is a feature of many Indian languages. Word order doesn’t matter or doesn’t matter as much. गाय वह चऱायेगा, वह गाय चऱायेगा, चऱायेगा वह गाय all mean “he will take the cow out to graze” irrespective of word order, but of course there can be subtle shifts in meaning. (Apologies for any typos / potentially bad translation). Eg चऱायेगा वह गाय could be “he WILL graze the cow” if vocal stress is applied to चऱायेगा. A lot of “Indian English” traits make more sense if one understands a few Indic languages. Southern Indic languages have their own super interesting traits as well, eg Tamil speakers often insert “simply” into sentences, this reflects usage in Tamil.

_yy01 1y ago

I am Indian and I was confused when I first saw that phrase in a corporate setting. Only revert I knew was git revert.

sevensor 1y ago
What I’m learning from this thread is that there are at least as many ways of speaking English in India as there are in the UK. I’d noticed this with pronunciation (one colleague propels P and T sounds with explosive force, but none of the other Indians I work with do this), but I hadn’t picked up on grammar and vocabulary differences.
- _yy01 1y ago
  Apparently this revert thing is common across Indian corporate, but non-existent in other places, eg: academia.
- schoen 1y ago
  Maybe a difference of aspiration? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant Aspiration is contrastive in some Indian languages but not in English. (It's regular in most native speakers' English, but never distinguishes words by its presence or absence.) I could imagine that some Indian language speakers would learn to pronounce English /p/, /t/ consistently as [p], [t] and others consistently as [pʰ], [tʰ], even though English native speakers would have this difference in realization conditioned by other things. The [pʰ], [tʰ] versions would probably sound "louder" or "stronger" when they occur in unusual contexts in English (I guess, I don't have enough control over aspiration in my speech to record a useful sample; maybe I could synthesize it?).