Practice: Language and Literature

(b) Grierson's Linguistic Survey of India, Volume IX. Volume IX, Indo-Aryan Family, Central Group, Part II: Specimens of the Rajasthani and Gujarati.

Why not the others: It is a colonial survey, conducted to make the region's languages legible to an administration, and this site presents its scheme as Grierson's rather than as a natural fact — dialect boundaries being exactly the category to attribute rather than assert.

(c) Marwari and Jaipuri. In his own words, for the Eastern dialects, we have taken Jaipuri as the standard.

Why not the others: Everything else in the scheme is positioned against those two, so getting the pair wrong unbalances the whole classification.

(d) ko in Jaipuri and ro in Marwari. It is a one-word test: a speech that says ro is on the western side of Grierson's line, one that says ko on the eastern.

Why not the others: This does more work than any coloured map, and it is the kind of detail that only comes from reading the survey rather than a summary of it.

(a) Two in Jaipuri, three in Marwari. Jaipuri: one with the typical letter s, one with the suffix -lo, which changes for gender and number. Marwari: one with h, one with invariable -la, and a third adding -ga, like the Hindi ga.

Why not the others: That third Marwari form is the interesting one — the western dialect is closest to Hindi in precisely this feature while differing sharply in others, which is why single-feature classifications are contested.

(b) An eastern form of Marwari. He calls it a well-known eastern form of Marwari, known as Mewari or Morwayi according to locality.

Why not the others: (a) is the later convention, and treating Mewari as a top-level dialect is not Grierson's placement. The question tests whether you have read the source or a summary of it.

(c) Western Hindi. He notes that Malvi has a plural formed with -hor, which he compares to old Kanauji.

Why not the others: This is the placement that most surprises candidates, because both are usually taught as straightforward Rajasthani dialects.

(d) Bhattiani. It is the mixed form through which Marwari merges into Lahnda and Punjabi.

Why not the others: (a) Bagri is the speech through which Marwari merges into Punjabi and the Bangaru dialect of Western Hindi — a transition speech that Grierson does not exclude in the same way.

(a) They are gradients occupied by named intermediate speeches, not lines. Grierson describes the edges as merges rather than as borders.

Why not the others: Transition speeches exist because the boundary is a slope, and they have names and speakers of their own — which is a better Mains point than any map.

(b) The heroic idiom, in archaic Rajasthani, used by the Charans. Pingal is the lyrical, soft idiom used for devotional and romantic themes.

Why not the others: Dingal is the idiom of the literature the sources chapter says to distrust for chronology. So the language question and the source-criticism question are the same question: knowing the register tells you what kind of evidence a text can be.

(c) Suryamall Misran, Rajkavi of Bundi. 1815-1868; Dingal historical poetry on Bundi and northern India. He is described as proficient in six languages and as a scholar of grammar, logic, history and politics.

Why not the others: (a) wrote the Veli Krisan Rukmani Ri; (b) the Kanhadade Prabandha of 1455. Three Rajasthani works, three authors, three centuries.

(d) The younger brother of Rai Singh of Bikaner. 1549-1600, son of Kalyanmal. Dursa Adha called the work the fifth Veda and the nineteenth Purana.

Why not the others: Rai Singh built Junagarh between 1589 and 1594 — so the fort and the poem come out of the same household, which joins this chapter to the dynasties and administration chapters.

(a). All 2.58 crore speakers are counted inside Hindi.

Why not the others: (b) is the assumption the question tests. Rajasthani has no Eighth Schedule status, and the grouping under Hindi is precisely what the recognition demand is against. At 2.58 crore it nonetheless exceeds several languages that are in the Schedule — which is the argument in one line.

(b) Bhili/Bhilodi, with 33,93,991 speakers — and Garasia (76,749) sits there too.

Why not the others: (a) is where a dialect map would put it, and that is the point: the Census classification cuts across the linguistic one. Neither is a mistake; they answer different questions, one about grammatical descent and one about what people said their mother tongue was. Consequence for an option: Wagdi's 34 lakh are NOT inside any Rajasthani total.

(c) twice — Bagri Rajasthani, 2,34,227, under Hindi, and Bagri, 16,56,588, under Punjabi. Seven times larger in one than the other.

Why not the others: Grierson had already described Bagri as the speech through which Marwari merges into Punjabi and Bangaru, and the Census records that same ambiguity a century later by splitting the returns. A transition dialect does not resolve when you count it; it splits.

(d). The two are a century and two methods apart — different areas, different categories, a survey estimate against an enumeration.

Why not the others: (a) is the tempting arithmetic and it is meaningless: you cannot compute a rate between two numbers that do not measure the same thing over the same ground. (c) is wrong on the facts, since Wagdi is grouped under Bhili/Bhilodi, not counted with Marwari.

(a) Marwari, 78,31,749 — the largest of the named Rajasthani mother tongues after Rajasthani itself.

Why not the others: (b) swaps in Mewari, which is 42,12,262. (c) gives Hara/Harauti's figure to Dhundhari, which is 14,76,446. (d) gives Nimadi's to Mewati, which is 8,56,643. Anchor Marwari at 78 lakh and Mewari at 42 lakh, and the rest sort by size.

(b). Statement 1 lists mother tongues returned by 10,000 speakers or more, so absence from it means below the threshold or not separately returned — nothing more.

Why not the others: (a) and (c) both read absence from one table as a substantive finding about the language, which it is not. This page therefore gives no Census figure for Ahirwati rather than inventing or inferring one — absence of evidence is reportable, and it is not evidence of absence.

(c) Marugurjari Apabhramsa — and the board makes the claim testable by drawing a parallel: Marubhasha, Rajasthani, from Marugurjari; Gujarati from Gurjari. Both languages evince grammatical similarities, which is offered as the evidence for the common ancestor.

Why not the others: Scholars interpret the role of Apabhramsa differently and other derivations circulate, so this is a source-attribution question, not a settled-fact question. The shared parent is why Gujarati keeps appearing in the dialect entries — it explains what would otherwise look like mere borrowing.

(d) Rathi, and the board groups Ahirwati (Rathi) with Eastern Rajasthani.

Why not the others: (b) Gorwari and (c) Thali are sub-dialects of Marwari, and (a) Bagdi is a Western Rajasthani dialect in the board's own two-fold table. The reason this question is worth having: a dialect can be absent from a national enumeration and still be a named category in the state's own textbook, because the Census counts what people return as their mother tongue and a textbook lists the regions and communities of a state. They are answering different questions.

(a). (b) is the Western group.

Why not the others: Note that the board's division is the same cut Grierson drew, stated from the other end. Grierson's scheme rests on two standards, Marwari for the west and Jaipuri for the east; the board keeps the east-west axis and lists the members. The board also notes that Grierson divided the Rajasthani dialects into five main groups, so the two-fold table is offered as a broader division, not a replacement.

(b) Gujarat influence.

Why not the others: (a) is the trap, because a different marker does that job: Grierson's genitive test, ro west of his line and ko east of it. The two tests are not rivals; they measure different things. Grierson's ro/ko separates Rajasthani from Rajasthani; the board's Chhe traces a relationship to Gujarati across the whole eastern group. (c) Brij influence is real but belongs to Mewati near Bharatpur.

(c) Archival literature. The earliest Rajasthani literature survives in this form; the body of it is meagre but of great literary and historical importance, and the influence of the oral tradition on Rajasthani literature is clearly visible throughout.

Why not the others: The term is worth knowing because of what it does: it ties this chapter to the sources chapter, where inscriptions and coin legends are treated as historical evidence. The same object is a source to a historian and a genre to a literary scholar.

(d).

Why not the others: (a) Thali and Gorwari belong to Marwari, which the board calls the most important of the Rajasthani dialects, with relatively more literature, so that it is sometimes regarded as synonymous with Rajasthani itself. (c) Rangdi and Neemadi belong to Malawi, whose Rajasthan area is Pratapgarh — and the board admits it is very difficult to distinguish that speech from Malawi and therefore counts Malawi as a Rajasthani dialect. Mewari's own division is by terrain: Parvati Mewari in the hills, Maidani Mewari in the plains.

(a) R is why A holds. What is not in doubt is that his classification is the one the field has argued with ever since, which is why it must still be learned.

(d) R is true and makes A false. Treating Mewari as a top-level dialect is a later convention, not his placement.

(a) R is the evidence for A. The intermediate speeches exist because the boundary is a slope.

(a) R explains A, and it makes the language topic and the source-criticism topic one topic.

(a) Bagri completes the picture as the merge into Punjabi and Bangaru, and Mewari as an eastern form of Marwari.

(a) Marwari's third future adds -ga, like the Hindi ga — the western dialect closest to Hindi in exactly that feature.

(a) A treats the resistance to Alauddin Khalji; D belongs to the sources chapter and to the Tod-versus-Ojha argument.

(a) Invented for the purposes of the Linguistic Survey. Grierson's own sentence: "The name, as connoting a language, has been invented for the purposes of this Survey, in order to distinguish it from Western Hindi on the one hand, and from Gujarati on the other." He adds that "natives do not employ any general name for the language, but content themselves with referring to the various dialects, Marwari, Jaipuri, Malvi, and so forth."

Why not the others: (c) and (d) belong to a naming chain that circulates widely and that this site has not traced to the texts themselves — only the last link, Grierson's, is verified, and it is verified from his own admission. The label under which the state now argues for constitutional recognition was coined by a survey officer to solve a filing problem, which is a reason to name whose word it is, not a reason to stop using it.

(b) 1908, by the Superintendent of Government Printing, India — the imprint on Volume IX, Part II.

Why not the others: (a) 1912 circulates widely for the same classification and is the commonest date error on this topic: the Linguistic Survey ran across two decades and many volumes, and 1912 belongs to another of them. (c) 1898 is the year of Macalister's separate survey of Jaipur State, and (d) 1917 the year of Tessitori's Descriptive Catalogue. Three real dates, three different books.

(c). The words are "Rajasthani contains five dialects, those of the West, of the Central East, of the North-East, and two of the South-East". He names four directions and reaches five because the South-East holds two — Malvi and Nimadi.

Why not the others: (a) is the version in circulation, and it invents a Southern group that is nowhere in the Survey. The group membership usually printed is close to right; the two labels are not. (d) confuses the two standards — Marwari for the west, Jaipuri for the east — with the number of dialects.

(d). The volume's own list of proposed volumes shows Vol. IX Part III as "Bhil languages, Khandesi, etc." — a separate part, and therefore not a Rajasthani dialect in this scheme.

Why not the others: (a) is the standard error, and it travels with the invented "Southern" group of the previous question: the two mistakes support each other, which is why a list carrying one usually carries the other. A separate part of a volume is a separate subject.

(a). It is "by origin a form of Malvi", isolated among hill tribes and reshaped by Bhili and Khandeshi until it became "a distinct dialect", and Grierson records that it "has no literature, and has not hitherto been described". Its diagnostic is the e of other Rajasthani appearing as a — agent na, locative ma, aga — which it shares with Khandeshi.

Why not the others: (b) is doubly wrong: the Nimar tract lies in the Narmada valley, in what is now Madhya Pradesh, and the Survey says the dialect has no literature. Nimadi is on every Rajasthani list and is not, in any modern sense, a dialect of Rajasthan — exactly the sort of thing to say in an answer rather than to hide.

(b). Grierson's other Harauti marker is the Jaipuri kai, "what", becoming ke; the ne he puts down to Bundeli influence, "while in Jaipuri the agent never takes this suffix".

Why not the others: (a) reads a borrowing as a parentage. Harauti sits with Jaipuri in the Central-East group — Grierson says that group is "recognised under two well-known names, Jaipuri and Harauti" — and it carries a Bundeli feature because Bundeli is next door. A feature borrowed from a neighbour does not move a dialect into the neighbour's family, which is the point of the next question.

(c). Deorawati, a Southern Marwari sub-dialect east of Sirohi, had gone over to its Gujarati neighbour in pronouns, in the verb "to be" and in much of its vocabulary — and the genitive had not moved.

Why not the others: (b) inverts the result. This is the clearest demonstration available that ro is the load-bearing test: it is diagnostic because everything around it changed and it did not. A speech is classified where its genitive puts it, which is worth a sentence in Mains on its own.

(d). It is spoken by the Sondias of the north-east of the Western Malwa Agency, the Chaumahla tract of Jhalawar, and the neighbouring Bhopal Agency.

Why not the others: (a) and (b) are the two circulating misplacements, and a third travels with them: Rangri, which is not a group beside Malvi either but "the form of Malvi spoken by Rajputs of Malwa", distinguished by its preference for Marwari forms. Both Rangri and Sondwari sit under Malvi, and the Marwari forms inside Rangri are why the mistake is easy to make.

(a). Gorawati is grouped with Mewari, the Marwari of Ajmer and the Marwari of Merwara as Eastern Marwari.

Why not the others: (b) is Godwari, a Southern Marwari of the eastern parts of the Sojat, Bali and Desuri parganas, whose own marker is ch becoming s (charavo to saravo, to graze) and s becoming h. The two spellings collapse into each other constantly, and the speeches sit at opposite ends of the Marwari country — one east towards Kishangarh, one south towards Sirohi.

(b). The words are "Bikaneri and Shekhawati are the same language. They are simply Marwari with an infusion of Jaipuri, which naturally increases as we go eastwards." Bikaneri is put at 5,43,770 speakers and Shekhawati at 4,88,017, with the Northern Marwari group totalling 13,59,146.

Why not the others: (a) is what almost every list implies by printing them on separate lines. The infusion of Jaipuri increasing eastwards is the useful half: the difference between them is a position on a gradient, not a boundary.

(c). The name means the speech of the Bagar: a range of rocky hills crosses Shekhawati, the country east of it is Dhundhar, the country west of it is Bagar, "generally applied to the sandy country where water is only procurable at a great depth". Standard Bagri lies in the north-east corner of Bikaner State, extending into Hissar, Sirsa, Loharu and Dadri, and "its backbone is essentially Marwari".

Why not the others: (a) is in circulation, including in marked answer keys, and it is wrong twice over: Dungarpur and Banswara are Wagdi country, and the confusion follows from Bagri / Bagdi being used as a spelling of Vagdi. Both readings circulate and the key is sometimes the wrong one — so carry the meaning of the name, which settles it. The Bagar is sandy country with deep water, not the southern hills.

(d). That survey found thirteen forms of speech in the State, of which six are forms of Jaipuri — Torawati in the north, standard Jaipuri in the centre, Kathaira and Chaurasi in the south-west, Nagarchal and Rajawati in the south-east.

Why not the others: (a) is the assumption the question tests: Grierson did not survey Jaipur State himself, and saying so is the difference between citing the Survey and citing what the Survey cites. Note also that Kathaira and Chaurasi are both south-western, and Nagarchal and Rajawati both south-eastern — lists that scatter the four across the compass are guessing.

(a). "The name 'Jaipuri'... has been coined by Europeans, from the name of the chief town of the State. Natives usually call it Dhundhari", after the Dhundhar country, the name traced to a once-celebrated sacrificial mount, dhundh. Two further native names are recorded: Jhadshahi boli, "the speech of the kingdom of the wilderness", and, contemptuously, kai-ket-ki boli, from the Jaipuri kai, "what".

Why not the others: (c) is the trap, and a common one: they are one speech under two names. This is the second time in the chapter that a standard name turns out to be a foreign convenience — the language is "Rajasthani" because a survey needed a heading, and its eastern standard is "Jaipuri" because a town was easy to point at. Both are the names the exam uses; neither is what a speaker would have said.

(b). The four, with the figures the Alwar State officials themselves returned: Standard 2,53,800; Rathi 2,22,200, of the Rath tract near the north-west border, mixed with Ahirwati; Nahera 1,69,300, of western Tehsil Thana Ghazi in the south-west, mixed with Jaipuri; Kather 1,13,300 in Alwar and 80,000 more in Bharatpur, mixed with Braj Bhakha. Mewati in total: 11,21,154.

Why not the others: (a) is the circulating version. What each name is mixed with explains how the dialect as a whole behaves: Grierson calls Mewati "a border dialect", representing "Rajasthani fading off into the Braj Bhakha dialect of Hindi". Every one of the four is named for a tract and defined by what it is mixed with.

(c). "Ahirwati, also called Hirwati and Ahirwal, or the language of the Ahir country", centred on Rewari in the west of the old Gurgaon district and covering the Dahar tract round Najafgarh and the Jhajjar tahsil of Rohtak. "Its backbone is throughout Mewati, and it can only be classed as a form of that dialect of Rajasthani." Speakers, 4,48,915. Its marker is the verb substantive sũ, against the Mewati hũ, the s being the pull of Bangaru.

Why not the others: (d) mistakes a pull for a parentage — Grierson calls Ahirwati "the connecting link between Mewati and three other dialects, Bangaru, Bagri and Shekhawati", which is a position between families, not membership of one. Note also what the Survey does not give as its other name: Rathi. The board's own table pairs "Ahirwati (Rathi)", so know both labels and whose each is — in the Survey, Rathi names two other things entirely.

(d). The Abu lok speak a form of Sirohi "which is called Rathi by the Rajputs of the plains", and the Survey records what the word carries: they "style themselves Rajputs", and the plainsmen "call them Rathi, i.e., half-castes, a title which they resent".

Why not the others: A word that arrives in a dialect list looking like a neutral label is, in the source itself, an insult its subjects rejected. That is why this site attributes colonial classifications rather than repeating them flat. (b) also fails on the facts: the Survey's other Rathi is Rathi Mewati, of the Rath tract of Alwar — two Rathis, and neither of them is Ahirwati.

(a). Its spelling is careless and "vowels being quite commonly omitted, so that it is often illegible", and no types were ever cast for it, which is why it survives only in manuscript. A footnote adds that "the Mahajani character is really this Marwari current script which has been carried in the course of trade all over India". (b) is right for books and printing, and the split between the two uses is the whole distinction.

Why not the others: The vowel-less illegibility produced the merchant's-ledger story: a clerk at Delhi wrote babu ajmer gayo, bari bahi bhej dyo, "the Babu has gone to Ajmer, send the big ledger", and, the vowels being unwritten, it was read as babu aj mar-gayo, bari bahu bhej dijo, "the Babu died today, send the chief wife". A hand optimised for people who already knew what the document said is easy for a bookkeeper and hard for a historian — and the bahi it turns on is the same bahi the sources chapter treats as evidence. A dialect does not imply a script, either: Ahirwati was written in Deva-nagari, Gurmukhi and Persian alike, the choice resting with the writer.

(b). Grierson: "The writers sometimes composed in Marwari and sometimes in Braj Bhakha. In the former case the language was called Dingal and in the latter Pingal." Tessitori says the same at greater length and lands on the line to quote: "Dingala is therefore practically synonymous with literary or poetical Marwari."

Why not the others: (a) and (c) circulate widely and neither is asserted here — Tessitori records Charans and Bhats together as the bards at a Rajput court and does not assign one idiom to each. The distinction matters for what the pair is for: heroic against lyrical describes what the two idioms were used for; Marwari against Braj Bhakha is what they are. A question asking which idiom a work is in is asking, underneath, which language the poet was writing.

(c). He fixes the close of the sixteenth century as roughly the end of the Old Western Rajasthani period and the beginning of Modern Marwari, and applies the same line to the literary idiom. That is a periodisation with a named author and a stated criterion, which is what a periodisation has to be to be worth quoting.

Why not the others: (a) and (b) are the schemes in general circulation. They are attributed to books this site has not read, and they disagree with each other on both the number of periods and the boundaries — which is itself a reason not to reproduce either as fact. Quote the one that comes with a criterion.

(d). Tessitori's definition: "a prose governed by no rules except that each phrase or sentence in it, no matter whether long or short, is required to rhyme with the next phrase or sentence, rhymes being generally combined in pairs."

Why not the others: (a) is the khyat, (b) the vigat, (c) the vamsavali, and the plain list of generations appended to them is the pidhi — the class Tessitori gathers under "Prose Chronicles" as "khyata, vata, vigata, vamsavali, pidhis and similar ones, all of which partake more or less of an historical character". A vachanika is not "a mixture of prose and poetry". It is prose that rhymes, with metrical verse dropped into it — a definition a candidate can actually use.

(a) A Marwari play. The Survey's own list of authorities on Marwari includes Rev. J. Robson, A Selection of Khyals or Marwari Plays, Beawar Mission Press, 1866.

Why not the others: (b) is the khyat, a prose chronicle — the great example being the Khyat of Muhanot Nainsi, whose chapters run as khyats of the Bhatis, Jarechas, Jhalas, Kachhwahas, Pawars, Sisodiyas, Chauhans and Sonigaras. One is a chronicle and one is theatre, and they differ by a single letter, which is precisely why an option can be built on them.

(b). From the Old Dingal period, it honours Achaldas and his death in a sortie against Muslim besiegers in the earlier half of the fifteenth century. Achaldas had married a daughter of Rana Mokal of Chittor, who was assassinated while marching to his son-in-law's aid.

Why not the others: (a) is the other vachanika, the Vachanika Rathor Ratan Singhji ri Mahesdasot ri, composed about 1660 by Khiriya Jaga and edited and published by Tessitori in 1917 as Bibliotheca Indica New Series No. 41, "Dingala Text, with Notes and Glossary" — the last noteworthy example, "which closes the period when such literary compositions were frequent". Two vachanikas hold the whole tradition between them: one opens it and one shuts it.

(c). Being a Charan was a position, not a genre, and Tessitori's material shows the arrangement working: Khiriya Jaga was in the service of Ratan Singh of Ratlam, three of his kavittas on that ruler's liberality survive in a manuscript in the Darbar Library in the Fort of Bikaner, and after the battle of Ujjain his family was rewarded with two villages, Alaniya and Deri, held by his descendants for generations.

Why not the others: The consequence is the examinable part. A tradition organised that way will be exact about names, kin and grants, and unreliable about who was in the wrong — the conclusion the sources chapter reaches from the other end. The poet is preserved from the battle because a defeat with no one to sing it is simply a defeat.

(d). Grierson names Chand Bardai as its author and calls it the most celebrated of the bardic histories, then says the published portion "is written in an old form of Western Hindi, not Rajasthani", and that it is "the one regarding the authenticity of which the most serious doubts are justified".

Why not the others: (c) is wrong on the attribution, (a) on both counts. The Raso is the standard first answer to any question on early Rajasthani literature, and both halves of what the Survey says point away from that answer: it is the famous Rajasthani work whose published text a linguist would not call Rajasthani, and whose date is the least secure of any work in the chapter. It belongs in an answer as a problem, not as a foundation.

(a). The Akademi's own words: "Besides the 22 languages enumerated in the Constitution of India, the Sahitya Akademi has recognised English and Rajasthani as languages in which its programme may be implemented."

Why not the others: This is the fact that turns the recognition question from sentiment into a record. Rajasthani is recognised as a language by the Sahitya Akademi, has carried its own annual award since 1974, and has a state akademi of its own — and is still counted inside Hindi by the Census. The demand is not for a status nobody has granted; it is for the Constitution to agree with the bodies that already have.

(b) Leeltans, listed by the Akademi as poetry, 1976.

Why not the others: (a) is the standing error — the poem is famous and the award was not for it. (c) Pagfero is Mani Madhukar's, 1975, and the Akademi lists it as poetry, not as a novel; (d) Bol Bharamli is Satya Prakash Joshi's, 1977. The column is headed "RAJASTHANI (Since 1974)", and the first award, in 1974, went to Vijay Dan Detha for Batan Ri Phulwari, Vol. X, a collection of folk-tales. The first thing the national literary body honoured in Rajasthani was the oral tradition written down — and Detha was later elected an Akademi Fellow, in 2004, listed under the language Rajasthani.

(c) Urdu. He is a distinguished Urdu poet of Jodhpur, and he does not appear on the Akademi's Rajasthani list at all.

Why not the others: (a) is where preparation material routinely puts him, in lists of modern Rajasthani writers, on the strength of this very award. An answer that places him in a Rajasthani list is wrong on the awarding body's own record — for this purpose, the language a writer belongs to is the language the award was given in.

(d). The state Art and Culture portal gives 25 January 1983, and the portal's page on the akademi's constitution confirms that its headquarters "shall be at Bikaner" and that it is an autonomous body.

Why not the others: (a) is worth fixing in memory, because 1985 circulates widely: the day and month are right in both versions, and only the year is wrong. (b) is the other akademi entirely — the Rajasthan Sahitya Akademi, formed at Udaipur on 28 January 1958, whose monthly magazine is Madhumati. Two akademis, two cities, two journals, and both dates fall in late January, which is exactly why the pair gets swapped.

(a) R is Grierson's own account of the gap, and it is why he settles on "about twelve millions" for a normal year. Three figures for one language in a single paragraph, each with its basis stated, is more use than one figure with none — and his dialect-by-dialect estimates total 1,53,90,972, which is a fourth number on a fourth basis again.

(a) (b) is the real swap to beware of, Godwari against Gorawati; (c) swaps the two Mewari names. Kishangarh appears in two rows on purpose: Gorawati is the Marwari of Kishangarh, Sarwari the Mewari of its southern part — one state, two speeches, two families. About 21,000 Khairari speakers are recorded within Bundi State, in the hills where Mewar, Jaipur and Bundi meet.