Meera Jii's Poetry
Naseer
The NaZm quoted below is the only poem by Meera Jii that I have read. I
saw it in an anthology of poetry some time ago and liked it very much.
I would appreciate any comments from fellow ALUP-ers on this poem and
would be most grateful for further postings of his work. This would
make a welcome change for me from the normal heated debates!
"Kalark kaa naGhma-i-MuHabbat"
"sab raat mirii sapnoN meN guzar jaatii hai awr maiN sotaa huuN.
phir SubH kii devii aatii hai,
apne bistar se uThtaa huuN, muNh dhotaa huuN.
laayaa thaa kal jo Dabal roTii
us meN se aadhi khaaii thii
baaqii jo bachii vuh meraa aaj kaa naashtah hai.
dunyaa ke rang anokhe haiN..
jo mere saamne rahtaa hai us ke ghar meN ghar-vaalii hai
awr daaeN pahluu meN ik manzil kaa hai makaaN, vuh KHaalii hai
awr baaiiN jaanib ik 'ayyaash hai jis ke yahaaN ik daashtah hai...
awr in sab meN ik maiN bhii huuN lekin bas tuu hii nahiiN.
faariGh hotaa huuN naashte se awr apne ghar se nikaltaa huuN
daftar kii raah pih chaltaa huuN..
raste meN shahr kii rawnaq hai, ik taaNga hai do kaareN hain
taangoN par barq-i-tabassum hai
batoN kaa miiTha tarannum hai
uksaata hai dhayaan yih rah rah kar, qudrat ke dil meN taraHHum hai?
har chiiz to hai mawjuud yahaaN ik tuu hii nahiiN, ik tuu hii nahiiN
awr meri aaNkhoN meN rone kii himmat hii nahiiN, aaNsuu hii nahiiN
juuN tuuN rasta kaT jaata hai awr bandii KHaanah aataa hai
main dheere dheere daftar meN apne dil ko le jaata huuN
chal kaam meiN apne dil ko lagaa yuuN koii mujhe samjhaataa hai
naadaan hai dil, muurakh bachcha ik awr taraf le jaataa hai
phir kaam kaa daryaa bahtaa hai awr hosh mujhe kab rahtaa hai
jab aadhaa din Dhal jaataa hai to ghar se afsar aataa hai
awr apne kamre meN mujh ko chapraasii se bulvaataa hai
yuuN kahtaa hai, vuuN kahtaa hai lekin bekaar hii rahtaa hai
maiN uskii aisii baatoN se thak jaataa huuN thak jaataa huuN...
awr dil meN aag sulagtii hai maiN bhii jo koii afsar hotaa
is shahr kii dhool awr galiyoN se kuchh duur miraa phir ghar hotaa
awr tuu hotii!
lekin maiN to ik munshii huuN tuu uuNche ghar kii raanii hai
yih merii parem kahaanii hai awr dhartii se bhii puraanii hai
Meeraajii (1912-1949)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Naseer
Vasmi
I hadn't seen this nazm before, and really enjoyed it.
Thanks for posting it.
It is an ordinary narration of an ordinary day in the life of an
ordinary man, and perhaps that is what makes it so extraordinary. The
tone and the conversational-style language rings true. Some parts are
wonderfully musical.
I especially like reading out this part:
"jab aadhaa din Dhal jaataa hai to ghar se afsar aataa hai
awr apne kamre meN mujh ko chapraasii se bulvaataa hai
yuuN kahtaa hai, vuuN kahtaa hai lekin bekaar hii rahtaa hai
maiN uskii aisii baatoN se thak jaataa huuN thak jaataa huuN...
awr dil meN aag sulagtii hai maiN bhii jo koii afsar hotaa
is shahr kii dhool awr galiyoN se kuchh duur miraa phir ghar hotaa
awr tuu hotii!
lekin maiN to ik munshii huuN tuu uuNche ghar kii raanii hai
yih merii prem kahaanii hai awr dhartii se bhii puraanii hai
"
wow!
concidentally, I also came across another Miraji nazm recently at:
http://aligarians.com/2006/06/mujhe-ghar-yaad-aataa-hai/
On Alup archives too, you will find several Miraji compositions, using
the "Search this Group" button.
Also try the alternate spellings "Miraji", "Meeraji", "Mira ji" etc.
regards,
Vasmi
Naseer
giraamii qadr Vasmi Sahib,
Thank you very much indeed for your feedback and the links to more
poetry by Meera Jii. Yes,a lot of office workers (and other workers)
could easily relate to the situation described by the poet. The
language is simple and there is a nice flow to the poem. It saddens me
everytime I read it. I can imagine him making a cup of tea and dipping
his Dabal RoTii in it and THAT is his breakfast. At home he looks
around him and sees one neighbour has a wife and another a mistress.
Yet he longs for his beloved jo uuNche ghar kii raanii hai and she
seems to be out of his reach. He probably walks to work or rides a
pedal cycle at best!
In the following scene...
" raste meN shahr kii rawnaq hai
ik taaNga hai do kaareN hain
taangoN par barq-i-tabassum hai
batoN kaa miiTha tarannum hai
uksaata hai dhayaan yih rah rah kar, qudrat ke dil meN taraHHum
hai?"...
I imagine that he sees some young ladies smiling/laughing and talking
sweetly whilst seated in a taaNga. ( Is this what your mind conjures up
or do you think the poet mean something totally different?). He sees
the hustle and bustle in the city, people quite happy and content
whilst he is in a state of despair and asks "Does God have mercy?".
For me "awr dil meN aag sulagtii hai maiN bhii jo koii afsar hotaa
is shahr kii dhool awr galiyoN se kuchh duur miraa phir ghar hotaa
awr tuu hotii!" sums up the whole poem.
I noticed that for the word "parem" to which I had added an
"a"deliberately, you typed it as "prem" (as per the true
pronunciation). However I was under the impression that Urdu does not
allow initial consonant "clusters" hence the reason why we say and
write "iskuul" and not "skuul". Does metre require it to be "prem"?
iraadat-mand
Naseer
Vasmi
Naseer wrote:
>
> I noticed that for the word "parem" to which I had added an
> "a"deliberately, you typed it as "prem" (as per the true
> pronunciation). However I was under the impression that Urdu does not
> allow initial consonant "clusters" hence the reason why we say and
> write "iskuul" and not "skuul". Does metre require it to be "prem"?
>
> iraadat-mand
>
> Naseer
Naseer Saahab,
aadaab arz.
I don't know of any such "rule" in urdu, but do know that urdu shairs
often use that kind of pronunciation, i.e. "barahman" instead of
"brahman". Although, Alup's own Qais Saahab does use "brahman:, e.g.,
"Qais SHAA'IR hai, ko'ii SHAIKH-O-BRAHMAN to naheeN
is ke ash'aar meiN "VOH BAAT" na DhooNDe ko'ii! "
Regarding "prem", Platts says that the correct word is "prem", vulg.
"parem".
In the nazm "prem" fits the meter.
And since we are talking about "Kalark" and "Dabal roTi" and "iskuul",
were you thinking about:
"
chhoR 'literature' ko apni 'history' ko bhool jaa
shaiKh o masjid se ta'aluq tark kar iskuul jaa
chaar din kii zindagii hai koft se kyaa faidaa
khaa Dabal rotii kalarkii kar Khushii se phuul jaa
"
[Akbar Allahabadi]
-Vasmi
UVR
>
> I don't know of any such "rule" in urdu, but do know that urdu shairs
> often use that kind of pronunciation, i.e. "barahman" instead of
> "brahman". Although, Alup's own Qais Saahab does use "brahman:, e.g.,
>
> "Qais SHAA'IR hai, ko'ii SHAIKH-O-BRAHMAN to naheeN
> is ke ash'aar meiN "VOH BAAT" na DhooNDe ko'ii! "
Vasmi sb!
He (i.e., the esteemed Qais saahib) may have *written* it the way
you have written it while quoting his sh'er, but it takes but a few
fleeting moments of close observation of the behr of the couplet
to realize that Qais sb's pronuncation of this word, at least here,
is exactly in line with the spelling you have used in your 'tehreer'.
Infact, I was surprised to see the word spelt the way it is spelt
in your quote above, because I have myself been at the receiving
end of mausoof's ire when I once suggested that someone use
the original Sanskrit pronunciation "braahman". Here, to refresh
your memory, is the episode I refer to:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.language.urdu.poetry/msg/af21f34cbf1cc06a?dmode=source
Not only this, Dr. Qais has himself clearly stated (addressing
none other than yourself!) that the word in the sh'er above is
infact not "braahman", but "baraahman" (but I think he may
have wanted to write "barahman"). See the last paragraph
here:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.language.urdu.poetry/msg/c3936d357b8fa340?dmode=source
The lesson one takes away from things like this is that the
'correct' pronunciation of a Sanskrit/Hindi word is not always
deemed to be 'faseeh' by Urdu poets. One then shakes one's
head (in disappointment), shrugs, and moves on.
-UVR.
Naseer
Dear Vasmi Sahib,
I tend to agree with UVR Sahib's comments concerning the pronounciation
of Sanskrit/English words like "brahman", "prem, "skuul" etc as
"barhaman", "parem" and "iskuul". You have yourself cited an example
from Akbar Illah aabaadii for "iskuul". Ghalib has...
qad-o-gesuu meN qais-o-kohkan kii aazmaaish hai......shaiKh-o-barhaman
kii aazmaaish hai.. (I believe there is a semi "a" after the "h" in
"kohkan".
Thiesen in his book mentioned in my other posts states..."In word-final
position Urdu allows only single consonants or clusters with a nasal as
thier first element; medially two consonants are allowed; initially
only single consonants or clusters wity y as their second element are
allowed".
I personally can not see any reason why Urdu poetry can not accommodate
"prem" , "brahman" and such like words as they are not, by any stretch
of the imagination, difficult to pronounce. I think this "restriction"
comes from the Arabic language's (or should I say the Arabic
speaker's?) "discomfort" with initial consonant clusters and as
Persian/Urdu have inherited the writing system from Arabic, this is a
legacy of that.
Naseer
UVR
>
> Thiesen in his book mentioned in my other posts states..."In word-final
> position Urdu allows only single consonants or clusters with a nasal as
> thier first element; medially two consonants are allowed; initially
> only single consonants or clusters wity y as their second element are
> allowed".
I'm not sure what exactly is being stated in the first part of the
quoted
sentence. Would you be so kind as to explain it to me? For the way I
am reading it, it makes no sense. See, it seems to suggest that Urdu
words cannot end with a consonant cluster unless that cluster begins
with a nasal consonant -- so, words like 'dabaNg', 'riNd', etc. But
what
about words like ishq, shaKhs, bardaasht, farq, fikr, shaGhl, ...?!
> I personally can not see any reason why Urdu poetry can not accommodate
> "prem" , "brahman" and such like words as they are not, by any stretch
> of the imagination, difficult to pronounce. I think this "restriction"
> comes from the Arabic language's (or should I say the Arabic
> speaker's?) "discomfort" with initial consonant clusters and as
> Persian/Urdu have inherited the writing system from Arabic, this is a
> legacy of that.
I more or less agree with you -- but I am not willing to lay the entire
blame on the Arabic speaker here. At least part of the fault lies with
the Persian speaker, too. But the lion's share of the responsibility
for this state of affairs rests squarely on the Urdu speaker's own
shoulders. Nobody could have forced him to prefer, for example, the
Persian pronunciation(s) of "barhaman" over the Sanskrit one. Were
it not for his own overzealous enthusiasm to 'ape' the Perso-Arabic
pronunciations of Perso-Arabic words, the Urdu speaker of today would
hardly have become the 'dhobi kaa kuttaa' he has become (insofar as
faithfulness to the native pronunciations of words borrowed from other
tongues is concerned).
I have more to say on this topic, but I really must tear myself away
for now. My other keyboard is awaiting manual input.
-UVR.
PS: I have taken the liberty to change the 'Subject' of this post. We
are
not really talking about Meeraji's poetry any more, are we?
Naseer
UVR Sahib aadaab 'arZ hai,
In my haste to write about consonant clusters at the begining of a
word, I did not pay attention to what I was quoting regarding their
position at the end of the word. You are right. I think the author did
not mean what has appeared in print. Of course words like farq, fikr
etc exist.
As for the Urdu speakers' "enthusiasm to ape" is concerned, I think it
is only right to pronounce correctly words from any language. Why
"prem"/"dharm" etc were not followed with the same vigour is open to
question. I suspect the Urdu writers were following "popular" speech in
this case. Secondly, perhaps (only a guess on my part), not all Urdu
writers may have been necessarily fully aware of Sanskrit
pronunciations, as they were of Persian and Arabic. I think the idiom
"dhobi kaa kutta" for Urdu speakers was perhaps rather harsh.
I had no intention of getting involved in any linguistic discussion on
this occasion, but I seem to have got drawn into it again. I think I
should not have even mentioned the "prem"/"parem" issue when I replied
to Vasmi Sahib.
Could I please ask you and other ALUP-ers, very respectfully, to revert
back to my first post.
Naseer
Vasmi
Naseer wrote:
...
> I had no intention of getting involved in any linguistic discussion
on
> this occasion, but I seem to have got drawn into it again. I think I
> should not have even mentioned the "prem"/"parem" issue when I replied
> to Vasmi Sahib.
>
> Could I please ask you and other ALUP-ers, very respectfully, to revert
> back to my first post.
>
> Naseer
Naseer Saahab,
don't think of this as a "heated debate", but as "enlightening
conversation".
although, as we know, the sun is capable of generating huge amounts of
both heat and light!(*)
I'm so glad this thread served to attract the attention of UVR Sb.
"taqreeb kuchh to bahr-e-mulaaqaat chaahiye".
So then I thought of Ghalib's "PIYAALA gar nahiiN detaa na de sharaab
to de", and said to myself - ok, he says "piyaala" instead of "pyaala",
but surely he would say "pyaar", not "piyaar".
So imagine my surprise when looking at Platts:
H पियार piyār, प्यार pyār [S.
प्रिय+आल], s.m.f.(?) Love, affection, fondness
Does anyone say "piyaar" any more?
It seems to belong to the same category as "parem".
- Vasmi
(*) UVR Sb's taKhalluz is "Khursheed".
Naseer
Vasmi Sahib, aadaab,
piyala(h), as you know, is a Farsi word, so the "consonant+y" rule is
not applicable as it is in "kya" and "pyaar". I don't have Platt's
dictionary but do have R.S.Mcgregor's "The Oxford Hindi-English
Dictionary" in which he spells "pyaar" as "p+y+aa+r".
Could we please, pretty please, leave this discussion for another
thread?
Naseer
UVR
> UVR wrote:
> >
> > I more or less agree with you -- but I am not willing to lay the entire
> > blame on the Arabic speaker here. At least part of the fault lies with
> > the Persian speaker, too. But the lion's share of the responsibility
> > for this state of affairs rests squarely on the Urdu speaker's own
> > shoulders. Nobody could have forced him to prefer, for example, the
> > Persian pronunciation(s) of "barhaman" over the Sanskrit one. Were
> > it not for his own overzealous enthusiasm to 'ape' the Perso-Arabic
> > pronunciations of Perso-Arabic words, the Urdu speaker of today would
> > hardly have become the 'dhobi kaa kuttaa' he has become (insofar as
> > faithfulness to the native pronunciations of words borrowed from other
> > tongues is concerned).
> >
>
>
> is only right to pronounce correctly words from any language. Why
> "prem"/"dharm" etc were not followed with the same vigour is open to
> question. I suspect the Urdu writers were following "popular" speech in
> this case.
I used to think so too, but it flies in the face of actual observation.
For example, a number of the (so-called) "uncultured" tongues of
the same region where Urdu was created use sounds like, say, the
retroflex '.Nr' (e.g., kira.Nr -- ray of light) or the retroflex "L"
(e.g., the Punjabi 'naaL' -- with) , but Urdu has nothing to do with
them. I have found no logical explanation for why such sounds
must be excluded from Urdu even though other tongues spoken in the
same area, heck, sometimes even spoken the very same populace,
do contain those sounds. "Aping" is the only thing that seems to
make sense given the incongruity of this situation.
> Secondly, perhaps (only a guess on my part), not all Urdu
> writers may have been necessarily fully aware of Sanskrit
> pronunciations, as they were of Persian and Arabic. I think the idiom
> "dhobi kaa kutta" for Urdu speakers was perhaps rather harsh.
I am sorry for offending your sensibilities by using that phrase.
'dhobi kaa kutta' was my attempt to state that Urdu speakers are
now at the point where they can pronounce neither English loan
words properly (i.e., school v/s iskool, stop v/s isTaap, clerk v/s
kalark) nor Perso-Arabic loan words, nor, for that matter, Sanskrit
ones. Basically, na ghar ke, na ghaaT ke, na wherever else ke!
All said, however, if you ask me, this "washerman's dog" way of
speaking is also where half the fun of speaking Urdu comes from
(at least for me). For example, while I know very well how to say
"braahmaNr" or "tamiZh" properly, the way I actually pronounce
these words depends very much on the linguistic context in which
they are being pronounced. Likewise, when I said above that Urdu
speakers "cannot" pronounce English/Perso-Arabic/Sanskrit words
properly, I didn't necessarily mean that we do not know how to
pronounce them right, but rather that for them (us), *every*thing
that comes off our Urdu tongue acquires the same -- delicious --
Urdu flavor. It's not unlike throwing a dash of garam masala into
the pot while heating up a can of store-bought refried beans. Try
it with tandoori roti instead of corn or wheat tortillas. It tastes
good :)
> I had no intention of getting involved in any linguistic discussion on
> this occasion, but I seem to have got drawn into it again. I think I
> should not have even mentioned the "prem"/"parem" issue when I replied
> to Vasmi Sahib.
>
> Could I please ask you and other ALUP-ers, very respectfully, to revert
> back to my first post.
Oh, Naseer sb! Please don't tell me to put away my toys just
when the fun is about to get started! :)
-UVR.
UVR
I am reminded of that famous anecdote about Khuda-e-suKhan
Meer Taqi 'Meer' reciting this sh'er:
'ishq bure hi *Khyaal* paRaa hai, chain gayaa, aaraam gayaa
dil kaa jaanaa Thahar gayaa he, subH gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
upon listening to which, someone in the audience (another poet,
perhaps) raised an objection saying, in effect "Meer saahib, saheeh
lafz 'Khyaal' naheeN, 'Khayaal' hai!" to which Meer's reply was
something along the lines of "ahl-e-zabaan (i.e., those of Delhi)
'Khyaal' bhi kahate haiN!"
> Could we please, pretty please, leave this discussion for another
> thread?
I must admit my ignorance about what you mean by "another
thread" here. When I changed the 'Subject' of the old thread,
I did so with the express intention of isolating this (linguistic)
discussion from the one around Meeraji's poetry. Indeed, if
you look at the latest messages (via Google or any other news
reader) you should find them included under the thread titled
"Urdu pronunciation". Are you suggesting that this is not enough?
-UVR.
Naseer
qaabil-i-Sad iHtiraam UVR Sahib, aadaab 'arZ hai,
When I said " Could we please, pretty please, leave this discussion for
another
thread", all I was saying was that I wanted this thread to discuss poor
Miiraa Jii's poetry and if we felt the need to carry our "prem/parem"
discussion, then we should perhaps start a completely new subject and
not mix this with my original (first) post. If this is not possible,
then so be it. It is just that apart from Vasmi Sahib, no other Aluper
had entered the discussion on the poetry and I wanted some more people
to express their thoughts.
I have no formal knowledge of any language's phonetics least of all
Urdu. I suppose this is really a subject for qualified experts whereas
my remarks are purely from observations and a little bit of guess work.
Perhaps Zafar Sahib could come into this discussion and express his
views on the matter.
If I could summarize our discussion so far...
I stated for "parem"etc that initial consonant clusters (apart from
kya,pyar etc) are not part of Urdu phonetics.I also indicated that as
Arabic language finds initial consonat cluster awkward, Urdu script,
which is based on Arabic, has followed suit. This may not be the only
reason.
You said, " Were it not for his own overzealous enthusiasm to 'ape' the
Perso-Arabicpronunciations of Perso-Arabic words, the Urdu speaker of
today would
hardly have become the 'dhobi kaa kuttaa' he has become (insofar as
faithfulness to the native pronunciations of words borrowed from other
tongues is concerned)".
My response to this was that one should follow correct pronunciation
and one reason for "parem" pronunciation could be popular speech.You
have then cited a shi'r from Meer which seems to indicate that he was
following popular speech pattern of Delhi when he used "Khyaal" instead
of "Khayaal". So,in this one example at least, an Urdu poet is not
"aping" and is prepared to follow popular pronunciation and sacrifice
the correct pronunciation.
I hasten to add that Urdu is not the only language which has dropped
initial cluster formations. Punjabi is another example, be it from any
religious back ground. "prem" is pronounced "parem" etc. So, when Rafi
MarHuum sai "yih mera prem patr paRh kih tum naaraaZ na honaa", most
Punjabis would , in natural speech, would say "yih mera parem patar
paRh kar". So, Punjabi wants to get rid of final consonat clusters as
well, it seems!
Now coming to the NR/L sounds (e.g Punjabi kaNRak=wheat, taaLaa=lock).
I don't believe that Urdu speakers have consciously kept these sounds
out because, to them, they were considered "unchaste". The real reason
is that through natural development, these sounds have fallen off the
cliff. To support this argument I can offer the following.
I come from district Gujarat but on the border of district Jhelum (the
river is the border). In my Punjabi, we do have the "NR" as in "kaNRak"
but no "L" as in "taaLaa". We pronounce this word as "taalaa". However
20+ miles away (30 kos), my mother's family resides. Now, they
pronounce "taaLaa" like it is no body's business and I remember being
quite amused, in my youth, at their "vulgar" pronunciation. To me,
thier "naaLaa" (small stream) sounded like "naaRaa" (izaar-band)! So,
have we, 20 miles from this location, deliberately thrown away the "L".
I would suggest NO.
Language is more complex than we may think. If "Khayaal" was pronounced
"Khayaal" in literary Arabic, say 1500 years ago, it is still
pronounced in exactly the same way in 2006's literary Arabic. However a
Sanskit word like "raatri" (night) over centuries of evolution became
not only "raat" in the popular language of the people but also in the
literary language. What has made Hindi speakers go back to the "raatri"
pronunciation I wonder?
Khair-andesh
Naseer
Vasmi
UVR wrote:
...
>. It's not unlike throwing a dash of garam masala into
> the pot while heating up a can of store-bought refried beans. Try
> it with tandoori roti instead of corn or wheat tortillas. It tastes
> good :)
UVR Sb,
I believe this is the first ever recipe presented on ALUP.
I'll try it this weekend while pondering urdu talaffuz. perhaps with a
garnish of some hari dhaniya and some pyaaz (or piyaaz)...
:) :)
Vasmi
UVR
harii, or haraa?! The coriander (the leaf, the seed as well as the
powder) we eat in our house is masculine!
-UVR.
UVR
Naseer wrote:
>
> qaabil-i-Sad iHtiraam UVR Sahib, aadaab 'arZ hai,
>
> When I said " Could we please, pretty please, leave this discussion for
> another thread", all I was saying was that I wanted this thread to discuss
> poor Miiraa Jii's poetry and if we felt the need to carry our "prem/parem"
> discussion, then we should perhaps start a completely new subject and
> not mix this with my original (first) post. If this is not possible,
> then so be it.
It depends on what you mean by "new thread". It's true that the
discussion on pronunciation has been conducted in a thread
'born of' your original post, but with a new Subject. A new thread
could hardly be more different. Think of it as a lesser poet trying
to write a Ghazal based on a tarah from Ghalib. I have taken
the step of further excising all trace of Meeraji's name from the
subject of the present post of mine. I hope it meets with your
approval.
> It is just that apart from Vasmi Sahib, no other Aluper
> had entered the discussion on the poetry and I wanted some more people
> to express their thoughts.
>
Maybe the discussion on language is more interesting to some.
Maybe neither discussion is interesting to anyone else!
> I have no formal knowledge of any language's phonetics least of all
> Urdu. I suppose this is really a subject for qualified experts whereas
> my remarks are purely from observations and a little bit of guess work.
> Perhaps Zafar Sahib could come into this discussion and express his
> views on the matter.
>
I would like that too!
> I hasten to add that Urdu is not the only language which has dropped
> initial cluster formations. Punjabi is another example, be it from any
> religious back ground. "prem" is pronounced "parem" etc. So, when Rafi
> MarHuum sai "yih mera prem patr paRh kih tum naaraaZ na honaa", most
> Punjabis would , in natural speech, would say "yih mera parem patar
> paRh kar". So, Punjabi wants to get rid of final consonat clusters as
> well, it seems!
>
I think that's a fallacy. While Punjabi is not my mother tongue,
I have had enough exposure to Punjabi speakers while growing
up to know that they *do* use initial consonant clusters. Only,
they do it in the funniest way: our school Principal, for example,
was notorious for saying things like, "aap supports meN jaanaa
chaahte haiN to hamaaraa pooraa s'port aap ke saath hai". And
Principal-Sir was hardly alone in speaking this way. Infact,
Punjabi speakers appear to have a propensity to drop or shorten
the vowel following the first consonant -- I seem to recall people
saying things like k'maal, s'waal .... Admittedly the apostrophe
here does not correspond to a total absence of any vowel sound.
However, it's not the full-scale "a" sound that one expects in faseeh
Urdu either. It's somewhere in the middle.
By the way, I want to make it clear that I do not mean any kind of
disrespect to you or any other Punjabi speaker by writing the above.
It's just one of those inexplicable things that one comes across as
one goes through life.
> Now coming to the NR/L sounds (e.g Punjabi kaNRak=wheat, taaLaa=lock).
> I don't believe that Urdu speakers have consciously kept these sounds
> out because, to them, they were considered "unchaste". The real reason
> is that through natural development, these sounds have fallen off the
> cliff.
>
I disagree with this premise. It's not that your example below is
invalid, but the fact remains that Punjabi even today uses the
sounds in question (otherwise, I, as a non-Punjabi would never
have known they exist in that language). Therefore, it can't be
a case of the sounds "falling off the cliff" as a result of natural
development, unless you're saying that Punjabi has been frozen
in time, a proposition with which I would be loathe to agree. There
has to be some other explanation. Besides, there are other tongues:
Rajasthani, Haryanvi, ... Infact, I think the languages of our
Subcontinent which use these sounds far outnumber those that
don't! This, at least, seems to be the case in present day India.
I don't know about Pakistan.
> I come from district Gujarat but on the border of district Jhelum (the
> river is the border). In my Punjabi, we do have the "NR" as in "kaNRak"
> but no "L" as in "taaLaa". We pronounce this word as "taalaa". However
> 20+ miles away (30 kos), my mother's family resides. Now, they
> pronounce "taaLaa" like it is no body's business and I remember being
> quite amused, in my youth, at their "vulgar" pronunciation. To me,
> thier "naaLaa" (small stream) sounded like "naaRaa" (izaar-band)! So,
> have we, 20 miles from this location, deliberately thrown away the "L".
> I would suggest NO.
>
> Language is more complex than we may think. If "Khayaal" was pronounced
> "Khayaal" in literary Arabic, say 1500 years ago, it is still
> pronounced in exactly the same way in 2006's literary Arabic. However a
> Sanskit word like "raatri" (night) over centuries of evolution became
> not only "raat" in the popular language of the people but also in the
> literary language. What has made Hindi speakers go back to the "raatri"
> pronunciation I wonder?
>
I don't think raatri has necessarily 'evolved' into 'raat'. It is
perhaps equally (if not more) likely that both words are of
similar vintage (and that 'raatri' was used in Sanskrit and
'raat' by Prakrit(s) -- after all, Sanskrit was hardly the only
language spoken by the people inhabiting its geographical
area of use).
-UVR.
Afzal A. Khan
Jab aisi lazeez cheezoN ka zikr ho to
hari hari soojhti hi hai !!
Afzal
Afzal A. Khan
Vasmi
> UVR wrote:
> ...
> >. It's not unlike throwing a dash of garam masala into
> > the pot while heating up a can of store-bought refried beans. Try
> > it with tandoori roti instead of corn or wheat tortillas. It tastes
> > good :)
> UVR Sb,
> I believe this is the first ever recipe presented on ALUP.
> I'll try it this weekend while pondering urdu talaffuz. perhaps with a
> garnish of some hari dhaniya and some pyaaz (or piyaaz)...
> :) :)
harii, or haraa?! The coriander (the leaf, the seed as well as the
powder) we eat in our house is masculine!
-UVR.
right you are, UVR Sb.
I was in a harii.
I meant to say "hari mirch aur dhaniya".
:)
Vasmi
Asa'd
I am new to you guys. Hope you'll welcome me :).
This discussion attarcted my attention a few days back, and I decided
not to say any thing, simply because all this seemed to be a non-issue
to me, but then I changed my mind. :)
Admission of words with slight change in pronunciation and meaning is
not unique to urdu. Other languages too, have adopted words from
different languages, acclimatizing them to suit their own
environments. Since no single authorized person, body or organization
is responsible for coining/modifying words, the reasons or explanations
for doing so aren't that simple or logical either. "Accent" or
absence of a particular sound being only one the many reasons. The fact
which remains however is that, once a word becomes acceptable to the
masses, no lexicon can ignore it for long, and we have to,
willy-nilly, accept it. Since we are talking about Urdu here, I would
like to list a few more words which have been adapted by urdu speakers,
over the past few centuries. These words have come from English,
Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic, Turkish etc. and new words are getting added
to this list with time. It depicts why urdu is considered to be one of
the most versatile languages spoken across the globe.
To save time I've taken most of these words from "Aab-e-Hayat" by
Mohammad hussain Azad.
Lantern (E) - laalTen (U)
Bottle (E) - Botal (U)
Biscuit(E) - BiskuT(U)
stamp(E) - staam(U)
Pistol (E) - pistaul (U)
Button(E) - baTan(U)
Glass(E) - gilaas(U)
Orderly(E) - ardalii(U)
Dozen(E) - darjan(U)
Flannel(E) - franiil(U)
Buggy(E) - Bagghii(U)
Ticket(E) - TikaT(U)
liilaam (P) - niilaam(U)
ruupaak(P) - ruumaal(U)
katta (T) - haTTa-kaTTa(U)
Chitrdhar(S) - chaudhry(U)
maas/maash(S) - mahiina(U)
chandr(S) - chaand(U)
aT(S) - aaTaa (U)
dughd(S) - duudh(U)
gaaNDa (S) - ganna(U)
S - Sanskrit
P - Persian
E - English
T- Turkish
U - Urdu
_________________________________________________________________
UVR Sahib :
I can see your point. Perhaps it would be easier for us to understand
if we treat "barhaman" and "braahmaNR" as two different words
belonging to different languages. Simple!
Interstingly, I recently came across a rare piece of work by Pandit
Chandra Bhan"Barhaman" (1562-1653), who lived during Shah
Jahan's period. I would like to share the matlaa and maqtaa with you
all.
khudaa ne kis shehar andar haman ko laaye Daalaa hai
na dilbar hai, na saaqii hai, na shiishaa hai, na pyaalaa hai
'Barahman' vaaste ashnaan ke phirtaa hai pagiyaa siiN
na gaNgaa hai, na jamunaa hai, na naddii hai, na naalaa hai
________________________________________________________________
Regards,
Asad
Asa'd
UVR wrote:
> > I am reminded of that famous anecdote about Khuda-e-suKhan
> Meer Taqi 'Meer' reciting this sh'er:
>
> 'ishq bure hi *Khyaal* paRaa hai, chain gayaa, aaraam gayaa
> dil kaa jaanaa Thahar gayaa he, subH gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
>
> upon listening to which, someone in the audience (another poet,
> perhaps) raised an objection saying, in effect "Meer saahib, saheeh
> lafz 'Khyaal' naheeN, 'Khayaal' hai!" to which Meer's reply was
> something along the lines of "ahl-e-zabaan (i.e., those of Delhi)
> 'Khyaal' bhi kahate haiN!"
ta'jjub hai k Meer ne aisaa kahaa, aur phir use Thiik bhii gardaanaa,
varnaa muhaavraa to "dhyaan paRnaa" hai.
sher yuuN hai :
ishq hamaare dhyaan paRaa hai, chain gayaa, aaraam gayaa
jii kaa jaanaa Thehar rahaa ha, subh gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
agar aap vazaahat farmaayeN k aap ne kis jagah paRhaa hai to navaazish
hogii.
khairaNdesh
Asad
_____________________________________________________________
Asa'd
UVR Sahib, maiN maazrat-khvaah huuN. asl meiN chuuN.k mere paas ye sher
isii tarah likhaa thaa, aur maiN ne dobaraa check karne kii zehmat
gavaaraa nahiiN kii, is liye mujh se ghalatii sarzad ho gayii. ab jo
Intikhaab-e-Meer meiN dekhaa to sher kuch yuuN darj hai
ishq hamaare khyaal paRaa hai, khvaab gayaa, aaraam gayaa
jii kaa jaanaa Thehar rahaa hai subh gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
albatta is meiN mujhe pehle bhii koii shak nahiiN thaa k 'khayaal' ko
'khyaal' baaNdhaa gayaa hai. :)
Vasmi
Asad Saahab,
Welcome to alup!
I too find it interesting to compare equivalent words in the languages
I know, e.g.
door(E), dar(U), dvaar(S).
And sometimes the similarity just seems like an unexpected coincidence.
For instance, behtar(U) and better(E) are not really linguistically
related, are they?
or diivaar(U) and "the wall"(E).
>...
>It depicts why urdu is considered to be one of
> the most versatile languages spoken across the globe.
>...
considered by whom?
The passive voice hides important information...
once again, welcome to the group, and hope to see you around.
Vasmi
Naseer
As'ad Sahib, Khush Aamaded!
I would like to take this opportunity to welcome you to the ALUP group.
Although, I myself am a new-comer, I am sure the "old hands" will not
mind my taking the lead.
When you say, "Admission of words with slight change in pronunciation
and meaning is not unique to Urdu. Other languages too, have adopted
words from different languages,
acclimatizing them to suit their own environments ", I believe you make
a good point. A large of number of Arabic consonants are not pronounced
in Urdu as pronounced in Classical Arabic and hardly any one pronounces
the Farsi voiced equivalent of sheen, ie, the "si" sound in vision. So,
pronouncing "br"/"pr" in the begining of a word as "bar" and "par" is
no different. Seemingly, the only initial consonat cluster "khwa" as in
Classical "Khwash" has developed into Khu(sh). I think, similar
development may have taken place with regard to words of Sanskrit
origin, without necessarily the influence of Arabic and Persian. But,
as I said in an earlier post, this is for experts in linguistics to
decide as to what phonetic changes have taken place in Urdu.
By the way, one of my dictionaries gives "niilaam" as "Portuguese". As
for "ruu-paak" and "ruu-maal", "Steingass" gives a meaning of both as
"handkerchief".
Naseer
Naseer
Aadaab Vasmi Sahib,
It is obvious that your typing skills are far superior than mine
otherwise you would not have been able to squeeze a welcome to As'ad
Sahib, before me!
dar/dvaar/door are related due to the three languages being from the
Ind-European language group...which apparently goes back to Hittite. I
would say better/behtar is no co-incidence.
What about "kona"/"corner", "grass"/"ghaas", "pale"/"peela", "
bail"/"bull" "dand" (Punjabi), "daaNt"/ "dent-ist". I can think of
several more!
Naseer
Zoya
> > Dear ALUPers, Adab!
> > I am new to you guys. Hope you'll welcome me :).
Asa'd Sahib,
You might be new to the 'guys', but are you really 'new' ?! ;)
Mohib, kya Khayaal hai, ham bhii aap ke bhaii sahib ko Alup par
formally welcome kar deiN?! ;)
vaise aap ne yeh bataa kar aChhaa kiya k aap ke naam ke biich meiN
'ain' bhii aata hai, varna ham to aap ko plain old 'Asad' hii samajhte
rahe haiN!! :)
Asa'd is definitely more exotic and meaningful! :)
ab aa gaye haiN, to aate jaate rahiiyegaa!
__________Zoya
UVR
I think the mention of "foreign" languages has led us far from the
main point (of the words 'barhaman', 'parem', etc) that seeded this
discussion. I really do not feel, excuse my bluntness, that much
is gained at all by pointing to the fact that Urdu has acquired words
from English, Turkish and other foreign languages with modified
pronunciations (e.g., laalten, laaT sb., palTan, patloon). These
words belong to languages spoken in foreign *geographies*, but
Sanskrit was spoken in the very same geographical area (and, as
I have said earlier, often by some of the same people!) as Urdu.
The question we must ask ourselves, therefore, is why (and how)
pronunciations like parem, dharam, karam came to be. But that
is hardly a topic for a group dedicated to poetry discussions, is it?
As'ad saahib, aadaab aur Khush aamadeed.
agarche digar ahbaab aap kaa is mahfil meN Khair maqdam kar
hi chuke haiN, aap kaa phir ek baar istiqbaal karnaa meraa bhi
Khush gawaar farz bantaa hai, kyooN-k aap ne Khaas taur *meri*
ek post ke badle meN sawaal kiyaa thaa. Welcome, huzoor. We do
hope you will enjoy your stay here.
Meer Taqi Meer kaa sh'er, jahaaN tak mujhe yaad paRtaa hai,
maiN ne janaab Ali Sardar Ja'fri ke intiKhaab-e-kalaam-e-Meer
se naql kiyaa thaa. magar afsos k pichhle do din se saaraa ghar
chhaan maarne ke baa-wujood mujhe woh kitaab mil naheeN
rahi hai. lihaaza is baat ki tasdeeq filhaal mumkin naheeN k sh'er
meN "'ishq *hamaare* Khyaal" hai yaa "'ishq bure hi Khyaal".
Khair, koi baat naheeN: meri muraad to lafz "Khyaal" ki jaanib
ishaaraa karne se thi.
-UVR.
Naseer
UVR Sahib, aadaab 'arZ hai,
You wrote,...."The question we must ask ourselves, therefore, is why
(and how)
pronunciations like parem, dharam, karam came to be. But that
is hardly a topic for a group dedicated to poetry discussions, is it?".
I can not see any "problem" with final consonant clusters, such as
"dharm", "karm" because there is "garm", "sharm" from Farsi and "jurm"
etc from Arabic. However, initial consonant clusters like "prem" etc
are an enigma, it seems. For me, as speech comes before writing, if
"prem" was pronounced "prem" by the "proto-Urdu" speakers, then I can
not imagine them changing their pronunciation to comply with the Arab
distaste for initial consonant clusters. The reason must lie within the
speech pattern of the speakers. Simply, I don't know!
As for whether this is a topic for ALUP discussion, I can not see why
not! Having said this, as I have been pleading with you constantly, on
this occasion I personally did not want this discussion to overtake
Meera Jii's poetry discussion. It has happened, so I won't worry about
it.
The version im my " Kulliyaat-i-Meer" is.............
'ishq hamaare Khyaal paRaa hai Khwaab gaii aaraam gayaa
jii kaa jaanaa Thahar rahaa hai SubH gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
Naseer
Asa'd
Vasmi Sahib :
Thankyou!
"Door", "dvaar" and "dar" have a link. "behtar" and "better" also have
a linguistic relation, as Naseer Sb. pointed out.
This might help -
Indo-European(Indo-Hittite) ----->
a) IndoAryan (Indic) --->
Sanskrit
1. Indo-Iranian ---->
b) Old Iranian ---->
Persian
2. Germanic -----> English
3. Anatolian
4. Greek
5. Italic
6. Armenian
7. Tocharian
8. Celtic
9. Balto-Slavic
10.Albanian
____________________________________________________________________
Naseer Sb:
"Old Hands" or "puraanaa chaawal"! ;)
Thank you for welcoming me.
You're right. liilaam is Portuguese. I forgot to mention that this
"P" is different from others, so "P" is the culprit ;)
ruu-paak and ruu-maal are same. Persians call it ruu-paak.
_____________________________________________________________
Zoya Sahiba, like I said
Of course I'm new
To all, but you! ;)
ye biich meiN aap "ain" ka zikr kahaaN le aaiiN! aap dekh hii rahii
haiN k yahaaN hamaare bhaai-bandhuu kaisii gambhiir baateN kar rahe
haiN. ab aise meiN ain mumkin hai k aap ke is "ain" kaa koii aur
hii matlab nikal aaye. ;)
shukria!
________________________________________________________________
UVR Sahib :
aap kaa behad shukria!
maiN ne apne mehduud ilm kii binaa par is zimn meiN jo kuch kehnaa thaa
arz kar diyaa.
khair, ab sher jo bhii ho,aap ye bataaiye k aap ko in tiinoN meiN se
kaun sii suurat ziyaada pasaNd aayii.
mujhe to yahaaN "dhyaan" zyaadah achaa lagtaa hai, aur ba-khudaa is
kii ye vajah nahiiN hai ke maiN ne yuuN likhaa hai! :) :)
aap kyaa kehte haiN!
yahaaN to baat sirf ek lafz kii hai, ab ye sher mulaahiza ho
ibtidaa-e-ishq hai rotaa hai kyaa
aage aage dekhiye hotaa hai kyaa
yahaaN pehlaa misraa "kulliyaat-e-Meer" meiN kuch aur hai!
___________________________________________________________________
.
UVR
> ________________________________________________________________
> UVR Sahib :
>
> aap kaa behad shukria!
>
> maiN ne apne mehduud ilm kii binaa par is zimn meiN jo kuch kehnaa thaa
> arz kar diyaa.
>
> khair, ab sher jo bhii ho,aap ye bataaiye k aap ko in tiinoN meiN se
> kaun sii suurat ziyaada pasaNd aayii.
> mujhe to yahaaN "dhyaan" zyaadah achaa lagtaa hai, aur ba-khudaa is
> kii ye vajah nahiiN hai ke maiN ne yuuN likhaa hai! :) :)
> aap kyaa kehte haiN!
>
aji hazrat! maiN kyaa meri raaye kyaa? magar Khair aap poochhte
hi haiN to 'arz kartaa hooN k mujhe to "Khyaal" hi pasand aataa hai,
if only because it shows how closely Meer saahib held his "homeland"
(Delhi) to his heart and how proud he was of its linguistic heritage!
neez, aap ko shaayad jaan kar Khushi hogi k mujhe woh Sardar
Ja'fri waala nusKha mil gayaa hai. jis waaqi'e kaa zikr maiNne
kiyaa thaa use janaab-e-Ja'fri kahte haiN unhoNne Aab-e-Hayaat
se naql kiyaa thaa (aur unhoN ne apne intiKhaab ke 'foreword'
meN zer-e-zikr sh'er ki kulliyaat-e-Meer waali soorat bhi darj kii
hai -- jo k aap bhi aage post kar chuke haiN). Khair, Aab-e-Hayaat
to ab Internet-ji-mahaaraaj ki apaar kripaa se baRi aasaani se
dastyaab hai:
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/digbooks/dig_toc.html?BOOKID=PK2167.A84)
waise maiNne aap ki aur deegar ALUPers ki sahoolat ke liye
woh waaqi'a zail meN Roman-Urdu meN naql kar diyaa hai.
> yahaaN to baat sirf ek lafz kii hai, ab ye sher mulaahiza ho
>
> ibtidaa-e-ishq hai rotaa hai kyaa
> aage aage dekhiye hotaa hai kyaa
>
> yahaaN pehlaa misraa "kulliyaat-e-Meer" meiN kuch aur hai!
aap saheeh farmaate haiN. "ibtidaa-e-'ishq" Aab-e-Hayaat meN
hai, magar kulliyaat meN pehlaa misr'a (jahaaN tak mujhe yaad
paRtaa hai) "raah-e-door-e-'ishq se rotaa hai kyaa" hai. Theek?
-UVR.
PS: Mohammed Hussain 'Azad', Aab-e-Hayaat, safHa #209, par
farmaate haiN dekheN:
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/digbooks/digpager.html?BOOKID=PK2167.A84&object=211
lakhna'uu (Lucknow) ke chand 'amaayid-o-araakeen jam'a hokar
ek din aaye k Meer saahib se mulaaqaat kareN aur sh'er suneN.
darwaaze par aa kar aawaaz dee. lauNDi yaa maamaa niklee;
haal poochhkar andar gayee; aik boriya laa kar dyoRhi meN
bichhaayaa, unheN biThaayaa, aur aik puraanaa saa huqqah
taazah kar ke saamne rakh gayi. Meer saahib andar se tashreef
laaye. mizaaj pursi waGhairah ke ba'ad unhoNne (UVR: ya'ani
lakhna'uu waaloN ne) farmaaish-e-ash'aar kee. Meer saahib ne
awwal kuchh Taalaa, phir saaf jawaab diyaa k saahib qiblah
mere ash'aar aap ki samajh meN naheeN aane ke. agarche
naagawaar hua, magar ba-nazar-e-aadaab-o-aKhlaaq unhoN
ne apni naarasaa'ii-e-tab'a kaa iqraar kiyaa, aur *phir* darKhwaast
kee. unhoNne phir inkaar kiyaa. aaKhir un logoN ne giraaN-
Khaatir hokar kahaa k hazrat! anwaree-o-Khaaqaani [tak] kaa
kalaam samajhte haiN, aap kaa irshaad kyooN na samjheNge?
Meer saahib ne kahaa k yeh durust hai, magar unkee sharaheN,
mustalahaat aur farhaNgeN maujood haiN, aur mere kalaam
ke liye faqat muhaawra-e-ahl-e-Urdu hai, yaa jaam'a masjid
kee seeRhiyaaN! aur us se aap mahroom! yeh kahkar ek sh'er
paRhaa --
'ishq bure hi Khyaal paRaa hai, chain gayaa aaraam gayaa
dil kaa jaanaa Thahar gayaa hai, subH gayaa yaa shaam gayaa
aur kahaa k aap ba-moojib apni kitaaboN ke kaheNge k "Khyaal"
ki 'ye' zaahir karo. phir kaheNge k yeh taqtee' meN girtee hai.
magar yahaaN is ke siwaa jawaab naheeN k muhaawara *yahi*
hai!
Asa'd
_____________________________________________________________
UVR Sahib, Links faraaham karne ke liye aap kaa mamnuun huuN.
aap ne sahii farmaayaa, "Aab-e-Hayaat" meiN sher yuuN hii maujuud hai,
albataa
Kulliyaat meiN suurat kuch aur hai. ba-har-haal ye to saabit ho hii
gayaa ke "khyaal paRaa" muhaavraa hai. so maiN to is silsile meiN pehle
hii hathyaar Daal chukaa huuN :) aur apnaa maazrat-naama aapkii khidmat
meiN pesh kar chukaa huuN, lekin aap kii tashaffii ke liye ek baar phir
behad aajizii ke saath apnii ghalatii qubuul kartaa huuN aur aap se
maazrat chaahtaa huuN.
umiid hai mulaaqaat hotii rahegii. :)
khair-aNdesh
Asa'd
Naseer
Asa'd Sahib,
Continuing with Zoya bahin's " 'ain Ghain" comments I am curious as to
the way you spell your name on your address, i.e Asa'd. If your name is
spelt aliph, seen, 'ain and daal, then should it not be As'ad?
Naseer
>
>
>
> .
Asa'd
Naseer wrote:
> Asa'd Sahib,
>
> Continuing with Zoya bahin's " 'ain Ghain" comments I am curious as to
> the way you spell your name on your address, i.e Asa'd. If your name is
> spelt aliph, seen, 'ain and daal, then should it not be As'ad?
>
> Naseer
Naseer Sahib,
I have written ain as a' , but on second thoughts, I feel your version
is better, as it also accounts for the brief "pause" between the word,
consequently helping the reader pronounce it better. It might raise a
new argument for some "Roman Urdu" experts though, who feel that the
appendage should not precede the letter.
Regards,
As'ad :)