PunjabiyoN kaa Urdu [2] - aap idhar aa'o aur mere saath baat karo

[Naseer]

Dear ALUPers. aadaab-o-tasliimaat

This is the second thread in the "PunjabiyoN kaa Urdu" series. In 2006 in a thread entitled, "Urdu zabaan se vaabasta chand baateN 2", one of my questions was:

"The use of "tum" verb after "aap" pronoun"

This appears to be becoming quite common in Urdu/Hindi speech, as well as film/play media. I don't know whether the film writers are reflecting speech situations or whether people are copying film actors. Do you think this trend is "healthy" or is it likely to damage the "tum"/"aap" distinction.

e.g. aap idhar aao awr mere saath baat karo."

UVR SaaHib replied.

"Isn't this the Punjabi-influenced style of speaking? At least that was my observation growing up in Delhi. Non-Punjabis seemed to use either "aap idhar aaiye aur ... keejiye" or "aap idhar aayeN aur mere saath baat kareN", and who is partial to which of these also seems to be determined by his/her family/linguistic heritage." [He also followed this in the same breath by:

"Another Punjabi-influenced speaking peccadillo is the propensity to use 'ne' in sentences like "maiNne ek kaam karnaa hai", "tumne gaanaa hai" instead of "mujhe ... karnaa hai" or "tumheN".....but this need not concern us here!:-)]

I remember at least one occasion when a gentleman called "Sachin Al-Hindi" used a similar sentence on ALUP, namely,"."aap kuchh bhuul jaate ho"

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/alt.language.urdu.poetry/Sachin/alt.language.urdu.poetry/u9Py1NGKAyY/DgGMxL4vu4MJ

I have n't the slightest clue as to the ethnic origins of this gentleman. He may well be Punjabi. Is it also your experience that this kind of sentence is only uttered by Punjabis. I have heard such sentences on the media but I don't know how one can work out the ethnic origins of the person unless of course it is plainly obvious from the person's accent.

Once again please come forward with your views and let us have a decent discussion. Have you come across anything of this sort in Urdu poetry or prose by well known authors? Or is this just a spoken phenomenon but still a Punjabi one?

aap kaa xair-xvaah,
Naseer

[Naseer]

Dostaan-i-giraamii

yih laRii kyoN ThaNDii rahe?

aap sab ne janaab-i-Shamsur Rahman Faruqi SaaHib kaa naam zaruur sunaa ho gaa. vuh bunyaadii taur par Urdu ke giraamii-tariin naqqaadoN meN se haiN lekin saath saath shaa3ir bhii aur naavil-naviis bhii. sone par suhaagah yih kih vuh Ilahabaad ke rahne vaale haiN jis kaa Punjab se roz-i-azal se ko'ii ta3alluq nahiiN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTC769HYy2Y

(Pratiman Release- Shamsur Rehman Faruqi)

"bhaiyaa aap jaante ho naa" -26:33


aisii zabaan Luknow meN bhii bolii jaatii hai!

"Jashn-e-Iftikhar Arif" part III at 1:04:32 .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9W7aATpLLs

"aap dunyaa ko Khuub-suurat dekhnaa chaahte ho...aap dunyaa ko tabdiil karnaa chaah rahe ho..".

Naseer

[Raj Kumar]

On Saturday, January 16, 2016 at 2:30:05 PM UTC-8, Naseer wrote:

Dostaan-i-giraamii

yih laRii kyoN ThaNDii rahe?

***janaab-e-man, maiN bhi yihii soch rahaa thaa k jis laRii ki ‘theme’ aisi hai k jis ne mujhe aek ‘arse se “dukhii” kar rakkhaa hai, voh laRii khaamosh kyuuN hai? yaqeen jaaniye, Naseer sahib, k jab ko’ii mujh se yeh kehta hai k “aap kahaaN rehte ho ji?”, jii chaahata hai k use javaab duuN: “DhaTThe khuu ch”!!!
I hope everyone gets it!

Even so, my hunch is that this ‘ugliness’ arises from the fact that, while Urdu and Hindi have three ways of addressing the person in front (tuu, tum & aap), Punjabi has only two ways (tuuN for tuu, tusii for both tum & aap). Hence, the tragedy --- with Punjabis saying “tusii aao”, with no option to say “aap aayeN”!*** ☹

aap sab ne janaab-i-Shamsur Rahman Faruqi SaaHib kaa naam zaruur sunaa ho gaa. vuh bunyaadii taur par Urdu ke giraamii-tariin naqqaadoN meN se haiN lekin saath saath shaa3ir bhii aur naavil-naviis bhii. sone par suhaagah yih kih vuh Ilahabaad ke rahne vaale haiN jis kaa Punjab se roz-i-azal se ko'ii ta3alluq
nahiiN!

***Ghalat, Sir. aap shaayad bhuul rahe haiN k, ba-qaul-e-shaKhse, Pujaabi zabaan, kaheeN bhi ho, apne asaraat chhoRne meN der naheeN lagaati.

aap ne abhi abhi farmaaya k Allahabaad ka maahaul Punjaabi asaraat se mutlaqin mubarra thaa --- aap shaayad bhuul rahe haiN k Allahabaad university ke sho’aba-e-Angrezi meN aek professor the: Harivansh Rai Bachhan (jo Firaaq Gorakhpurii ke ‘colleague’ the aur megastar Amitaabh Bachhan ke vaalid!

Husn-e-ittefaaq se, HRB ki shaadi aek Punjabi sardaarni, ba-naam Teji ( more likely, Tejinder Kaur) se ho gayee --- ab aap hi bataaiye k, is shadii ke ba’ad, Allahabaad Punjaabi ta’assuraat se kaise bach sakta tha? ;)

Khair, maiN apne is kathan ko yahiiN par bishraam deta huuN. agar aap saaHibaan mujh se kuchh aur sun_na chaahate HO to, ba-aavaaz-e-bulaNd, kaHO; maiN vaapas lauTne meN qat’an der naheeN lagauuN gaa! ☺

niyaaz-kesh, Raj Kumar

[Naseer]

muHtaram Raj Kumar SaaHib, aadaab.

Please allow me to translate your response for the benefit of those who do not understand Punjabi.

"yaqeen jaaniye, Naseer sahib, k jab ko’ii mujh se yeh kehta hai k “aap kahaaN rehte ho ji?”, jii chaahata hai k use javaab duuN: “DhaTThe khuu ch”!!!"

In a ruined (or deserted or abandoned) well! (Or is it a "demolished well"?)

Thank you for your views on the possible reasoning for why Punjabis could be using "aap idhar aa'o aur mere saath baat karo". It is possible your reasoning may well be correct.

I do not deny that this construction and others (maiN ne vahaaN jaanaa hai/baahir etc) are not employed by Punjabis. Of course they are. But I do not believe they are the instigators of these constructions nor are they the only ones who employ them. This is what I intend to prove to ALUPers in the three threads that I have begun.

Coming back to the use of "aap ho". I hope this author will seal the argument, so to speak.

In the book entitled, "The Modern Hindustani Scholar or The Pucca Munshi" by Munshi Thakardass Pahwa" published in 1919 in Jhelum, Punjab on page 194 the author says..

https://archive.org/details/modernhindustani00pahwuoft

"Note- Occasionally in Delhi it is given the declension of the second person, plural, but this is not so elegant. For instance they say, "aap kahaaN jaa,oge" instead of "aap kahaaN jaa,eNge" for "Where will you go, Sir".

If this phenomenon also existed in the Punjab, why would he single out Delhi?

Naseer

[Naseer]

Haseena Moin kaa vatan Kanpur thaa. vuh Pakistan kii jaanii-maanii Drama-naviis haiN aur un ke likhe hu'ee khel bahut hii mash_huur hue haiN. is Youtube ke clip meN aap dekheN ge kih vuh nah sirf ek nihaayat suljhii xaatuun haiN balkih un kii zabaan bhii utnii hii shiiriiN hai.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkwAj1lXL8w

(9:34) aap literature paRho.................

(9:55) yih kyaa baat hu'ii kih aap 3aurat ko maar bhii rahe ho...

Naseer

[Asad]

""Note- Occasionally in Delhi it is given the declension of the second person, plural, but this is not so elegant. For instance they say, "aap kahaaN jaa,oge" instead of "aap kahaaN jaa,eNge" for "Where will you go, Sir". ""

yeh hujjat mere liaye to kaafi hai.

[Naseer]

Asad SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

yih to bahut xush-aayand baat hu'ii. ek hii "hujjat" aap ke liye kaafii hai? shukr hai!:-)

ab UVR SaaHib kii Ghair maujuudagii meN is baab ko band hii kar denaa bihtar ho gaa.

shirkat ke liye bahut bahut shukriyah.

Naseer

[Naseer]

On Sunday, 17 January 2016 01:38:53 UTC, Raj Kumar wrote:

Raj Kumar SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

aap to zahr meN shakkar kaa mazah chaahte ho
gaaliyaaN dete ho aur ham se du3aa chaahte ho

Shah Naseer

[Raj Kumar]

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:27:09 AM UTC-8, Naseer wrote:

Raj Kumar SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

aap to zahr meN shakkar kaa mazah chaahte ho
gaaliyaaN dete ho aur ham se du3aa chaahte ho

Shah Naseer

***janaab Naseer saaHib:

bahut Khuub sanad pesh kii hai aap ne aur voh bhi Shah Naseer ke qalam se, jo kisi bhi liHaaz se Panjaabi nahiiN the! ☺
Dilli, Lakhnau aur Hyderaabaad se vaabasta, saaHib-e-deevaan, Zauq aur Momin jaise esaatiza ke ustaad aur is pe tuurah yeh k farmaate haiN:

AAP to zahr meN shakkar ka mazaa chaahate HO
gaaliyaaN dete HO aur ham se du’aa chaahate HO

mazaa aa gayaa, Huzuur!

B/W, in misro’N meN ham “chaahte” ki bajaaye “chaahate” bhi keh sakte haiN; aisa karne se baHr meN ko’i Khalal naheeN paRtaa.

du’aa-go, Raj Kumar***

[Naseer]

Raj Kumar SaaHib, aadaab-o-tasliimaat

Just to throw a spanner in the works, could this "aap" mean "xud"?

Naseer

[Raj Kumar]

***It very well could, in which case this she’r would mean:

“(tum) Khud to zehr meN shakkar ka mazaa chaahate ho aur ham se,
gaaliyoN ke ‘ivaz, du’aaoN ki tavaqqo’a rakhte ho”!

I must say that the word ”to” in the first misr'a very much strengthens the point you have raised!

du’aa-go, Raj Kumar***

[Naseer]

Thank you, Raj Kumar SaaHib. I did n't wish to exclude this possibility for the sake of fair play. I am surprised however that janaab-i-Shamsur Rahman Faruqi did not exclude this possibility. My source for this shi3r is his book "Arooz, Ahang aur Bayaan" in which he discussed "shutur-gurbah", as presented by Hasrat Mohani in his book entitled "nikaat-i-suxan". I quote..

"shutur-gurbah ke baare meN Maulaanaa ke xayaalaat se mujhe ko'ii ixtilaaf nahiiN sivaa-i-is ke kih aap aur tum kaa ijtimaa3 har jagah shutur-gurbah kaa asar nahiiN rakhtaa. ba3z Haalaat meN "aap" tanziyah ma3ne rakhtaa hai. 3ilaavah bariiN diHlii kii zabaan meN "aap jaa'o", "aap baiTho" vaGhairah muHaavare meN shaamil hai, lihaazaa ise bhii 3aib meN shaamil nahiiN kar sakte......."

Then he goes on to give various examples including that of Shah Naseer and provides an explanation (taujiih) for each.

"aap to zahr meN shakkar kaa mazah chaahte ho
gaaliyaaN dete ho aur ham se du3aa chaahte ho

taujiih:- "aap chaahte ho" dihlii ke muHaavare meN shaamil hai.

is shi3r meN xvaah "aap" ke ma3nii "xvud" hii kyoN nah ho, ba-qaul Shamsur Rahman Faruqi ke, aap ke saath tum kaa fi3l lagaanaa dihlii vaaloN kii den hai! maiN pahle hii Munshi Thakardass Pahwa kii kitaab "The Modern Hindustani Scholar or The Pucca Munshi" se ek iqtibaas de chukaa huuN.

"In the book entitled, "The Modern Hindustani Scholar or The Pucca Munshi" by Munshi Thakardass Pahwa" published in 1919 in Jhelum, Punjab on page 194 the author says..

https://archive.org/details/modernhindustani00pahwuoft

"Note- Occasionally in Delhi it is given the declension of the second person, plural, but this is not so elegant. For instance they say, "aap kahaaN jaa,oge" instead of "aap kahaaN jaa,eNge" for "Where will you go, Sir"."

so saabit hu'aa kih "aap idhar aa'o aur mere paas baiTho" Punjab kii ixtiraa3 nahiiN aur agar Punjab meN se log aisaa bolte haiN (aur vuh yaqiin-an aisaa bolte haiN) to vuh bilaa jhijhak bolte raheN!

Naseer

[marrish]

SaaHibaan, aadaab.

Munshii Thakardass Pahwa kaa bayaan bhii saamne aayaa hae, Prof. Shams-ul-Rahman Faruqi SaaHib kaa tajziyah pesh kiyaa jaa chukaa hae natiijatan in 3ulamaa-e-urduu kii hidaayaat bilaa shub_ha saabit kartii haiN kih "aap+...o" qism kii tarkiibaat to xaas dihlii kii urduu ke muHaaware meN shaamil haiN.

yih saare inkishaafaat Naseer SaaHib kii ba-daulat qaari'iin tak pahuNchne kaa mauq3a paa chuke jinhoN ne is amr kii taHqiiq meN bahut waqt sarf kar Daalaa ho gaa aur khodte khodte maHz Dihlii tak pahuNch ga'e, jabkih Dihlii meN paNjaabii zabaan kii kashish yaa kaavish yaa kyaa jaane kis binaa par bol baalaa hae aur asar is kaa itnaa xuub aur zabardast chhaayaa rahaa hae kih udhar kii Taksaal ko bhii yahaaN kahiiN kahiiN shaa'ibe kii nazar se dekhnaa shuruu3 ho gayaa.

apnii taHqiiq karte karte merii nazar diigar faazil-o-3aalim-e-urduu kii taHriir par paRii jo Husn-e-ittifaaq se bhii ahl-e-hind the aur is maGhfuur kaa Panjaab se kyaa, Dihlii se bhii ta3alluq nahiiN thaa, unhoN ne xud awadh meN raushanii dekhii thii. un kii zaatii kaifiyat bar-taraf, un kii Bhopali Urdu par taHqiiq kaa iqtibaas mulaaHazah farmaa'iye aur ixtitaam-e-matn tak paRhiye. sarzamiin-e-bhopaal par phaltii phuultii urduu nah to panjaab ke nah hii xaas dihlii ke zer-e-asar rahii thii aur phir bhii yih samar bar laa'ii jise aap aaxirii pairaa meN paa'eN ge:

Late Prof. Gyan Chand Jain:

khaRii bolii yaa hiNdustaanii yaa urduu ne isii tarH muxtalif shahroN meN apnaa Deraa jamaa liyaa hae. un meN se kuchh ziyaadah aham haiN aur un meN se ek bhopaal hae. yahaaN kii 3ilaaqaa'ii zabaan ko ham urduu kii bhopaalii Zailii bolii yaa ixtiSaar ke saath bhopaalii urduu kah sakte haiN. yih paas paRos ke qaSboN masal-an siihuur, aashTah, raa'e siin, begam ganj wa Ghairah meN bolii jaatii hae. bhopaal maalwe kaa juzw hae go bundelkhanD ke DaaNDe ko bhii chuutaa hae. maalwe kaa markazii HiSSah bikramaajiit ke ujjain raajah bhoj ke dhaar, maaz bahaadur ke maaNDaw aur ahliyyah baa'ii ke indaur par mushtamal hae lekin riwaayat ke mutaabiq bhopaal bhii dhaar waale raajah bhoj kaa basaayaa hu'aa bhoj paal hae.
is 3ilaaqe kii bolii maalwii hae jo raajasthaanii kii ek Zailii bolii hae. yahaaN ke hiNduu seThoN kii pagRii aur un kii 3auratoN kaa libaas bhopaal aur raajasthaan kii mumaasilat ke shaahid haiN. yih wasii3 3ilaaqah urduu kaa nahiiN jis tarH registaan ke biich naxlistaan hotaa hae usii tarH maalwii ke samaNdar meN bhopaal aur chand duusre qaSbe urduu ke jaziire haiN. shahr se qaSbaat aur qaSbaat se dehaat kii taraf ko jaa'iye, ba-tadriij urduu kaa asar kam aur maalwii kaa asar ziyaadah hotaa hae. bhopaal meN bhii nichle tabqe ke hinduu masal-an duudh waale, kumhaar (bho'ii) wa Ghairah urduu par maalwii kii tah chaRhaa kar bolte haiN.
bhopaal bamba'ii kii nisbat dillii se qariib tar hae lekin tahZiibii aur tijaaratii ta3alluqaat bamba'ii se ziyaadah haiN is liye bhopaal kii zabaan kisii qadr bambaiyyaa urduu se bhii muta'aassar hae. ya3nii bhopaal kii zabaan wuh urduu hae jis par thoRaa thoRaa maalwii, bundelii aur bamba'ii kii hindustaanii kaa asar hae. ahl-e-bhopaal ko us kaa shu3uur nah ho gaa lekin yuu pii se aane waaloN ko mi3yaarii urduu se ixtilaafaat baadiiunnazar hii meN dikhaa'ii de jaate haiN. unhiiN ixtilaafaat kaa naam bhopaalii urduu hae. un meN se xaas xaas yih haiN:

Sautii* (phonetic):

yaa-e-liin ko yaa-e-majhuul bolnaa masalan zamiir mutakallam, maiN, aur paisah ko fatH-e-awwal kii bajaa'e kasrah-e-awwal se adaa kartaa jis se zamiir ''maiN'' kii aawaaz Harf-e-jaar ''meN" (andar) jaisii ho jaatii hae. yih nazlah aNgrezii alfaaz par bhii paRtaa hae masal_an waesT (West) ba-ma3nii maGhrib ko "Waste" ba-ma3nii barbaad karnaa ke ham aawaaz kar dete haiN.
waa'o liin ko waa'o majhuul banaa denaa masal_an sau (ba-ma3nii Sad) ko fatHah-e-awwal kii bajaa'e pesh se "so" bolte haiN. Harf-e-3atf aur ko pesh ke saath 'or' bolte haiN jis se yih hindii lafz bama3nii "taraf" kaa ham aawaaz ho jaataa hae.
naHwii* (grammatical):
yahaaN ta3ziimii zamiir-e-Haazir* (3rd person honorific personal pronoun) "aap" ke saath fi3l* (verb) ke wuh SiiGhe*(endings) isti3maal karte haiN jo "tum" ke saath bole jaate haiN. masal_an:


aap aisaa karo bajaa'e aap aisaa kiijiye.
aap to khaanaa khaa'o bajaa'e aap to khaanaa khaa'iye.

(Dr. Gyan Chand Jain)

[Naseer]

Marrish SaaHib, thank you for this lengthy write up. Dr. Gyan Chand Jain talks about this construction's existence in Bhopal. Here is a BBC Urdu clip where at 1:49 you will hear from the mouth of an elderly lady from Rajastaan the following sentece..

"aap maas-machchhlii khaa rahe ho....".

So, it seems that this "aap + tum verb" construction is quite widespread. Thank you once again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m3BFgrvUzY

Naseer

[Naseer]

On Tuesday, 23 February 2016 19:00:43 UTC, marrish wrote:

marrish SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

yuuN lagtaa hai kih Dillii vaale "tuu" ke saath bhii "tum" kaa fi3l isti3maal karte haiN.

6:20 agar aap ke bande gaRbaRaa jaa'eN to kyaa ta3ajjub? haatif ne kahaa suno Muhammad Ali. ***tuu yuuNhii chale chalo!*** ham apnaa qaa3idah to tumhaare liye badleN ge nahiiN.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNvvL_48FUU

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

mua'af kiijie Naseer sahib, lekin mujhe to 'tum' hii sunaai deta hai?


Best,

Vijay

[Raj Kumar]

On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 12:50:52 PM UTC-7, vij...@gmail.com wrote:

> > yuuN lagtaa hai kih Dillii vaale "tuu" ke saath bhii "tum" kaa fi3l isti3maal karte haiN.
> >
> > 6:20 agar aap ke bande gaRbaRaa jaa'eN to kyaa ta3ajjub? haatif ne kahaa suno Muhammad Ali. ***tuu yuuNhii chale chalo!*** ham apnaa qaa3idah to tumhaare liye badleN ge nahiiN.
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNvvL_48FUU
> >
> > Naseer
>
> mua'af kiijie Naseer sahib, lekin mujhe to 'tum' hii sunaai deta hai?
>

I too hear "tum" ----- not "tuu".

R.K.

[Naseer]

Vijay SaaHib aur Raj Kumar SaaHib aadaab.

tabsire ke liye shukriyah. yaqiin maaniye mujhe to "tuu" hii sunaa'ii detaa hai likin agar do baTaa tiin kii raa'e ek baTaa tiin ke xilaaf jaa'e, to ek baTaa tiin ko do baTaa tiin kii baat maan lenaa chaahiye!:-) bahut bahut shukriyah. yih alag baat hai kih maiN ne Muhammad Ali Rudaulavi ke xutuut se is baat kii tasdiiq kar lii hai. unhoN ne "tum" hii likhaa hai.

Naseer

[Asad ur Rahman Kidwai]

aadab arz hai,
ek arse baad idhar aanaa huaa aur is laRii se aa.nkh laRii to Meer ka vo sher yaad aa gayaa....
chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte hai.n ki bahaaraa.n hai
paat hare hain phuul khile hai.n kam kam baad o baaraan hai

[Naseer]

Asad SaaHib, xush aamaded.

"chalte ho to chiin ko chaliye" is not quite what we are discussing in this thread. You know we say, "chalo chaleN". Miir is saying "chalo chaliye" because he was a Punjabi! Not many people know this as it is one of those best kept secrets!

Naseer

[Naseer]

Asad SaaHib, aadaab.

As I've said earlier, Miir's shi3r is not aap pronoun going with the tum verb. Let's look at it again.

chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte haiN kih bahaaraaN hai
paat hare haiN phuul khile haiN kam kam baad-o-baaraaN hai

If you (tum) have a mind to go anywhere, then let us go to the garden .....(Not China! "chalte ho to chiin ko chaliye" is the title of a safar-naamah by Ibn-i-Insha)

A similar example is by Aatash (please note the word is Aatash and not Aatish)

fasl-i-bahaar aa'ii, piyo suufiyo sharaab
bas ho chukii namaaz, musalaa uThaa'iye!

suufiyo (tum) piyo sharaab.....bas ho chukii namaaz...let us roll up the prayer mat.

Naseer

[Asad ur Rahman Kidwai]

Naseer saahib,
aap bajaa farmaate haiN.
vaise agar chiiN-ba-jabiiN na hoN to ye puuchh sakte haiN ki chaman meN aapko chiin kahaaN se nazar aa gayaa.
(baqaul majruuh 'jaanaa thaa jaapaan pahuNch gay_e chiin..')
Asad

[vij...@gmail.com]

Naseer sahib, aadaab. I need some further clarification and am asking for a little more of your indulgence. I am more of follower of poetry and the language as it pertains to Urdu poetry, so do forgive me if my question is rather mundane.

First about the Miir misra, you state:

> If you (tum) have a mind to go anywhere, then let us go to the garden

I see it as 'if you (tum) have a mind to go anywhere, then (aap) chaman ko chaliie:

Otherwise it should have been.. then let us (ham) chaman ko chaleN. 'ham chaman ko chaliie' does not seem right, does it?

And in the Aatash she'r you say:

> suufiyo (tum) piyo sharaab.....bas ho chukii namaaz...let us roll up the prayer mat.
>

It can either be 'aap musalla uTThaaye' or 'ham musalla uTThaaeN'.

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

Vijay SaaHib aadaab.

Please see post 7 of this thread.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/alt.language.urdu.poetry/musallaa/alt.language.urdu.poetry/fj-z0I4slm0/tBwTkLh3SEAJ

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 12 May 2016 23:06:41 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:

>
> Vijay SaaHib aadaab.
>
> Please see post 7 of this thread.
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/alt.language.urdu.poetry/musallaa/alt.language.urdu.poetry/fj-z0I4slm0/tBwTkLh3SEAJ
>
> Naseer

Naseer sahib, I remember that whole thread now. I was not convinced then and am not now. The post 7 of the thread talks about the 'imperative' and 'jussive' sense to be possibly interchangeable but limits the discussion to the usage in English. The problem of course arises when one tries to translate the same phrases to Urdu. You have tried to explore it further in the subsequent posts but nowhere have I seen a good example where in Urdu a 'jussive' sense can instinctively sound 2nd person imperative. I admit that I have merely scanned the remainder of the thread and perhaps if there are good examples I have missed, you will be good enough to post these.

Back to the examples in hand. Let's take Miir's:

The only way 'chaliie' can be jussive would be if one phrases it as:

agar tum kahiin jaana chaahte ho, to chaliie, ham chaman ko chalte haiN. sunte haiN ki bahaaraaN hai etc.

But here 'chaliie' is not in the same sense of 'let us go' but it is more of a filler, like:

chaliie, yuuN hii sahii. It is not the same as in the jussive 'ham chaman ko chaliie'

I go back to Occam's razor Naseer sahib that if one has to go to such lengths to justify a usage which on the surface appears to be just a 'defect' of 'shutur-gurba', then I am afraid the apparent explanation is likely to be the correct one. Now, I think it sacrilege to accuse Miir of using substandard Urdu, in the same way as it would be to say that Shakespeare didn't know his English grammar. Clearly language has evolved tremendously since Miir into its modern day use and the rules now are different than they were in Miir's time (or even Aatash's time). These apparent defects only add to the beauty and nostalgia about the language and trying to find faults or correcting will be the same as trying to correct Dickens (Law is a ass) or Shakespeare ('Pox of your love letters' or 'I'll after...' for example).

Best regards,

Vijay

PS: BTW, the Shakespeare examples are from a randomly opened page of his Complete works which opened at the end of scene 1 of Act 3 of The Two Gentlemen of Verona.

[Naseer]

Vijay SaaHib, aadaab.

Frankly, I am not surprised that you are not convinced. A man who finds it difficult to accept "qamiis" in place of "qamiiz" is indeed a hard nut to crack!:-)

Let me start my response with a clarification. I am not claiming that Miir or Aatash have erred in their use of the language. I am merely interpreting both of these couplets with the "we" pronoun instead of "you". I accept that I have not come across "ham" explicitly juxtaposed with "chaliye"/"uThaa'iye" etc but what I am suggesting is that it is there, albeit invisibly understood.

I am fully aware that one normally thinks of the "-iye/iijiye" verb form associated with the "aap" pronoun, as in the following example.

naamah ko'ii nah yaar kaa paiGhaam bhejiye
is fasl meN jo bhejiye bas aam bhejiye

aise zaruur hoN kih unheN rakh ke khaa sakuuN
puxtah agar hoN biis to das xaam bhejiye

ma3luum hii hai aap ko bande kaa address
seedhe Ilah-aabaad mere naam bhejiye

aisaa nah ho kih aap kaheN javaab meN
ta3miil ho gii magar daam bhejiye

Akbar Ilahabaadii

There are also idiomatic usages of verbs such as "chaliye" and "dekhiye" etc.

chaliye (OK), maiN aap kii baat maan letaa huuN.

dekhiye (Look) aap mujhe taNg nah kareN!

I am also fully aware that Urdu has moved on since Miir, Aatish and Ghalib's days but this does not mean that the "we" (or let us) meaning was not present then and is not present today. I shall endeavour to prove this point.

In Urdu we have..

main karuuN/ham kareN

tuu kare/tum karo/ aap kareN/aap kiijiye/aap kiijiye gaa

vuh kare/vuh kareN

It might be beneficial (for you) to compare this with Punjabi

main karaaN/asiiN kariye

tuu(N) kare/tusiiN karo

o kare/o karan.

You will notice that Punjabi has the equivalent of "ham kiijiye" but Urdu seemingly does n't have this...BUT it does!

In the first person singular, i.e with maiN pronoun, we have, with Professor Pritchett's translation....

zindagī meñ to vuh maḥfil se uṭhā dete the
dekhūñ ab mar gaʾe par kaun uṭhātā hai mujhe

1) in life, she used to eject me from the gathering
2) let me see, now, upon my having died, who ejects/lifts me!

In the first person plural, i.e with the "invisible" ham.

3umr-bhar dekhaa kiye marne kii raah
mar ga'e par dekhiye dikhlaa'eN kyaa (let us see)

aaj ham apnii pareshaanii-i-xaatir un se
kahne jaate to haiN par dekhiye kyaa khate haiN (let us see)

dekhiye laatii hai kyaa us shox kii naxvat kyaa raNg (let us see)
us kii har baat pih ham naam-i-xudaa kahte haiN

You might say, well these are all "dekhiye" examples. Can't you provide anything different. Here are a couple of examples provided by Professor Frances Pritchett, one coincidently with "dekhiye" and another one with "kahiye"

dekhiye pāte haiñ ʿushshāq butoñ se kyā faiẓ
ik barahman ne kahā hai kih yih sāl achchhā hai

1) let's see what grace/favor/benefit lovers find from idols
2) a single/particular/excellent/unique Brahman has said that this year is good

shikve ke nām se be-mihr ḳhafā hotā hai
yih bhī mat kah kih jo kahiye to gilā hotā hai

1) with the word/name of 'complaint', the unkind one is [habitually] angry

2a) don't say even/also this, that 'whatever you say, it is [habitually] a reproach/complaint'
2b) don't say even/also this, that 'whatever we say, there is [habitually] a reproach/complaint'
2c) don't say even/also this-- for whatever we say, it is [habitually] a reproach/complaint [to her]
2d) don't say even/also this-- for whatever we say, there is [habitually] a reproach/complaint [from her]

Similar to the one above, the following examples provide the "we" pronoun combination.

rahiye ab aisii jagah chal kar jahaaN ko'ii nah ho (let us stay/we should stay)
ham-suxan ko'ii nah ho aur ham-zabaaN ko'ii nah ho

paRiye gar biimaar to ko'ii nah ho tiimaar-daar (If we should fall ill)

Sarwar jo uTh ke seHn.e.Haram se nikal gayaa
kyaa jaan'iye k uss kaa iraada kidhar kaa hai! (what do we know)

lauT jaatii hai udhar ko bhii nazar, kyaa kiije (what shall we do/what can we do/what can one do)
ab bhii dil-kash hai teraa Husn magar kyaa kiije

c.f Punjabi : ke/kii kariye)

purash-i-tarz-i-dil-barii, kiijiye kyaa kih bin kahe (what shall we do/what can we do/what can one do)
us ke har ik ishaare se nikle hai yih adaa kih yuuN

vuh neshtar sahī par dil meñ jab utar jāve
nigāh-e nāz ko phir kyūñ nah āshnā kahiye

1) it is a lancet, {no doubt / indeed}; but when it would go down into the heart
2) why would one/we not, then, call the glance/gaze of coquetry a friend/beloved?

yeh havaa, SaaGhar, yeh halkii chaaNdnii
jii meiN aataa hai, yaheeN mar jaa'iye!!! (we should die right here!)


is jiine se bih-tar hai ab maut pih dil dhariye
jal-bujhiye kahiiN jaa kar yaa Duub kahiiN mariye
kis taur kaThin raateN, kis tarH se din bhariye
kuchch ban nahiiN aatii hai, Hairaan huuN kyaa kariye

Now finally an example from prose...It's a dialogue.

Alif: kyoN bha'ii Shakiil SaaHib, aap ko fursat hai?

Be: Zaruur. kyaa kahiiN jaane kaa iraadah hai?

Alif: jii haaN, zaraa baRe baazaar tak chalte haiN. kuchh chiizeN xariidnaa haiN. aaj to der tak dukaaneN khulii raheN gii.

Be: achchhaa bahut see chiizeN xariidnii haiN?

Alif: kuchh kapRaa xariidnaa hai. jaaRaa shuruu3 hone vaalaa hai. maiN ne sochaa kuchh garm kapRe banvaa lene chaahiyeN.

Be: chaliye! mujhe bhii ek garm patluun banvaanii thii. abhii to kapRaa sastaa ho gaa?

Alif: jii haaN, varnah sardii shuruu3 ho ga'ii to phir daam baRh jaa'eN ge.

It might be worth mentioning a word or two about C.M.Naim, currently Professor Emeritus at the University of Chicago. He is the founder of "The annual of Urdu studies" and co-founder of "Mahfil". He has authored a number of literary works including translations. He has written a book on Urdu grammar (Introductory Urdu- 1999) in two volumes and he is a renowned (Urdu) literary critic. And now the most important; he is from Barabanki and therefore a mother-tongue Urdu speaker. Why am I telling you all this? Because the dialogue I quoted is from the second volume of his book. He translates the relevant sentence as..

"Let's go. I too need to get a pair of pants made. Cloth should still be inexpensive, [don't you think?]"

I hope I have provided enough food for thought.

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 14 May 2016 22:49:35 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:
> Vijay SaaHib, aadaab.
>
> Frankly, I am not surprised that you are not convinced. A man who finds it difficult to accept "qamiis" in place of "qamiiz" is indeed a hard nut to crack!:-)

LOL!
Aadaab-o-tasliimaat Naseer sahib. pahle to aap kii yaadaasht kii daad aik baar phir de dun! qubuul farmaaiye:-)

Now, your response has so overwhelmed me by its sheer size and volume that I have to ask for your patience. It is going to take some time for me to read and fully comprehend the arguments provided by you. I will be back (as the Terminator would say):-)

Best regards and thanks for taking the time.

Vijay

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 14 May 2016 22:49:35 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:

I am back Naseer sahib. aadaab-o-tasliimaat. tafsiilii wazaahat ke liie aap ka bohat shukriia. main mutma'aiin huuN ki 'dekhiie' 'kiijiie' 'jaaniie' jaise alfaaz first person plural meN istemaal hote haiN aur is fahrist meN ham 'chaliie' bhii shaamil kar lete haiN. main aap ko sirf zara sii zehmat aur duuN gaa. mere dil meN abhii bhii Miir ke misre meN 'shutur-gurba' naqs nazar aa raha hai. main aap se koi sanad nahin maNguuNga, bas sirf aik sawaal hai Ghalib ke she'r ke bare meN jis kii misaal aap ne dii hai.

dekhiie paate haiN usshaaq butoN se kya faiz

agar ham ise yuuN likheN:

dekhte ho to dekhiie usshaaq butoN se kya faiz paate haiN

to kyaa aap ke nazdiik yih misra grammar ke lihaaz se sahiih hai? ya is meN aap ko koi ibhaam dikhaaii deta hai?

peshagii shukriia.

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

On Wednesday, 18 May 2016 20:29:06 UTC+1, vij...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I am back Naseer sahib. aadaab-o-tasliimaat. tafsiilii wazaahat ke liie aap ka bohat shukriia. main mutma'aiin huuN ki 'dekhiie' 'kiijiie' 'jaaniie' jaise alfaaz first person plural meN istemaal hote haiN aur is fahrist meN ham 'chaliie' bhii shaamil kar lete haiN. main aap ko sirf zara sii zehmat aur duuN gaa. mere dil meN abhii bhii Miir ke misre meN 'shutur-gurba' naqs nazar aa raha hai. main aap se koi sanad nahin maNguuNga, bas sirf aik sawaal hai Ghalib ke she'r ke bare meN jis kii misaal aap ne dii hai.
>
> dekhiie paate haiN usshaaq butoN se kya faiz
>
> agar ham ise yuuN likheN:
>
> dekhte ho to dekhiie usshaaq butoN se kya faiz paate haiN
>
> to kyaa aap ke nazdiik yih misra grammar ke lihaaz se sahiih hai? ya is meN aap ko koi ibhaam dikhaaii deta hai?
>
> peshagii shukriia.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Vijay

Vijay SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

Apologies for the delay. I posted a lengthy reply yesterday but I don't know which galaxy it has ended up in. It certainly is n't in the Milky Way!:-)

The reason for the delay is that I was looking for a definitive explanation in an Urdu grammar book but unfortunately this topic is hardly touched upon in all the books that I have access to.

Colonel Douglas Craven Phillott in his "Hindustani Stumbling-Blocks" published in 1919 (pages 48-49) does briefly cover this aspect of the grammar. And please don't worry. What he says has an "isnaad" as he had access to the best of Urdu speakers of his time, as mentioned in the preface to the book. So, "in kaa farmaayaa mustanad hai".

He describes the "-iye" form for the aap pronoun to give the meaning of a polite command (present) and a polite request with or without "gaa" for the future. The example he gives for the latter is...

aap kal do-pahr tashriif laa'iye gaa....and then goes on to say, which is more relevant to the topic of the thread....

..."incorrectly and in vulgar Delhi Hindustani aap kal do-pahr tashriif laa'o". This is another proof that "aap aa'o, jaa'o, laa'o" etc is NOT a Punjabi invention!

On page 49 he provides another meaning of the "-iye" form and says....

(a) is also used impersonally as "jii chaahaataa hai kih is vaqt so rahiye" where (a) has already been described as the second person plural (i.e with aap) command form. This is his translation for the sentence which you will agree does not do justice to it.

"I want to sleep" (!!!!!!!!!!)

What is important for me and you is that the speaker is referring to himself as "ham". So, the sentence in reality is...

hamaaraa jii chaahtaa hai kih is vaqt ham so rahiye (raheN)

Now, coming to ...

chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte haiN kih bahaaraaN hai

paat hare haiN phuul khile haiN kam kam baad o baaraan hai

Your take is that in the first misra3, we have "shutur-gurbah"

agar tum chalte ho to aap chaman ko chaliye.....

In one breath, from "tum" to "aap" is extremely unlikely! Normal format of shutur-gurbah , as far as I know and I might be wrong, is one pronoun in one misra3 and another in the second one.

My take is...

agar tum kahiiN chalnaa hii chaahte ho to kyoN nah maiN aur tum = ham chaman ko chaliye kyoNkih sunaa hai kih bahaar kaa mausam aa gayaa hai. paudoN aur daraxtoN par hare hare patte phuuT nikle haiN, phuul khill ga'e haiN aur saath hii, maano nah maano, haule haule havaa chal rahii hai aur madham madham meNh baras rahaa hai.

Our Zafar SaaHib, in this very forum, used the following sentence...

“.....door kyoN jaa'iye, apne Sarwar sahib* hee kaa she'er le leeji'ye....”

The meaning that I take from this sentence is..

(ham) duur kyoN jaa'eN? (aap) apne Sarwar SaaHib hii kaa shi3r le liijiye.

Shamsur Rahman Faruqi has questioned Maulana Hasrat Mohani's understanding of "shutur-gurbah" and I quote (the relevant part for our debate between you and I is the last section beginning with "ba3z auqaat" of the first paragraph).

"shutur-gurbah ke baare meN Maulaanaa ke xayaalaat se mujhe ko'ii ixtilaaf nahiiN sivaa-i-is ke kih aap aur tum kaa ijtimaa3 har jagah shutur-gurbah kaa asar nahiiN rakhtaa. ba3z Haalaat meN "aap" tanziyah ma3ne rakhtaa hai. 3ilaavah bariiN diHlii kii zabaan meN "aap jaa'o", "aap baiTho" vaGhairah muHaavare meN shaamil hai, lihaazaa ise bhii 3aib meN shaamil nahiiN kar sakte. ba3z auqaat siiGha-i-jam3-Haazir kaa muxaatib vahii shaxs nahiiN hotaa jis ko tum kah kar bhii is shi3r meN muxaatib kiyaa gayaa hai. chunaaN chih Maulanaa kii darJ-kardah misaaloN meN se mundarajah-i-zail meN shutur-gurbah nahiiN hai....

fasl-i-bahaar aa'ii piyo suufiyo sharaab
bas ho chukii namaaz musallaa uThaa'iye

misra3-i-uulaa meN "piyo" be-takallufaanah aur dostaanah hai, is kaa taxaatub suufiyoN se hai. misra3-i-saanii meN "uThaa'iye" kaa taxaatub xvud shaa3ir kii taraf hai jo suufiyoN meN shaamil hai lekin us se maxsuus xitaab kiyaa jaa rahaa hai. masal-an ko'ii xvud se kahe , "chaliye SaaHib, yahaaN se uTheN"

For me, it is clear from Faruqi's explanation that we are not talking about the second person (aap) here but the "siiGhah-i-jam3-Haazir", ie, first person plural (ham).

Finally (at last!), coming to your question.

dekhte ho to dekhiie usshaaq butoN se kya faiz paate haiN

The meaning that I would take from this sentence is as follows.

agar tum dekh (hii) rahe to aap dekhiye kih 3ushshaaq butoN se kyaa faiz paate haiN (ya3nii paa'eN ge).

I am not certain if you would use this kind of sentence instinctively. I believe this sentence to be grammatically incorrect.

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 26 May 2016 10:11:16 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:

>
> Finally (at last!), coming to your question.
>
> dekhte ho to dekhiie usshaaq butoN se kya faiz paate haiN
>
> The meaning that I would take from this sentence is as follows.
>
> agar tum dekh (hii) rahe to aap dekhiye kih 3ushshaaq butoN se kyaa faiz paate haiN (ya3nii paa'eN ge).
>
> I am not certain if you would use this kind of sentence instinctively. I believe this sentence to be grammatically incorrect.
>
> Naseer

bohat shukriia Naseer sahib. maiN do aik baateN aur kahna chaahtaa huuN.

About 'shutur-gurbah', so far as I believe, it is all about addressing the same person in the same verse, in either line of the she'r or baNd, with different pronoun. For example, 2nd person formal and informal or first person formal or informal. Hence, 'tum and aap', or 'maiN and hum'. I don't think it matters whether it is done in the same line or different lines of the verse. However, it is not shutur-gurbah if the persons being addressed are different. So it is OK to use 'maiN' for first person pronoun and 'aap' for 2nd person and vice versa. Another qualification, it is not 'shutur-gurbah' if the usage is in context. For example, 'aap se tum, sum se tuu hone lagii' obviously wouldn't be shutur-gurbah.

Here is an example of 'shutur-gurbah' from a film song of Majrooh Sultanpuri. Note that in the first two lines, the use of 'maiN' and 'aap' is NOT shutur-gurbah naqs:

mujhe dard-e-dil ka pata na thaa, mujhe app kis liie mil gae
maiN akela yuuN hii maze meN thaa, mujhe app kis liie mil gae

And now the defect:

yuuN hi apne apne safar meN gum, kahiiN duur maiN kahiiN duur 'tum'
chale jaa rahe the judaa judaa, mujhe 'aap' kis liie mil gae

My second point is again about the Mir misra. I agree that when words like 'dekhiie' 'jaaiie' 'challie' etc are used on their own, they could mean 'aap chaleN' or 'aaie ham challeN'. For example, strictly (and obviously) for the sake of argument, if Mir had said, 'chaliie, chaliie, chaman ko chaliie', I would see no problem in interpreting it as either 'aap chaleN' or 'aaiie, ham chaleN'. What makes it difficult is the occurrence of the word 'chalte ho' in the same line. So 'chalte ho to ... chaliie' to me has the same discordance as 'dekhte ho to dekhiie', and this is why I have difficulty seeing it the way you do. I still feel that Miir wants to say, 'agar tum kahiiN chalte ho (chalna chaahte ho), to (aap) chaman kii taraf chaleN, kahte haiN ki bahaaraaN hai'. And although it is strictly a 'naqs', I have come to accept it as endearing (maybe because it is Mir).

It will be great to have Raj sahib's opinion, both on the definition of 'shutur-gurbah' and the Mir misra. So Raj sahib, if you are reading, kindly oblige.

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

Vijay SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

I am afraid I can't do more than what I have presented to support my argument. Whether this particular shi3r of Miir is shutur-gurbah or not is not important for me. The Aatahs shi3r and its explanation by Faruqi and Phillot's example are sufficient for me to prove the point that in addition to "aap chaliye" etc we do have (ham) chaliye. Beyond this, we'll have to agree to disagree. Besides, further discussions on this issue in a thread which is related to "aap ho" type of construction are unnecessary, don't you think?

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Friday, 27 May 2016 12:41:46 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:
>Besides, further discussions on this issue in a thread which is related to "aap ho" type of construction are unnecessary, don't you think?
>

Well, that Naseer sahib depends on how pedantic one wants to be, don't you think?

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

chaliye, Vijay SaaHib, agar aap kii yahii marzii hai kih is baHs ko aur tuul diijiye to is shi3r kaa tarjumah ba-zabaan-i-K.C. Kanda paRhiye (Mir Taqi Mir- Selected Poetry - pp 236-237).

chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte haiN kih bahaaraaN hai
paat hare haiN phuul khile haiN kam kam baad o baaraan hai

The spring, they say, endows the garden, let's take a stroll
Flowers bloom, leaves glisten, lightly doth it drizzle and blow

kyaa qasr-i-dil kii tum se viiraanii naql kariye
ho ho ga'e haiN Tiile saare makaan Dah kar

shauq hai Gham meN be-sabrii hai aah kisuu ko kyaa kahiye
achchhe apne dil ko ham ne aap hii rog lagaa'e haiN

Miir

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 28 May 2016 22:46:37 UTC+1, Naseer wrote:

>
> chaliye, Vijay SaaHib, agar aap kii yahii marzii hai kih is baHs ko aur tuul diijiye to is shi3r kaa tarjumah ba-zabaan-i-K.C. Kanda paRhiye (Mir Taqi Mir- Selected Poetry - pp 236-237).
>
> chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte haiN kih bahaaraaN hai
> paat hare haiN phuul khile haiN kam kam baad o baaraan hai
>
> The spring, they say, endows the garden, let's take a stroll
> Flowers bloom, leaves glisten, lightly doth it drizzle and blow
>
> kyaa qasr-i-dil kii tum se viiraanii naql kariye
> ho ho ga'e haiN Tiile saare makaan Dah kar
>
> shauq hai Gham meN be-sabrii hai aah kisuu ko kyaa kahiye
> achchhe apne dil ko ham ne aap hii rog lagaa'e haiN
>
> Miir
>
> Naseer

Addab Naseer sahib. janaab, behas ko tuul dene kii baat nahiiN hai. maiN ne to picchli post meN sirf aik chhota sa sawal puuchha thaa jis ka jawaab agar aap 'haaN' ya 'na' meN bhii de dete to mere liie kaafii hota.
In fact the bulk of your previous email and 2/3 of this current email provides examples with which I have already expressed my agreement. Now it is possible that you want to provide more examples to convince those who still have some doubt or possibly just add to the repository for reference in future.
mera sawaal to sirf 'dekhte ho to dekhiie' 'chalte ho to chaliie', 'uThaate ho to uThaaiie' jaisii tarakiib ke baare meN thaa.

Thanks for providing K C Kanda's translation (better, interpretation) of Miir's she'r under discussion. To wit:

> The spring, they say, endows the garden, let's take a stroll
> Flowers bloom, leaves glisten, lightly doth it drizzle and blow

You will no doubt notice that he has avoided completely any reference to 'chalte ho to'. So although he does capture the gist of the she'r and utilises first person plural interpretation of 'chaliie', he does so by by-passing the reference to second person singular 'chalte ho'.

Before leaving, I may add that Miir surely had at his disposal 'chalna hai to chaman ko chaliie'? And yet, for some reason, he decided to use 'chalte ho'. Just an observation, mind.

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

Yes, Vijay SaaHib, Kanda has not translated the shi3r but interpreted it. And yes, it did not escape my attention that "chalet ho" had been missed. OK, here is Shamsur Rahman Faruqi's daughter Baran Faruqi (Baaraan/rain) talking about her father and other family members and of course Urdu poetry.

http://thebyword.com/focus/reading-father/love-life-and-literature-in-the-presence-of-father.html/2

She mentions the shi3r we have been discussing. Here is her take on it and she did n't miss out "chalet ho" either.

Chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye kahte hain ki baharan hai
Paat hare hain phool khile hain kam kam baad-o-baraan hai

Let’s come to the garden, if you feel like going somewhere,
Spring is here they say Flowers are blooming, leaves are greening,
There’s just a little bit of wind and rain)

.............................................................................

At the bottom of this piece are few lines concerning her credentials.

maan ga'e ustaad?!:-)

Naseer

[vij...@gmail.com]

'maan ga'e' Nasser sahib, maan ga'e! In fact, as I opened the thread to post another post, I saw your response. I was going to say that I had seen another way of understanding the use of 'chalte ho' with 'chaliie'. It came to me in a rather round about way. i.e. If Miir were saying 'We are going to the garden because etc., tum (hamaare saath) chalte ho?'. But here, Miir would either be using 'we' as the royal pronoun or would already have a group of people going. This somehow did not seem intuitive although it did explain to my mind 'chalte ho'. The other way I saw it if 'chalte ho' is used idiomatically; i.e. 'if you are game' or 'if you are up to it', then let's go the garden etc. etc. Now that you have posted this translation which is more or less what you had posted right at the beginning, it has begun to sink in.

Thanks for persevering.

Best regards,

Vijay

BTW why has Faruqi used 'coming' rather than 'going' for chalte ho?

[vij...@gmail.com]

Apologies for the follow up, but 'if you are coming' for 'chalte ho' sounds alright, Naseer sahib.

[Naseer]

On Monday, 30 May 2016 17:14:05 UTC+1, vij...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > BTW why has Faruqi used 'coming' rather than 'going' for chalte ho?
>
> Apologies for the follow up, but 'if you are coming' for 'chalte ho' sounds alright, Naseer sahib.

Vijay SaaHib, Baran Faruqi's translation (apart from the section that suited my purpose!:-)) did seem odd to me. I would have put it something like...

If you are in the mood to come with me, then let us go to the garden.

I have in mind Miir and his beloved....However...

As you are well aware, "tum" can be used for one person as well as more than one. So, if he has two or more people that he is referring to with the "tum" pronoun, with his own inclusion, the group becomes "ham". So, either way, I have been perceiving the meaning associated with "ham" and therefore "let us".

This is the translation from Rekhta.org

To the garden let's repair, I have heard spring is in the air
Flowers bloom, leaves are green, a gentle breeze and shower fare

This translator, like Kanda, has missed "chalte ho". And I don't really know what "repair" has got to do with going!

Naseer

[Naseer]

Sorry, about the follow up...

If you are in the mood to take a walk with me, then let us take a stroll in the garden

Naseer

[Raj Kumar]

janaab Vijay sahib v Naseer sahib:

maiN (agarche naHeef-o-nazaar huuN, phir bhi) aap saahibaan ki is guft-guu ko baa-qaa’idgi se paRhtaa rahaa huuN aur ise saraahata bhi rahaa huuN. aaj, jo ma’ani Vijay sahib ne “chalte ho to chaman ko chaliye” ke pesh kiye haiN, un se jii Khush ho gayaa aur jo dauR-dhuup is zimn meN Naseer sahib ne kii hai, us ke bhi kyaa kenhe!

nateejatan, mere zehn meN Miir ka yeh she’r ubhraa:

yeh jo chashm-e-pur-aab haiN dono
aek Khaana-Kharaab haiN dono

What a use of the word “aek”, I wonder!

is she’r ne, aur Haaliya laRii ki saaKht ne, Khaaksaar ke muNh se (janaab-e-Vijay v janaab-e-Naseer ki shaan meN) yeh tazmeen kehlavaa’ii k

yeh jo ‘aalii-janaab haiN dono
kis qadar laa-javaab haiN dono!

du’aa-go, Raj Kumar

P.S. Naseer sahib, jo adabii inkishaafaat aap ne (Haal hi meN) Zia sahib ke baare meN kiye haiN, maiN un inkishaafaat par apni raaye jald hi pesh karuuN ga! R.K.

[vij...@gmail.com]

Raj sahib, aap ko idhar dekh kar, hamesha kii tarah, bohat Khushii huii. aap ne jis muhabbat se mujhe (aur Naseer sahib ko) yaad kiia hai, us se to jii Khush ho gaya.

aap se aik guzarish hai ki jab aap Zia sahib ke bare meN kucch likheN to ho sake to jo un ka kalaam Naseer sahib ne pesh kiia hai, use Roman script meN daraj kar deN.

ehsaanmaNd,

Vijay

[Raj Kumar]

-----------------

janaab Vijay sahib v janaab Naseer sahib:

Sorry for “doubling up” on my own post ---

{I can clearly hear you both saying: “ko’ii gall na’iiN”!} ☺

Huzuur, aek vajah is madaaKhilat ki yeh hai k jo she’r maiN ne, Haal hi meN, aap saaHibaan ke liye ‘arz kiyaa thaa, voh she’r ab (pal-palaa-kar) aek qit’a ban gayaa hai, jo Haazir-e-Khidmat hai:

yeh jo ‘aali-janaab haiN dono

kis qadar laa-javaab haiN dono

in se ko’ii savaal kyaa puuchhe?
aap apnaa javaab haiN dono!

{Now I can hear you both saying: “gall ho’ii naa”!} ☺

duusri vajah yeh k maiN aap ko yaqeen dilaanaa chaahataa thaa k jab maiN, ‘an-qareeb hi, Zia sahib ke baare meN kuchh ‘arz karuuN gaa to un ka voh kalaam jo Naseer sahib ne DhuuND nikaalaa hai, use Roman rasm-ul-Khat meN Dhaal kar yahaaN zaruur pesh karuuN ga!

ab yeh kaar-e-Khair kab sire chaRe gaa, kehna mushkil hai. taa-ham, koshish to jald-az-jald karuuN ga!

Khair-aNdesh, Raj Kumar

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 31 May 2016 23:13:05 UTC+1, Raj Kumar wrote:

>
> Huzuur, aek vajah is madaaKhilat ki yeh hai k jo she’r maiN ne, Haal hi meN, aap saaHibaan ke liye ‘arz kiyaa thaa, voh she’r ab (pal-palaa-kar) aek qit’a ban gayaa hai, jo Haazir-e-Khidmat hai:
>
> yeh jo ‘aali-janaab haiN dono
> kis qadar laa-javaab haiN dono
> in se ko’ii savaal kyaa puuchhe?
> aap apnaa javaab haiN dono!
>

kya kahne raj sahib. sirf do misroN ka izaafa hai lekin qit'a 10 gunaa behtar hai. aaKhirii misre ka istamaal bohat Khuub hai.

It is sort of an idiom in it-self, but here offers a beautiful closing argument to the first three lines. At the risk of sounding immodest, what inspiration!

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

Here is the late Shamsur Rahman Faruqi Sahib (from Allahabad, India) saying, "aap kaun kahne vaale hote ho"!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwEcpN7hElE&ab_channel=Jashn-e-Rekhta (26:43)

Naseer