1. The WordReference Forums have moved to new forum software. (Details)

Hindi/Urdu - omission of ke to specify inanimate objects

Discussion in 'Indo-Iranian Languages' started by tonyspeed, May 1, 2013.

  1. tonyspeed Senior Member

    JA- English & Creole
    In a recent thread, it was noted that "ke" can be omitted in certain pospositions to designate that the object of the postposition is inanimate.

    Two examples were given:

    kis bare meN soc rahe haiN - kis ke bare meN soc rahe haiN
    kis liye jiite haiN - kis ke liye jiite haiN?



    I must say I am indebted to the ones who pointed out this difference as I cannot recall ever seeing this point in grammar books.

    Can this be applied to other postpositions?
     
  2. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    tonyspeed, the first example above is a kind of exception, since "kis ke baare" implies "kis manushy ke baare". I don't think that "ke" designates in inanimate objects in other situations, and in fact I do not agree with the second example - "kis ke liye" can be used for both animate and inanimate objects (usually concepts, as "kis ke liye" to me is "grander" than mere "kis liye"). Of course, "kis liye" cannot be used with persons, since again "kis ke liye" can imply "kis manushy ke liye" but "kis liye" cannot.

    Meanwhile, there is "kaaye ke liye" very much present in Deccani and in certain dialects of Hindi, synonymous to "kis liye" (and not "kis ke liye"): "kaaye" (could mean what or why) here marks the object to be inanimate, even though "ke" is used. For a person, it would be "ka-uun ke liye". Why is "kaaye ko?" (also "kaaye ku?") in Deccani.
     

Share This Page