| Author |
Message |
Prai Jei
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:08 am
Post subject: Head charang |
|
|
My late father used this curious expression as a semi-contemptuous word for
the boss of some organisation. Its usage would be on a par with "The Great
White Chief", "Our Lord and Master" and other such expressions. I have
never seen the expression written down so I'm guessing at the spelling.
Anybody here ever come across it? Derivation?
--
There are very few spiders found on bananas that bite.
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:21 am
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Prai Jei wrote:
| Quote: | My late father used this curious expression as a semi-contemptuous
word for the boss of some organisation. Its usage would be on a par
with "The Great White Chief", "Our Lord and Master" and other such
expressions. I have never seen the expression written down so I'm
guessing at the spelling.
Anybody here ever come across it? Derivation?
|
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:08 am
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | Prai Jei wrote:
My late father used this curious expression as a semi-contemptuous
word for the boss of some organisation. Its usage would be on a par
with "The Great White Chief", "Our Lord and Master" and other such
expressions. I have never seen the expression written down so I'm
guessing at the spelling.
Anybody here ever come across it? Derivation?
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
There was a British-India Steam Navigation Company. A friend was a lecky |
with them for years.
Meanwhile, my Concise OD supports your theory, somewhat:
"serang n. Anglo-Ind. a native head of a Lascar crew [Hindi f. Pers.
sarhang commander]"
My question here is, of course, why Anglo-Indian?
Cheers, Sage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:21 am
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
sage wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
There was a British-India Steam Navigation Company. A friend was a
lecky with them for years.
Meanwhile, my Concise OD supports your theory, somewhat:
"serang n. Anglo-Ind. a native head of a Lascar crew [Hindi f.
Pers.
sarhang commander]"
My question here is, of course, why Anglo-Indian?
Cheers, Sage
|
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I wasn't
allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much wrong with it.
"Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of "India-based British",
not its later "mixed-race" sense.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:11 am
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
There was a British-India Steam Navigation Company. A friend was a
lecky with them for years.
Meanwhile, my Concise OD supports your theory, somewhat:
"serang n. Anglo-Ind. a native head of a Lascar crew [Hindi f.
Pers.
sarhang commander]"
My question here is, of course, why Anglo-Indian?
Cheers, Sage
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I wasn't
allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much wrong with it.
"Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of "India-based British",
not its later "mixed-race" sense.
|
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! Anyroad up,
we found out things we didn't really know before. The first time I saw
Lascars was in Southampton (formerly known as The Gateway to The
Empire). They were the first males I ever saw walking hand-in-hand, in
public.
Cheers, Sage (This may appear twice; foibles of the system.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:11 am
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
There was a British-India Steam Navigation Company. A friend was a
lecky with them for years.
Meanwhile, my Concise OD supports your theory, somewhat:
"serang n. Anglo-Ind. a native head of a Lascar crew [Hindi f.
Pers.
sarhang commander]"
My question here is, of course, why Anglo-Indian?
Cheers, Sage
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I wasn't
allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much wrong with it.
"Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of "India-based British",
not its later "mixed-race" sense.
|
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! Anyroad up,
we found out things we didn't really know before. The first time I saw
Lascars was in Southampton (formerly known as The Gateway to The
Empire). They were the first males I ever saw walking hand-in-hand, in
public.
Cheers, Sage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
sage wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle wrote:
sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
Sounds like "serang", I think an Urdu word, which, at least in
British use, means something like "boatswain". British and
British-Indian ships often had Indian sailors: I remember it being
typical on P&O in the old days when P&O _was_ P&O.
There was a British-India Steam Navigation Company. A friend was a
lecky with them for years.
Meanwhile, my Concise OD supports your theory, somewhat:
"serang n. Anglo-Ind. a native head of a Lascar crew [Hindi f.
Pers.
sarhang commander]"
My question here is, of course, why Anglo-Indian?
Cheers, Sage
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I wasn't
allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much wrong with it.
"Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of "India-based British",
not its later "mixed-race" sense.
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! Anyroad
up, we found out things we didn't really know before. The first time
I saw Lascars was in Southampton (formerly known as The Gateway to The
Empire). They were the first males I ever saw walking hand-in-hand, in
public.
|
First males I saw walking hand in hand were my friends George and Brian
when we all five and they were ahead of me in the school crocodile.
Hobson-Jobson has "serang" as detailed here meaning "boatswain". Origin
"sarhang" - Persian for overseer though they note "In modern Persia, it
seems to be used for a colonel." No mention of Hindi or Urdu. The
implication seems to be that it was taken into Anglo-Indian vocabulary
without passing through the indigenous population. H-J's earliest cite
antedates OED by 200 years. From Carletti "Viaggi" in 1599 citing a
"Saranghi" who is the go-between for the European officers and the crew
of "Arabs, Turks, Indians and Bengalis."
"Lascar" (still with H-J) is from Persian "lashkari" - a soldier. From
that meaning it somehow passed to the maritime.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
John Dean wrote:
| Quote: | sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before
Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general
Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I
wasn't allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much
wrong
with it. "Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of
"India-based
British", not its later "mixed-race" sense.
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! [...]
Hobson-Jobson has "serang" as detailed here meaning
"boatswain". Origin "sarhang" - Persian for overseer though they
note
"In modern Persia, it seems to be used for a colonel." No mention
of
Hindi or Urdu. The implication seems to be that it was taken into
Anglo-Indian vocabulary without passing through the indigenous
population.
|
One needs to be cautious with this: older sources often seem to
attribute direct to Persian rather than mention Urdu as intermediary.
I'm very ready to be corrected, but I have the impression that the
more formal official Urdu was often referred to as "Persian", though
not actually pure Farsi.
There may also have been some kind of political or pedantic
correctness going on, since Urdu really is Hindi with a lot of
Persian and Arabic words and written in the Persian expansion of the
Arabic alphabet. Some writers may perhaps have wished to stress this
essential unity, or even have done so unconsciously. But these are
waters deeper than my height.
| Quote: | H-J's earliest cite antedates OED by 200 years. From
Carletti "Viaggi" in 1599 citing a "Saranghi" who is the go-between
for the European officers and the crew of "Arabs, Turks, Indians
and
Bengalis." "Lascar" (still with H-J) is from Persian "lashkari" - a
soldier. From that meaning it somehow passed to the maritime.
|
Perhaps in Mughal, or even John Company, usage? "Askar(i)" is
certainly one of the Arabic words for "soldier", and I can easily see
how that would have applied to military or quasi-military seafarers
employed by a regime in the days when merchant ships could be heavily
armed. Maybe the Arabic word is of Persian origin, of course -- I
don't know.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | John Dean wrote:
sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before
Hindi, given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general
Hindustani word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as
a boy I wasn't allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's
much wrong with it. "Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of
"India-based British", not its later "mixed-race" sense.
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! [...]
Hobson-Jobson has "serang" as detailed here meaning
"boatswain". Origin "sarhang" - Persian for overseer though they note
"In modern Persia, it seems to be used for a colonel." No mention of
Hindi or Urdu. The implication seems to be that it was taken into
Anglo-Indian vocabulary without passing through the indigenous
population.
One needs to be cautious with this: older sources often seem to
attribute direct to Persian rather than mention Urdu as intermediary.
I'm very ready to be corrected, but I have the impression that the
more formal official Urdu was often referred to as "Persian", though
not actually pure Farsi.
I couldn't say. OED, like H-J, merely describes the word as Persian. I |
suppose the acid test wuld be to know what modern Urdu / Hindi uses for
"boatswain".
| Quote: |
H-J's earliest cite antedates OED by 200 years. From
Carletti "Viaggi" in 1599 citing a "Saranghi" who is the go-between
for the European officers and the crew of "Arabs, Turks, Indians and
Bengalis." "Lascar" (still with H-J) is from Persian "lashkari" - a
soldier. From that meaning it somehow passed to the maritime.
Perhaps in Mughal, or even John Company, usage? "Askar(i)" is
certainly one of the Arabic words for "soldier", and I can easily see
how that would have applied to military or quasi-military seafarers
employed by a regime in the days when merchant ships could be heavily
armed. Maybe the Arabic word is of Persian origin, of course -- I
don't know.
|
H-J again - they note that Persian "lashkar" "is usually derived from
Ar. 'al'askar', but it would rather seem that Ar. 'askar', 'an army', is
taken from this Persian word: whence 'lashkari', 'one belonging to an
army, a soldier'."
Personally, I have no idea.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | John Dean wrote:
sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before
Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general
Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I
wasn't allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much
wrong
with it. "Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of
"India-based
British", not its later "mixed-race" sense.
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! [...]
Hobson-Jobson has "serang" as detailed here meaning
"boatswain". Origin "sarhang" - Persian for overseer though they
note
"In modern Persia, it seems to be used for a colonel." No mention
of
Hindi or Urdu. The implication seems to be that it was taken into
Anglo-Indian vocabulary without passing through the indigenous
population.
One needs to be cautious with this: older sources often seem to
attribute direct to Persian rather than mention Urdu as intermediary.
I'm very ready to be corrected, but I have the impression that the
more formal official Urdu was often referred to as "Persian", though
not actually pure Farsi.
|
persian (in a dialect now called "Indo-Persian") was used for offical
bussiness transaction until replaced by Urdu (also called Hindustani,
especially back then).
at any rate, Urdu "kept track" of the persian and arabic loans, i.e.
they were, and still are, (usually) concious of their origin.
| Quote: |
There may also have been some kind of political or pedantic
correctness going on, since Urdu really is Hindi with a lot of
Persian and Arabic words and written in the Persian expansion of the
Arabic alphabet. Some writers may perhaps have wished to stress this
essential unity, or even have done so unconsciously. But these are
waters deeper than my height.
H-J's earliest cite antedates OED by 200 years. From
Carletti "Viaggi" in 1599 citing a "Saranghi" who is the go-between
for the European officers and the crew of "Arabs, Turks, Indians
and
Bengalis." "Lascar" (still with H-J) is from Persian "lashkari" - a
soldier. From that meaning it somehow passed to the maritime.
|
it's persian la*sh*kar (troops) la*sh*kari: (soldier; persian and
arabic share a homphonous but unrleated suffix of unity).
| Quote: | Perhaps in Mughal, or even John Company, usage? "Askar(i)" is
certainly one of the Arabic words for "soldier", and I can easily see
how that would have applied to military or quasi-military seafarers
employed by a regime in the days when merchant ships could be heavily
armed. Maybe the Arabic word is of Persian origin, of course -- I
don't know.
|
it is not clear what direction was the borrowing. 3askar "military,
troops" is not semitic, in spite of the `ayn). those who advocate an
arabic to persian direction (if so,it must have been very early, the
only instanceof arabic /s/ as persian /*sh*/, rather than the more
common other way round for late middle (or early new) persian loans in
arabic. those seeing an arabic etymology derive it from Latin exercitus
, I had seen a persian etymology as "corpse maker", provided la*sh* is
of genuine persian origin.
there was a thread about this in sci.lang involving "YahyaM" and myself
a few years ago.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Head charang |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle wrote:
John Dean wrote:
sage wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
That wasn't a theory, it was information! I'd say Urdu before
Hindi,
given the Persian origin, though I'm sure it's a general
Hindustani
word. "Lascar" was the word for Indian ships'crews: as a boy I
wasn't allowed to use it, but I'm still not sure there's much
wrong
with it. "Anglo-Indian" is there used in the sense of
"India-based
British", not its later "mixed-race" sense.
You said, "I think" therefore I thought you were theorizing! [...]
Hobson-Jobson has "serang" as detailed here meaning
"boatswain". Origin "sarhang" - Persian for overseer though they
note
|
acc. to Steingass (classical persian) various military ranks (at
different periods), boatswain, a commander.
sar is "head, chief", hang "authority", also a body of men, in modern
persian (acc. to. Kahsani - Aryanpur) "regiment"
| Quote: | "In modern Persia, it seems to be used for a colonel." No mention
|
yes. litt. "chief of a regiment".
| Quote: | of
Hindi or Urdu. The implication seems to be that it was taken into
|
because it has an internal persian etymology.
| Quote: | Anglo-Indian vocabulary without passing through the indigenous
population.
One needs to be cautious with this: older sources often seem to
attribute direct to Persian rather than mention Urdu as intermediary.
I'm very ready to be corrected, but I have the impression that the
more formal official Urdu was often referred to as "Persian", though
not actually pure Farsi.
|
Farsi refers to either: any dialect of post-islamic (arabized) new
persian, or in modern official parlance, the standar persian of Iran,
the Afghanistan standard persian in modern official parlance being
Dari, formerly used for the older forms of New Persia, i.e. less
arabized early forms.
| Quote: |
persian (in a dialect now called "Indo-Persian") was used for offical
bussiness transaction until replaced by Urdu (also called Hindustani,
especially back then).
at any rate, Urdu "kept track" of the persian and arabic loans, i.e.
they were, and still are, (usually) concious of their origin.
There may also have been some kind of political or pedantic
correctness going on, since Urdu really is Hindi with a lot of
Persian and Arabic words and written in the Persian expansion of the
Arabic alphabet. Some writers may perhaps have wished to stress this
essential unity, or even have done so unconsciously. But these are
waters deeper than my height.
H-J's earliest cite antedates OED by 200 years. From
Carletti "Viaggi" in 1599 citing a "Saranghi" who is the go-between
for the European officers and the crew of "Arabs, Turks, Indians
and
Bengalis." "Lascar" (still with H-J) is from Persian "lashkari" - a
soldier. From that meaning it somehow passed to the maritime.
it's persian la*sh*kar (troops) la*sh*kari: (soldier; persian and
arabic share a homphonous but unrleated suffix of unity).
Perhaps in Mughal, or even John Company, usage? "Askar(i)" is
certainly one of the Arabic words for "soldier", and I can easily see
how that would have applied to military or quasi-military seafarers
employed by a regime in the days when merchant ships could be heavily
armed. Maybe the Arabic word is of Persian origin, of course -- I
don't know.
it is not clear what direction was the borrowing. 3askar "military,
troops" is not semitic, in spite of the `ayn). those who advocate an
arabic to persian direction (if so,it must have been very early, the
only instanceof arabic /s/ as persian /*sh*/, rather than the more
common other way round for late middle (or early new) persian loans in
arabic. those seeing an arabic etymology derive it from Latin exercitus
, I had seen a persian etymology as "corpse maker", provided la*sh* is
|
rather la:*sh*
| Quote: | of genuine persian origin.
there was a thread about this in sci.lang involving "YahyaM" and myself
a few years ago.
--
Mike. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in