[Assam] Language

[Chan Mahanta]

>I did not drag you into discussion.


*** Language again! I did not suggest you dragged ME. You dragged the 
SUBJECT into it.

See:  >-- because YOU dragged the matter into the discussion.


>Assamese based on ethnicity (according to your definition of Assamese)

*** When or where did *I* write the above?

And does what I wrote mean the above?

If it does to you, then again, it is that damned English language 
that continues to haunt your perceptions and thus your responses.


>  those will have to be assimilated into Assames

*** Will you show us WHERE and WHEN I wrote that? And if what I did 
write is the same as what you show above?


>On the other hand the definition of Assam, as proposed by me,  based 
>on Nation concept of Assam is the safe >definition if we want to 
>include all minorities in Assam irespective of their clolor, creed, 
>caste, language or >religion.

*** If it is *your* NATION concept, WHO are you recommending this 
Assam nation seek protection from for its cultural identity? Some 
other mai/baap super nation, UN Security Council , who ?



>  >Also if your above statement is true, the following Gwal Gali must 
>be wrong and baseless:


*** Firstly there is NO connection between the two. Secondly, 'gual 
gaali' is abuse directed towards unnamed persons. I did NO such thing 
( unleashing gual-gaali') , but pointed out YOUR ingratitude for my 
attempting to help you understand the issue by submitting to your 
inquisition. It is very disappointing to see that you, who has such a 
good command over the Oxomiya language otherwise, misusing the very 
fine phrase 'gual-gaali' here, and that too totally out of context.











At 12:00 PM -0600 12/29/05, Rajen Barua wrote:
>  >*** Yes, as a matter of fact I did consider it my solemn duty to 
>defend the concept of Assam for the Assamese as *I* saw it in the 
>context, because YOU >dragged the matter into the discussion.
>
>I did not drag you into discussion. You did it on your own. Nobody 
>drag nobody into discussion in the net. We all do it by choice.  In 
>your own words,
>you did it by choice and it is your interpretation to defend the 
>concept of Assam for Assamese and not Sumant Chaliha or somebody 
>else.
>
>I already showed you that your defense of the concept of Assam for 
>Assamese based on ethnicity (according to your definition of 
>Assamese)  failed the test in case of Bengalis and other minorities 
>living in Assam.  According to your definition, those will have to 
>be assimilated into Assamese (which you did not say how) before they 
>qualify as Assamese. Your concept has led you to a dead end. 
>
>On the other hand the definition of Assam, as proposed by me,  based 
>on Nation concept of Assam is the safe definition if we want to 
>include all minorities in Assam irespective of their clolor, creed, 
>caste, language or religion.
>
>Also if your above statement is true, the following Gwal Gali must 
>be wrong and baseless:
>
>  >I try to help my friends who are not as articulate as they could 
>be, when I can.
>  >It is however unfortunate to see that instead of appreciating my 
>effort at educating you, threatened to 'attack' me, and then tried 
>to devalue my explanations >and criticized my methods.
>  >That is a real 'khai-paat-folaa' attitude, of biting the hand that 
>feeds. Hope you will take a New Year's resolution to overcome it in 
>the future.
>
>You cannot do both at the same time: Do something to defend 
>your concept and gwal gali me as khai pat fola.
>
>RB
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>Chan Mahanta
>To: <mailto:barua25 at hotmail.com>Rajen Barua ; 
><mailto:assam at assamnet.org>assam at assamnet.org
>Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 9:51 AM
>Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese
>
>  >Why you had to provide an interpretation at all for and on behalf 
>of Sumanat?. You could not sleep or you thought >it was your solemn 
>duty as a nopota phukon for the sake of the netters?.
>
>
>
>*** Yes, as a matter of fact I did consider it my solemn duty to 
>defend the concept of Assam for the Assamese as *I* saw it in the 
>context, because YOU dragged the matter into the discussion. Did I 
>need YOUR prior permission for it? Are you the ARBITER, the true 
>'pota-phukan' over who can or who cannot speak for or against the 
>concept ? If you are, just let us know. I will be sure to " gua 
>ebhaag aag borhai aaru xaasatnge pronipaat jonai"  beg for 
>permission to speak next time.
>
>
>*** But I know you are making the argument above only because you 
>have realized, finally, where you went wrong, but are unable to 
>admit it, and are attempting to divert attention away from the issue 
>in point. That is OK. I won't rub it in any further. Sure as heck I 
>went far more into it than I wished I had and am not enjoying it one 
>bit.
>
>Take care, and Om Xaanti!
>
>:-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://assamnet.org/pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20051229/2b8fb150/attachment.htm