Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Consider the following statements: 1. In British India, English and Hindi were the sole language used for administrative purposes as well as for higher education purposes. 2. The Indian constitution declared Hindi in Devanagari script to be the official language of the union in 1950. Which of the above statements is/are correct?

Consider the following statements: 1. In British India, English and Hindi were the sole language used for administrative purposes as well as for higher education purposes. 2. The Indian constitution declared Hindi in Devanagari script to be the official language of the union in 1950. Which of the above statements is/are correct? Correct Answer 2 only

The correct answer is 2 only.

Key Points

  • Prior to Independence, in British India, English was the sole language used for administrative purposes as well as for higher education purposes. Hence, Statement 1 is NOT correct.
  • The Indian constitution, in 1950, declared Hindi in Devanagari script to be the official language of the union. Hence, Statement 2 is correct.

Additional Information

  • Unless Parliament decided otherwise, the use of English for official purposes was to cease 15 years after the constitution came into effect, i.e. on 26 January 1965.
  • The prospect of the changeover, however, led to much alarm in the non Hindi-speaking areas of India, especially in South India whose native tongues are not related to Hindi.
  • As a result, Parliament enacted the Official Languages Act in 1963, which provided for the continued use of English for official purposes along with Hindi, even after 1965.

Related Questions

Which of the following statements are true? Hindi written in Devanagari script with the Devanagari form of numerals can be used as an official language of the Union. The proceedings of the Supreme Court are to be carried out in English only not in Hindi.  58th amendment act inserted provision regarding the authoritative text of the constitution in the Hindi language.  
A call center recruits candidates with the following criteria I. Candidates should have passed at least 10th standard. II. Candidates must be fluent in English and Hindi. III. Candidates must be ready to work in both day and night shifts. Which candidate among the following will the call center definitely take? A. Seeta is a graduate, fluent in Marathi, Hindi and English and can work only in day shift. B. Sarita is fluent in English, Tamil and Hindi, can work in both shifts and has had no formal education. C. Smita speaks English and Hindi very well, is ready for day as well as night shifts and has studied till 12th standard. D. Savita can work in both shifts, has passed 10th standard with 65% and speaks fluent Hindi and Marathi.
A call center recruits candidates with the following criteria I. Candidates should have passed at least 10th standard. II. Candidates must be fluent in English and Hindi. III. Candidates must be ready to work in both day and night shifts. Which candidate among the following will the call center definitely take? A. Seeta is a graduate, fluent in Marathi, Hindi, and English and can work only in day shift. B. Sarita is fluent in English, Tamil and Hindi, can work in both shifts and has had no formal education. C. Smita speaks English and Hindi very well, is ready for the day as well as night shifts and has studied till 12th standard. D. Savita can work in both shifts, has passed 10th standard with 65% and speaks fluent Hindi and Marathi.
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? Why do some French people think that Hindi is the only Indian language?
Given below are six sentences, four of which (P,Q,R,S) are jumbled. Pick the option that gives the correct order of P,Q,R,S. S-1 English is a fascinating language P - This is because each area of the English-speaking world has developed its own characteristics Q - Therefore we come across expressions such as British English, American English, Canadian English, African English, Indian English, and so on. R - We speak of English as a Language, and at the same time we speak of varieties of English, that is, 'Englishes'. S - It has diversity in spelling, use and pronounciation S-6 There is a variety within each English and some common factors across the 'Englishes'.
Which of the following statements are true of languages in India? a. English is the official language of India. b. Hindi is the national language of India. c. Hindi is the official language of India. d. English is the associate official language of India.
‘The Assam Official Language (Amendment) Bill, 2020’ will allow which language in Devanagari script as an ‘associate official language’ for “all or any of the official purposes” of Assam?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? What wrong with respect to India are the Europeans responsible for?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? According to the writer the responsibility of explaining the facts about India to Europeans rests with?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? The writer was working at a university in which country?