• Jana Gana Mana Translation In Kannada
• Jana Gana Mana English Translation

Translation of The national anthem- Jana Gana Mana In English Thou are the ruler of the minds of all people, dispenser of India's destiny. The name rouses the hearts of Punjab, Sind, Gujurat and Maratha. Of the Dravid and Orissa and Bengal. Jana Gana Mana Jump to. English translation. You are the ruler of the minds of all people, Dispenser of India's destiny. Thy name rouses. Below are the five stanzas in their entirety - the original Bengali version coming first; followed by its English translation. The forgotten stanzas of Jana, Gana, Mana.

New transliterations[edit]

Ficusindica, what is the source for the three new transliterations that you have added? —Gazoth (talk) 14:39, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Hindi version[edit]

Jana Gana Mana Translation In Kannada

There has never been a Hindi version. The original parliament records don't mention of it - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1810361/. There is no name of Hindi translator or no date later where a 'Hindi' version is adopted. The ministry site says: 'The composition consisting of the words and music of the first stanza of the late poet Rabindra Nath Tagore’s song known as “Jana Gana Mana” is the National Anthem of India.' (https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/NationalAnthem%28E%29_2.pdf). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckundu (talk • contribs) 06:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hindi version[edit]

@Ckundu: Your provided reference does not support the statement that you have added. Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata. The fact that Jana Gana Mana's origins were not mentioned by the Constituent Assembly in one debate does not mean anything. —Gazoth (talk) 06:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: There is no substance in the claim 'Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata'. Neither there is any Hindi translator, nor any mention of Hindi version in parliament. It doesn't stand. The ministry clearly states it as the original song and not of any translation similar to the parliament records. It's not 'one debate', it's the resolution to adopt national anthem and there is no 'Hindi' version. Ckundu (talk) 06:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: The Encyclopedia Britannica reference is quite sufficient. If you want to prove otherwise, you need to provide a reference that explicitly refutes the claim that there was a translation. 'There is no mention of it' is unverifiable and not good enough. —Gazoth (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: For any Hindi version to exist, you need to provide the name of the translator and some parliament resolution to substantiate it. I'm afraid Britanica reference may not supersede Parliament resolution. Ckundu (talk) 06:56, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: Why would a parliamentary resolution be required to support a translation? You cannot set arbitrary standards for references. I'd suggest that you read up on WP:RS. Once again, a lack of a mention does not mean anything. Claiming otherwise is pure original research. —Gazoth (talk) 07:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: As the parliament resolution to adopt the national anthem doesn't mention of any translation, clearly it deals with the original song. Also as there can be no translation without a translator, the claim of Hindi version needs at least that name to exist at all. Ckundu (talk) 07:08, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: This is going nowhere. You keep repeating the same statements without addessing any of mine. For the last time, a lack of a mention does not mean anything. I don't need to provide you with arbitrary details when the statement is sufficiently supported by a reliable source. The question of Encyclopedia Britannica reference superseding a constituent assembly meeting transcript does not arise as the latter does not contradict the former. —Gazoth (talk) 07:18, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: I understand there is not much reference to support the claim of Hindi version or the statement 'Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata'. That was exactly my point. I believe the parliament resolution is a reliable source whether you agree or not. As Britannica comes up with a rference to Hindi version which is not there in the parliament resolution, the contradiction is self-evident. The ministry record is also in line with the parliament resolution without any mention of Hindi version. Ckundu (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: I suggest that you re-read the entire conversation if you think that I said there were insufficient references for Hindi version. If the constituent assembly had called Jana Gana Mana Bengali, then there would be contradiction. Since it does not say that, there is no contradiction. The 'ministry record' that you are referring to is just your interpretation since it too does not call Jana Gana Mana Bengali. On the other hand, India 2008 reference manual by I&B ministry and the India portal both call Jana Gana Mana as Hindi version. —Gazoth (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: From WP:RS, 'The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content.' Since there is no mention of any translation in the parliament resolution, the translation is not there. The references you provided have been discussed earlier in this page. Please take a moment to go through. Ckundu (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────┘@Ckundu:Since there is no mention of any translation in the parliament resolution, the translation is not there. is considered as original research. I saw the previous discussion, but I don't see anything that would disqualify the sources. —Gazoth (talk) 07:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: Please read through to recheck what original research is. This doesn't fall under that as it simply goes by what's there in the resolution rather than extrapolating that to some translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckundu (talk • contribs) 07:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: Quoting from the policy To demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented. Since your conclusion that there was no Hindi version is not explicitly stated by the source, it is not directly supported and is thus original research. —Gazoth (talk) 08:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: Had there been an Hindi translation, it would have been mentioned while adpting that as national anthem. Original is the default. Rather, Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata is considered as original research. Ckundu (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: Now we are just going around in circles. It is not original research as the Encyclopedia Britannica reference explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana is the Hindi version. If you have a reliable reference that explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana was adopted as national anthem in Bengali version, we can continue this discussion. Until then, this the last message from me on this topic. —Gazoth (talk) 08:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: The Britannica doesn't mention Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata. And since the adoption was not by Britannica authors but by Indian parliament, I look forward to see a parliament resolution that explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana was adopted as national anthem in Hindi version. However, for now, let me add the reference to the original parliament resolution. Hope that's ok with you. Ckundu (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: I have reverted your edit as it would undermine the previous sentence amounting to synthesis. As I said before, the standard for sources in Wikipedia is documented by WP:RS. You set an arbitrary standards for sources as per your personal preference. Please don't make any further changes to the page on this topic until you get a consensus here, as you'd be in violation of WP:3RR. Lastly, my statement Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata was my explantation for you when I assumed that you were unaware of the background. Britannica doesn't explicitly state that, but it does say Adopted by the Constituent Assembly as the national anthem of India on January 24, 1950, the song Jana-gana-mana, in its Hindi version of the first stanza, was originally composed in Bengali by poet Rabindranath Tagore which is sufficient to support the statement in the lead. —Gazoth (talk) 16:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ckundu: There is a simple compromise here. The Time of India article is a good enough reference to show that there is disagreement over the Hindi version part. However, it cannot be in the lead. We can add it in one of the later paragraphs. —Gazoth (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Lyrics[edit]

ScrapIronIV, WP:LYRICS does not forbid inclusion of lyrics, it only talks about copyright concerns. Other popular national anthems such as God Save the Queen, The Star-Spangled Banner and Advance Australia Fair include the lyrics. Can you substantiate your claim that it is a convention to not include lyrics? The transliterations on this page were indeed excessive, but that is not an excuse to remove all lyrics. —Gazoth (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

तव vs. तब[edit]

@Gazoth: The तब listed in the pdf document is clearly a typo. I am a native, fluent Hindi speaker, and तव is a poetic word for 'your, thy' in Hindi, not तब. Here is a dictionary reference to support this: Oxford Hindi Dictionary. The Official Romanisation also clearly indicates this by writing 'tava' not 'taba'. So this needs to be fixed in the article and as it stands the Official Romanisation doesn't match the Hindi. In addition, all Bengali words with 'b' that have Hindi equivalents with 'v' were adapted accordingly with 'v' (e.g. विधाता, द्राविड़, विंध्य), so तब is definitely an error in the pdf document. Furthermore, there is no reason why the MHA order would 'trump' anything else on an Indian govt. website as you claimed. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC) Wapking songs download ramleela.

(edit conflict)@Foreverknowledge: You might be right about the Hindi word, but your analysis amounts to original research. We are not supposed to achieve consistency between different language transcriptions, we just summarize from reliable sources. In this case, an official order is a much stronger source than something posted on a website, especially since the order was supposed to summarize all previous orders on the national anthem. If you find one of the previous orders on national anthem and show that it was a typo, we can replace तब with तव. तब should stay until then, but I have no objections to adding तव as footnotes as Ficusindica has done. —Gazoth (talk) 02:00, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

I think तब 'taba' was an effort to mirror Bengali, which is 'taba' in both transcription and transliteration. Ficusindica (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

If the aim was to mirror Bengali, the Official Romanisation would have 'taba' instead of 'tava', and the spellings बिधाता, द्राबिड़, बिंध्या would've been used instead of विधाता, द्राविड़, विंध्य. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

'द्रावि़ड़'[edit]

'द्रावि़ड़' is actually used, often in Jana Gana Mana.[1]Ficusindica Look at [2]

No, द्रावि़ड़ is a typo. Many typos will produce a small number of results online. Google refers it to द्राविड़. Nuqta is only for consonants as shown on the Wiktionary link. You have placed it under a vowel. So it doesn't make sense at all. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 03:17, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

'তব শুভ আশিস মাগে' vs 'তব শুভ আশিষ মাগে'[edit]

It seems that both of these are commonly used: [3][4]. আশিস appears in dictionaries and not আশিষ [5], but the official Hindi version seems to be based on আশিষ ie. आशिष. I'm proposing putting আশিস, and possibly even আশিষ, with a note on the other usage. Ficusindica (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Jana Gana Mana English Translation

Transcriptions[edit]

@Naga ganesan: Transcriptions in languages other than Bengali, Hindi and English are considered to excessive and have been previously removed from this page. You need to get consensus on the talk page before adding any other transcriptions. —Gazoth (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The Constituent Assembly adopted the Indian national anthem from a song written
and composed by the Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore on January 24, 1950.
Before this Vande Mataram written by Bankim Chandra Chattapadhya
was the National Anthem of India.
Later Constituent Assembly of India,( Vol.XII, 24-1-1950) opined:
'The composition consisting of words and music known as Janaganamana
is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations
as the Government may authorize as occasion arises, ..'
Only the first of the five stanzas was designated as the anthem.
The anthem goes:

Independence Day celebrations in India