Ahmed Faraaz's Muhaasra
Mudit
Can someone post the full lyrics of Faraz sahab's nazm Muhaasra,
please? I can only find a video clip online - which annoyingly is not
complete.
Thanks!
Vijay
mahaasra
mere ghaniim ne mujh ko pyaam bheja hai
ki halqa zan haiN mire girdlashkarii us ke
fasiil-e-shehar ke har burj har munaare par
kamaaN ba-dast sitaazah haiN askarii us ke
vuh barq-e-lehar bujhaa dii gaii hai jis kii tapash
wajuud-e-Khaak meN aatish fashaaN jagaati thii
bichha diia gaya baaruud us ke paani meN
vuh juue aab jo merii galii ko aati thii
sabhii dariida dehan ab badan darrida huue
sapurd-e-daar-o-rasan saare sar kashiida huue
tamaam suufii-o-saalik sabhii shiioKh-o-amaam
ummiid-e-lutf pe aiwaan-e-kajkalaah meN haiN
muaaz'ziin-e-adaalat halaq uThaane ko
mashaal-e-saayl-e-mubram nishashta raah meN haiN
tum ehl-e-harf ke piNdaar ke sanaagar the
vuh aasmaan-e-hunar ke najuum saamen haiN
bas ik masaahib-e-darbaar ke ishaare par
gadagaraan-e-suKhan ke hajuum saamne haiN
qalaaNdaraan-e-wafa kii isaas to dekho
tumhaare paas hai kaun aas paas to dekho
so shart yeh hai jo jaaN kii amaan chaahte haiN
to apne lauh-o-qalam qatal gaah meN rakh do
wagarna ab ke nishaana kamaaNdaraanoN ka
bas aik tum ho, so ghairat ko raah meN rakh do
yeh shart namaa jo dekha to ailchii se kahaa
use Khabar nahiiN tariiKh kyaa sikhaati hai
ki raat jab kisii Khurshiid ko shahiid kare
to sub'h ik nayaa suuraj taraash laati hai
so yeh jawaab hai mear mere aduu ke liie
ki mujh ko hirs-e-karam hai na Khauf-e-Khamiazaah
use hai satwat-e-shamshiir par ghummaND bohat
use shikoh-e-qalam ka nahiiN hai aNdaazaah
miraa qalam nahiiN kirdaar us mahaafiz kaa
jo apne shehar ko mehsuur kar ke naaz kare
mera qalam nahiiN kasaa kisii subuk-sar kaa
jo ghasbon ko qasiidoN se sar faraaz kare
meraa qalam nahiiN us naqb zan ka dast-e-hawas
jo apne ghar kii hii chhat meN shagaaf Daalta hai
meraa qalam nahiiN us duzd-e-niim shab kaa rafiiq
jo be chiraagh gharoN par kamaNd uchhalta hai
meraa qalam nahiiN tasbiih us maballagh kii
jo baNdgii ka bhii har dam hisaab rakhtaa hai
mear qalam nahiiN mezaan aise aadil kii
jo apne chehre pe duhraa niqaab rakhtaa hai
miraa qalam to amaanat hai mere logoN kii
mera qalam to adaalat mere zamiir kii hai
isii liie to jo likkha tapaak-e-jaaN se likhaa
jabhii to loch kamaaN ka, zabaan tiir kii hai
maiN kaT giruuN ki salaamat rahuuN, yaqiiN hai mujhe
ki yeh hisaar-e-sitam koii to giraae gaa
tamaam um'r kii aizaa nasiibiooN kii qasm
mere qalam ka safar raaegaaN na jaaegaa
sarashat-e-ishaq ne uftaadagii nahiiN paaii
to qad-e-saruu na banii voh saaya paimaaii
Faraaz
Vijay
> On 6 Dec, 11:30, Mudit <rmu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> > Can someone post the full lyrics of Faraz sahab's nazm Muhaasra,
> > please? I can only find a video clip online - which annoyingly is not
> > complete.
>
> > Thanks!
>
> mahaasra
>
> mere ghaniim ne mujh ko pyaam bheja hai
> ki halqa zan haiN mire girdlashkarii us ke
> fasiil-e-shehar ke har burj har munaare par
> kamaaN ba-dast sitaazah haiN askarii us ke
>
> vuh barq-e-lehar bujhaa dii gaii hai jis kii tapash
> wajuud-e-Khaak meN aatish fashaaN jagaati thii
> bichha diia gaya baaruud us ke paani meN
> vuh juue aab jo merii galii ko aati thii
>
> sabhii dariida dehan ab badan darrida huue
> sapurd-e-daar-o-rasan saare sar kashiida huue
>
> tamaam suufii-o-saalik sabhii shiioKh-o-amaam
> ummiid-e-lutf pe aiwaan-e-kajkalaah meN haiN
halaf uThaane ko (and not halaq Uthaane ko)
Naseer
janaab-i-Vihay Sahib, aadaab.
Thank you for posting this wonderful poem. Here is a youtube link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYkBHXdFyWE
In one or two places your version differs somewhat from his own
reading.
In place of..
bas ik masaahib-e-darbaar ke ishaare par
Faraz seems to say..
bas is qadar thaa kih darbaar se bulaavaa thaa (?)
Also...
tumhaare saath hai kaun aas-paas to dekho
meraa qalam nahiiN auzaar us naqb-zan kaa
A few typos..
muHaasara(h)
Ghaniim
payaam
manaare
sitaada(h)
tapish
barq-lahar (?)
aatash fishaaN
sipurd
shuyuuKH-o-imaam
kaj-kulaah ( Is he saying kaj-nigaah (?)
mu’azziziin
misaal-i-saa’il-i-mubram
nujuum
hujuum
musaahib
kamaan-daaroN
asaas
so shart yeh hai jo jaaN kii amaan chaahte ho
qatl-gaah
muhaafiz
shahr
GhaasiboN
shigaaf
muballiGh
bandagii
miizaan
iizaa-nasiibiyoN
sirisht-i-‘ishq
sarv
................................................................................
Naseer
Vijay
Thanks Naseer sahib for providing the link and the corrections. I
listened to Faraaz reciting this naz'm and there are indeed a couple
of variations in the way he recites it and how it is printed in the
book. (although from a meter point of view, both versions fit).
I write 'gh' for the ghaaf sound whereas some just use G for the same
sound. sitaadah was an error on my part, it is written with a ''daal'
in the book and I somehow imagined it to be 'zaal'. And of course,
sarv it is. But I am sure it is baNdagii and not bandagii.
Best,
Vijay
khattaki
Now a second request for another of Faraz's poems. It starts something
like this:
mey ne ab tak tumharey qaseedey likhey
aur aj apney hi naghmon se sharminda hun
Can anyone post this poem?
Mudit
corrections.
Best,
Mudit
Naseer
Vijay Sahib, aadaab 'arz hai.
>
> I write 'gh' for the ghaaf sound whereas some just use G for the same
> sound. sitaadah was an error on my part, it is written with a ''daal'
> in the book and I somehow imagined it to be 'zaal'. And of course,
> sarv it is. But I am sure it is baNdagii and not bandagii.
>
I presume you meant to write "Ghain" and not "ghaaf"(?) Are you sure
that the "n" in bandah/bandagii is a nuun-i-Ghunnah? Is this how it is
"analysed" in terms of prosody? I personally think that it is a normal
nuun.
Naseer
UVR
I am with you, Naseer saahib: especially prosodically, the noon in
bandagi is a fully scanned noon and not one dropped from the count
like a "real" noon-Ghunna (as in "neend", "gaanTh", "chhonk").
Like yourself, I have often found myself puzzled no end when our
senior members refer to the noon in bandagi, zinda, jangal etc as a
noon-Ghunna.
-UVR.
Vijay
Naseer aur UVR sahebaan: tasliimaat.
At the risk of starting another inordinate discussion on writing Urdu
in Roaman script, I thought I will reiterate my method ot
transcribing. I try to write Urdu in Roman script phonetically. When I
want to convey 'z' sound of 'zoe' 'zuaad' 'ze' or 'zaal', I write
using 'z', although the actual sounds of these letters may be slightly
different from each other and some (e.g. Sarwar sahib) may want to
denote these subtle differences by using different letters or
combinations of letters. That would be the method where each Urdu
alphabet has a unique Roman representative, so that Urdu spellings are
replicated letter by letter. I feel that although that method is the
more exact, it is so at the cost of being cumbersome.
So back to the sound of soft 'n'. I represent the 'sound' by 'N',
whether it comes at the end or the middle of a word. I go by sound
rather than it being or not being nuun-e-gunnah. So it is 'n' for the
full 'n' sound and 'N' for soft 'n'. Similarly, 'd' for 'daal' sound
and 'D' for 'Dagar' sound, 't' for 'tapaak' and 'T' for 'Takraao'
sound (irrespective of whether it is 'toe' or 'te';) etc. etc. I think
my system is more intuitive for those who are not familiar with the
Urdu script or have only a passing familiarity (like I do).
Vijay
PS BTW, thanks Naseer sahib, for correcting my 'ghaaf/ghain blunder.
While on the 'gh' sound, I will use 'g' for gard', 'gh' for
'ghubaar/'ghaniim' and Gh for 'ghar'
UVR
Vijay saahib,
Thanks for your response, but I don't think the question was about
your way of transcribing Urdu (or anyone's way of writing it) in Roman
script at all. The question Naseer saahib posed was specific to Urdu
linguistics -- or at least it sounded so to my ears -- namely, "is the
noon in zindagi a noon-Ghunna, or not". Whilst from your way of
transcribing Urdu in Roman one can easily determine that in your
opinion all "soft n"-s in Urdu are noon-Ghunna, this is not sufficient
to answer the larger question within the context of the Urdu language
itself.
Naseer saahib can correct me if I am wrong about the focus of his
question. Should I be found to in fact be wrong, please accept my
sincere apologies.
-UVR.
Vijay
UVR sahib, when I wrote baNdagi with 'N', it seemed to me as if Naseer
sahib thought I was insisting on it being a nuun-e-ghunnah. My
response was to clarify that I go by sound of hard 'n' and soft 'n'
and don't reserve 'N' for just nuun-e-ghunnah. That's all I wanted to
clarify. I don't disagree with either of you about the nuun in baNdagi
being a nuun-e-ghunnah. (Even though I don't possess the necessary
knowledge to argue the point either way, I would never bet against you
and Naseer sahib on matters of Urdu language).
Best,
Vijay
Naseer
UVR Sahib, aadaab.
When I put "bandagii" in the list of typos in my reply to Vijay
Sahib's post, my intention was to point out that there is an "a" after
d which he had missed out. I had noticed that Vijay Sahib had used a
capital N in baNdgii (and I took this to represent the nasal n), but
decided not to make too much of it since he had also used the same
convention for aNdaazah and kamaNd. Only when Vijay Sahib in his reply
to me stated that he was sure about the baNdagii speliing as opposed
to bandagii did I question his usage of N for n. I have been puzzled,
to use your phrase, about this kind of usage for a long time. Thank
you for clarifying the matter for me too.
To be fair to Vijay Sahib, Kitaabistan's Urdu/English dictionary
(which I find very useful) does show a dot above the n, for which I
have no explanation. I certainly have my doubts about a number of
words where I am not certain if the n is full or nasal.
Take for example the word an-daataa. That's fine. But why are ant,
antRii, anTii, anjaam,anjum, andaazah, andar, andaam...the list is
endless..being shown in the same dictioanry with a dot above the n?
You have mentioned the word jangal but what about angbiiN (honey),
angrez? Should they fall in the same category as jangal? With long
vowels it is easy to decide if the n is nasal or not, but after a, i
and u there do appear to be difficulties.
Naseer
Naseer
As UVR Sahib has indicated, I have not said anything about your system
of transliteration. We all have slightly different ways of writing
Roman Urdu and there is nothing wrong with this because we generally
know what the writer's intention is. I was merely questioning whether
the n in bandagii was a full n or a nasal n. I personally thought that
it was n't a nasal n and that is what I indicated in my post to you.
> So back to the sound of soft 'n'. I represent the 'sound' by 'N',
> whether it comes at the end or the middle of a word. I go by sound
> rather than it being or not being nuun-e-gunnah. So it is 'n' for the
> full 'n' sound and 'N' for soft 'n'.
What is a soft n, Vijay Sahib? Could you please elaborate on this.
> PS BTW, thanks Naseer sahib, for correcting my 'ghaaf/ghain blunder.
> While on the 'gh' sound, I will use 'g' for gard', 'gh' for
> 'ghubaar/'ghaniim' and Gh for 'ghar'
But in your original post you have spelt the word for pride/arrogance
as "ghummaND" ( I shall overlook the double m:)) instead of "GhumaND!!
Similarly, you have written Khauf/Khamyaazah/Khursheed etc with a
capital K. By this logic, the word for dust should be written Ghubaar
and not ghubaar. Would n't you agree?
Naseer
UVR
Indeed, Naseer saahib, there are difficulties when we look at these
words as they are spelt in the Urdu script; for a medial nuun, whether
it be a nuun-Ghunnah or otherwise, is always written with a dot on the
nuun. I have personally never encountered Urdu script transcriptions
that transcribe the medial nuun-Ghunnah using any kind of diacritical
mark: whether they be handwritten notes, newspaper prints, or
dictionaries. I don't even know that a universal symbol/diacritical
mark exists for the medial nuun-Ghunnah that is distinct from other
medial nuun-s.
In the absence of such clear diacritical annotation in Urdu, it is
hardly surprising that there exists confusion about which medial nuuns
are really nuun-Ghunnahs. One is forced to determine the answer for
oneself, taking recourse essentially to three methods: (1)
pronunciations of people who are "in the know" (something we can't
really determine ourselves) or from radio/TV/film sources where
"proper" language is supposedly spoken (2) pronunciations of nuun in
words derived from or related to the one we are interested in, and (3)
Devanagari spellings of these words in OLD dictionaries and text
books, when they were still distinguishing circumspectly between
chandrabindu (= nuun-Ghunnah) and anuswaar (=medial half-nuun).
Today, that distinction is lost.
I cannot say which of these approaches is the best and most reliable,
but Approach 1 is definitely the most unscientific and most
unreliable. Approach 2 yields us to nuun-Ghunnah in words such as,
"baNT, chhaNT, iNch" -- derived from their related words "baaNTnaa,
chhaaNTnaa, aiNchnaa" etc. Approach 3 is, quite obviously, not for
everyone, but for me leads to aNgrez, aNdheraa, gaNwaar, saNwarna, as
well as to andar, bandar, chukandar, sikandar, qalandar, etc (none of
which have a nuun-Ghunnah).
Incidentally, the word "an-daataa" that you wrote -- what is it? "ann
()-daataa"? There is no Ghunna if so. There's, rather, a shadd on
the nuun, and the correct (pedantic) pronunciation should be "anna-
daataa"
-UVR.
Zuhra
> I have personally never encountered Urdu script transcriptions
> that transcribe the medial nuun-Ghunnah using any kind of diacritical
> mark: whether they be handwritten notes, newspaper prints, or
> dictionaries. I don't even know that a universal symbol/diacritical
> mark exists for the medial nuun-Ghunnah that is distinct from other
> medial nuun-s.
>
UVR saahab, aadaab.
Roman Urdu meN to koi universal symbol nahi hai lekin kuchh Urdu
luGhaat meN jahaaN Ghalati kaa imkaan ho noon par chhota sa noon-
Ghunna ̆ banaa diya jaataa hai, masalan lafz haNsii meN noon par yeh
̆ nishaan ho gaa magar aaNkh ke noon par nahi. aur yeh to aap
yaqeenan jaante hoN ge k agar noon ki awaaz kisi lafz meN saakin ho
jaise k intehaa/andeshah/bandah waGhaira meN to noon par yeh nishaan ˆ
(jazm) hota hai Urdu dictionaries meN.
> I cannot say which of these approaches is the best and most reliable,
> but Approach 1 is definitely the most unscientific and most
> unreliable. Approach 2 yields us to nuun-Ghunnah in words such as,
> "baNT, chhaNT, iNch" -- derived from their related words "baaNTnaa,
> chhaaNTnaa, aiNchnaa" etc. Approach 3 is, quite obviously, not for
> everyone, but for me leads to aNgrez, aNdheraa, gaNwaar, saNwarna, as
> well as to andar, bandar, chukandar, sikandar, qalandar, etc (none of
> which have a nuun-Ghunnah).
ab iss mauzu par baat ho rahi hai to meN aap se ek sawaal poochhna
chaahooN gi -- lafz 'saiNt' meN noon ki awaaz bilkul 'noon-Ghunna' ki
hai yaa iss meN noon ko zaraa bolaa jaae gaa jaise lafz 'bint' meN
bolte haiN?
shukria,
Zuhra
UVR
> On Dec 9, 7:44 pm, UVR <u...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have personally never encountered Urdu script transcriptions
> > that transcribe the medial nuun-Ghunnah using any kind of diacritical
> > mark: whether they be handwritten notes, newspaper prints, or
> > dictionaries. I don't even know that a universal symbol/diacritical
> > mark exists for the medial nuun-Ghunnah that is distinct from other
> > medial nuun-s.
>
> UVR saahab, aadaab.
>
> Roman Urdu meN to koi universal symbol nahi hai lekin kuchh Urdu
> luGhaat meN jahaaN Ghalati kaa imkaan ho noon par chhota sa noon-
> Ghunna ̆ banaa diya jaataa hai, masalan lafz haNsii meN noon par yeh
> ̆ nishaan ho gaa magar aaNkh ke noon par nahi. aur yeh to aap
> yaqeenan jaante hoN ge k agar noon ki awaaz kisi lafz meN saakin ho
> jaise k intehaa/andeshah/bandah waGhaira meN to noon par yeh nishaan ˆ
> (jazm) hota hai Urdu dictionaries meN.
>
Zuhra-ji,
wazaahat kaa bahut bahut shukriya. mere paas kull ek "print" luGhat
hai, jo is waqt storage mein paRi hai -- the Standard Urdu-English
dictionary compiled by Maulvi Abdul Haq (ji haaN baabaa-e-Urdu). mujhe
naheeN yaad paRta k maiNne us meN 'chhoTa sa nuun Ghunnah' dekhaa hai,
lekin aap kahti haiN to phir Theek hi kahti hoNgi. yaqeen maaniye --
aap ki baat mere liye baais-e-tashaffi hai kyoN.k kam az kam ek to
aisi luGhat hai hi jis meN nuun-Ghunnah aur nuun-saakin kaa farq saaf-
saaf dikhaayaa gayaa hai.
> ab iss mauzu par baat ho rahi hai to meN aap se ek sawaal poochhna
> chaahooN gi -- lafz 'saiNt' meN noon ki awaaz bilkul 'noon-Ghunna' ki
> hai yaa iss meN noon ko zaraa bolaa jaae gaa jaise lafz 'bint' meN
> bolte haiN?
saiNt meN nuun-Ghunnah hi hai. neez 'bint' aur 'ant' (=end) meN nuun
bilkul ek-saa hai.
-UVR.
Zuhra
UVR saahab,
maiN ne iss ‘chhote noon-Ghunna’ jaisi alaamat kaa istemaal na sirf ye
ke kuchh luGhaat meN paayaa hai balke mujhe achhi tarha yaad paRta hai
k ek India se chhapi huii Urdu kitaab meN bhii ise dekha hai (kitaab
kaa naam yaad nahi iss waqt). mere paas jo Feroz-ul-luGhaat hai uss
meN iss ̆ nishaan ko “jiss noon kaa elaan nahi kiyaa jaataa aur wazn
me shumaar nahi hota hai” ke liye istemaal kiyaa gayaa hai masalan
haNsii/aNdheraa waGherah ke liye.
> saiNt meN nuun-Ghunnah hi hai. neez 'bint' aur 'ant' (=end) meN nuun
> bilkul ek-saa hai.
bohat shukria.
Regards,
Zuhra
Vijay
Naseer sahib, for the purposes of transcribing, I use 'n' for the
'hard' sounding 'nuun' as in 'sanad' or 'naseer'; i.e. where tip of
the tongue touches the palate. For all other 'n' sounds, I prefer to
use 'N' be they sounds of (from naagri) bindu, chandarbindu or half
'n' quarter n, whatever. As, e.g., in bhaNwar, samaNdar etc. This is
mere phonetic transcription and hopefully people understand what I
mean.
>
> > PS BTW, thanks Naseer sahib, for correcting my 'ghaaf/ghain blunder.
> > While on the 'gh' sound, I will use 'g' for gard', 'gh' for
> > 'ghubaar/'ghaniim' and Gh for 'ghar'
>
> But in your original post you have spelt the word for pride/arrogance
> as "ghummaND" ( I shall overlook the double m:)) instead of "GhumaND!!
> Similarly, you have written Khauf/Khamyaazah/Khursheed etc with a
> capital K. By this logic, the word for dust should be written Ghubaar
> and not ghubaar. Would n't you agree?
>
> Naseer
I have been tardy. (I still keep in the back of my Urdu dictionary a
note about my system of transcription in Roman of urdu from which I
copied examples in my previous response. When I was transcribing
muhaasra, I obviously ignored my own system, as you have so pointedly
shown). Nevertheless, I hope Mudit sahib/sahiba understood most of it
(and all of it after your corrections):-)
Best,
Vijay
Naseer
As Zuhra Sahiba has stated earlier, for the medial nasal nuun a small
nuun-i-Ghunnah (nuun without a dot) is placed just above the nuun dot.
For nuun saakin there is a jazm symbol which resembles an Urdu number
eight. I have books at home which show these symbols. This is however
the exception rather than the rule.
> In the absence of such clear diacritical annotation in Urdu, it is
> hardly surprising that there exists confusion about which medial nuuns
> are really nuun-Ghunnahs. One is forced to determine the answer for
> oneself, taking recourse essentially to three methods: (1)
> pronunciations of people who are "in the know" (something we can't
> really determine ourselves) or from radio/TV/film sources where
> "proper" language is supposedly spoken (2) pronunciations of nuun in
> words derived from or related to the one we are interested in, and (3)
> Devanagari spellings of these words in OLD dictionaries and text
> books, when they were still distinguishing circumspectly between
> chandrabindu (= nuun-Ghunnah) and anuswaar (=medial half-nuun).
> Today, that distinction is lost.
I presume, by half nuun you mean an "n" without a following vowel, i.e
nuun saakin. True? If this is the case, bandagii would be spelt in
Nagri with a half nuun followed by da.This half nuun to my mind is a
"full nuun" and not a nuun-i-Ghunnah. For this reason, and you have
expressed agreement with me, I can not understand why Vijay Sahib has
used a capital n to denote baNdagii for the correct bandagii.
> I cannot say which of these approaches is the best and most reliable,
> but Approach 1 is definitely the most unscientific and most
> unreliable. Approach 2 yields us to nuun-Ghunnah in words such as,
> "baNT, chhaNT, iNch" -- derived from their related words "baaNTnaa,
> chhaaNTnaa, aiNchnaa" etc. Approach 3 is, quite obviously, not for
> everyone, but for me leads to aNgrez, aNdheraa, gaNwaar, saNwarna, as
> well as to andar, bandar, chukandar, sikandar, qalandar, etc (none of
> which have a nuun-Ghunnah).
What puzzles me is that if one writes jangal with a full nuun, i.e not
a nuun-i-Gunnah, then the "ang" in jungle, to my ears at least, sounds
the same as the "aNg" in aNgrez, aNg (part of body), aNgbiiN (honey),
naNg (shame), raNg , baNgaal and so on and so forth.
> Incidentally, the word "an-daataa" that you wrote -- what is it? "ann
> ()-daataa"? There is no Ghunna if so. There's, rather, a shadd on
> the nuun, and the correct (pedantic) pronunciation should be "anna-
> daataa"
In the Urdu dictionary I spoke of earlier, "ann(a)-daata" is shown as
"an-daataa". I am aware that "an" could be construed as "non".
Naseer
Vijay
>
> I presume, by half nuun you mean an "n" without a following vowel, i.e
> nuun saakin. True? If this is the case, bandagii would be spelt in
> Nagri with a half nuun followed by da.This half nuun to my mind is a
> "full nuun" and not a nuun-i-Ghunnah. For this reason, and you have
> expressed agreement with me, I can not understand why Vijay Sahib has
> used a capital n to denote baNdagii for the correct bandagii.
>
It is possible Naseer sahib that my earlier response to you hasn't
appeared on ALUP in some groups; it has on my google group page. Or
perhaps I wasn't very clear; so here goes again, hopefully for the
last time. I transcribe Urdu in Roman how the letters sound rather
than how they are written in Urdu. I use 'n' only for full 'nuun'
sounds as in say manpriit (a common enough Panjabi name) or taraana or
'inkaar', where tip of the tongue touches the palate during the
enunciation of this 'n' sound. For every other 'nuun' sound that is
less than this hard 'n' sound, I use 'N'. In baNdagi, after 'b', 'd'
is the main consonant that is pronounced with the tongue touching the
upper teeth, but it is nasalised with the soft 'nuun' sound, hence my
spelling with 'N' to represent that nasalisation of 'd'. I guess
'samaNdar' is another example of the same. I try to replicate the
sound rather than the 'haruuf'. The way I read it, you want to reserve
'N' for 'nuun-e-ghunnah' only and 'n' for all other 'nuun' sounds, and
on this we can agree to disagree. With my system of transcription,
'bandagi' reads like 'ban dagi' where 'n' is enunciated fully before
'd'. (as it is in inkaar before 'k').
Best,
Vijay
Naseer
Vijay Sahib, aadaab.
I am not convinced since for me, the "n" in "inkaar" is of same
quality as the one in "bandagii"; but we shall agree to disagree. I do
appreciate your detailed explanations though and I am grateful for
them.
Naseer
Vijay
Naseer sahib, thanks for your response. I may need your help with
'inkaar': I think I (being a Panjabi I guess) may pronounce it
differently. Is the 'in' in 'inkaar' pronounced as the 'in'; in 'ink'
or as in 'inevitable'? Thanks for your indulgence.
With best regarrds,
Vijay
Naseer
Vijay Sahib, aadaab.
aap apnii davaat meN "ink" Daal kar zaraa apne qalam ke zor ko to
aazmaa'iye. ko'ii bhii in-kaar nahiiN kare gaa kih aap in-qilaab bar-
paa kar rahe haiN. yih baat bi_lkul "in-evitable" hai!
Naseer
Vijay
hahaha!
Thanks for that! Let's close this discussion then on this amiable
disagreement on baNdagi v/s bandagi:-). At least, there is no
disagreement on inkaar!
Regards,
Vijay