From The Economist!!!
A personal, addressed to ME mail from contributor at The Economist!
Dear ME,
Thank you for your letter which was passed on to me as the author of the
Kerala article - and many apologies for not replying earlier. In my
experience, both Keralite or Keralan are used, the former maybe more
consistently by people from Kerala. Keralan also seems to be used as an
adjective - as in Keralan people. But no, there's no difference! And what a
marvellous place!
best wishes
EJ
And now I wish I could think of an interesting reply so that this correspondence could be sustained.
PS: Honestly though, has anyone ever been referred to as Keralan people?
people who say "keralan" clearly don't know how to say "mallu". people who don't know how to say "mallu" clearly haven't been to kerala. people who haven't been to kerala, well, they don't really matter, do they.. QED.
ReplyDeleteNo, they don't!
ReplyDeletemay be...keraleeyan...LOL..mallenglish
ReplyDeleteKeralan? sounds awfully pseudo, or like a name like kurulan saar or something on those lines:)
ReplyDeleteyeah, it does. Keralan sounds pseudo or like Q says it sounds like manglish.
ReplyDeleteis saying mallu as bad calling an anglo-indian 'ding'?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. I know I don't like to be called Malabari but I don't find Mallu wrong.
ReplyDeleteI prefer mallu to keralan/keralite.
ReplyDeleteOne should call a person hailing from kerala either a Keralite or a Malayalee. Keralan is a wrong word to use and means nothing for a person hailing from those lands.
ReplyDelete