British Who Attended Maharaja Ranjit Singh’S Funeral- Letter

[kalaakaaraH]

http://dailysikhupdates.com/2014/01/21/british-who-attended-maharaja-ranjit-singhs-funerals-letter/

thought this was interesting. love reading old accounts!

[West London Singh]

Excellent read. Thanks for finding that and posting it KalaakaraaH.

Just one small complaint though. Well, not so much a complaint but a polite plea for good grammar. If you're a Canadian or an American one can understand the mistake but if youare resident in the UK than your mistake is unforgivable and perhaps an indictment of the poor standard of spoken and written English among 3rd generation UK Sikhs.

The correct title of your thread should be 'Briton who attended Ranjit Singh's funeral'.

[S4NGH]

'You are' to replace youare.

'Then' to replace than.

What are we brits coming to!

[West London Singh]

What are we brits coming to!

I must be getting old as I didn't realise we were now referring to ourselves (in terms of national identity) according to music award ceremonies. Now that I've heard the term 'Brit' one looks forward to Americans being described as 'Grammys'.

You are' to replace youare.

'Then' to replace than.

Fair cop.

I really need to treat what I write here with the same respect I show my thesis' and dissertatiions. Its all very well how most of my messages here over the last few years show me coming back and editing several hours later my silly grammar and spelling mistakes, but you're right....I have no right to criticise others when my own messages are riddled with schoolboy grammar and spelling errors.

But still, I stand my 2 points :

1) UK based 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation western born Sikhs have a far worse level of spoken and written English than 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation Canadian and American Sikhs

2) At the very least one should know how to refer to one's own countrymen. A Canadian doesn't through lack of education refer to his countryman as a 'Canada based'. A Frenchman does not and would not refer to his counyryman as a Belgian.

Now....there are situations around the world where my argument will fall apart because a Chinese poster will refer to himself or another who wrote an historical account as 'Chinese' and the same is true of so many languages and nationalities. But the English language does not follow these rules. The English language (just like the city that gave birth to it) goes here, there and everywhere. There is no grid pattern as there is in Canadian and American cities. There is nothing to say the first avenue must, by definition, be 2 blocks from third avenue. It exists in England and we refer to it as the Roman system because these straight grid system roads were built by the romans. And so do we follow this ? No. We are the English. We are the people that got rid of the Romans and then said "to hell with your sraight roads and grid system we're going back to our zig zag , alley there, road here, turning here and both there, thisaway thataway, Punjab village style.

And that, just like the English language, is how one understands and appreciates the little nuances of English. Nuances as in how older Canadians always have and always will describe their parents as 'mum and dad' rather than 'mom and dad', for this is how English adapts, But...no matter where in the world this global language has spread it's wings the speakers of it ( no matter the limitations of their education) the speakers of it always, at (unedcated) least, know how to refer to their own country.

All except, it seems, the motherland of the Eglish language.

It seems the British born Sikhs don't even know that the English language dictates that they, as indiduals, are Britons. Thats neither your fault or mine. Thats ther's,