Hindi-Urdu: What is "shuddh"?

Discussion in 'Indo-Iranian Languages' started by greatbear, Mar 9, 2013.

  1. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    In this thread, in post 15, marrish came up with a smug (and unwarranted, IMO) conclusion that the word "ruchi" is "shuddh": so that left me pondering over what is this so-called "shuddh Hindi"! If someone would say "gatiimaan honaa" as "shuddh", I could understand; if I were to use the word "antevaasii" for a boarding student, I can understand; but here, for a word that is not only very colloquial but also a very common name of girls, when this "shuddh" adjective was used, it left me perplexed. I would of course like marrish to explain why or how did he come up with this idea, but I would also like to open the debate to a larger question: what constitutes "shuddh" Hindi for the people here, especially some of the Urdu speakers who have some kind of issues with it (it seems ....).

    Yesterday, I was talking to a Hindi speaker (background: science researcher settled in US since a long time; origins of central India, remains in close touch with Indian culture and thought), who used the word "lagbhag" (लगभग), meaning "quite, almost, nearly, approximately". I myself use "takriiban", so it was interesting and a pleasure for me to hear a word that I know very well but don't use. Then I wondered if some of the people here would classify that as well "shuddh": just because maybe Urdu speakers don't use it (or don't use it that much)? It seems to be recent trend on this forum.

    Both "lagbhag" and "ruchi" are commonly used words in Hindi (and the words in Gujarati, i.e. both of them first-choice words in Gujarati); both are not that much used in Indian soaps and soaps-like news (from which some learners like tonyspeed try to infer what is shuddh and what is not, which is a very wrong way IMO), and both are widespread not just colloquially in one particular region but across India. So ... what's "shuddh" about them? And ... what the heck is anyway this shuddh?
     
  2. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    I'd say most of the words in Platts signified by S (Sanskrit) would be considered "shuddh" since those exact forms were not in common usage until after Hindi was standardized in the 19th century. Note: I said most, but obviously not all. Some Sanskrit words have of course been used in common speech for a long, long time. Conversely, those represented by H (Hindi or, perhaps more properly, Hindustani) represent what have been the common colloquial forms. Many of these forms have been replaced by their shuddh equivalents in the last two centuries. I don't know about ruchi. It is a Sanskrit word but I'm not sure when it entered into colloquial usage; however, lagbhag is not shuddh.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2013
  3. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    ^ Wolverine9, you have summed up the situation pretty well. This subject was discussed in detail in the thread "shuddhataa: The Purity of Hindi" more than a year ago. Post 52 is an attempt to summarise the thread and there was agreement expressed in post 54. I don't see the point of going round circles, covering the same ground once again and wasting precious time.

    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2250606&highlight=shuddhataa
     
  4. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    One needs to do one's homework first rather than being involved in casting aspersions on other people.
    Actually, in the post you linked here, I was summarizing what Qureshpor and tonyspeed said, I'm positive you couldn't have forgotten so quickly that the discussion started from the posts of these gentlemen, and I expressed my opinion on the issue (which was not concerning your question ''What is shuddh?'').

    As a matter of fact, it was not I who brought shuddh into the discussion.
    This is interesting information, thank you for sharing.

    As Wolverine9 indicated, lagbhag is by no means a Sanskrit loan-word (tatsam), and surprise, surprise, it is used in Urdu as well, besides تقریباً taqriiban. I believe the recent trend in this forum has been the use of denomination ''High Hindi'' or ''Modern Hindi'' by the Urdu speakers.
    Probably you have misunderstood me: please consult the thread where ''ruchi'' was discussed first:

    Hindi-Urdu: to express interest


    It was I who was the first one to recognize this word and to offer a bit of explanation. My words were:

    "It is a Hindi word which is by the way not shared by Urdu, and it is completely legitimate in Hindi."


    Can you see any ''shuddh''? Did I seem to have any issues with it? I just informed the original poster that it was not an Urdu word. Have I said it was shuddh Hindi because it was not used in Urdu?

    The next reaction is perhaps more relevant to this thread:
    shuddh Hindi translates to ''pure Hindi'', am I right?

    - I answered: "[...]
    It does seem to be used, also colloquially:...''

    greatbear, you commented on this with the following words:
    - I said: I agree with gb.
    ... and tonyspeed said in response to my ''It does seem to be used, also colloquially'':
    Dear friends, does it seem justified that precisely my person is being associated with the issue of ''shuddh'' or ''pure'' Hindi? I don't believe in the notion of ''purity'' in the context of any language; in the same way I never use the name ''xaaliS Urdu! - pure Urdu''.

    OK, now the facts being put right, let me just say that the term ''shuddh Hindi'' is a way of referring to a special style or register of this language *by* its users. It has come about by purge, to the extent of being ridiculous, of the words originating in Persian and Arabic and, overindulging in words (not only nouns, which is illustrated at the end of this post), that are called ''tatsam'' (almost unchanged Sanskrit loan-words, as they are), at the cost of ''tadbhav'' (Prakritic) and ''desii'' vocabulary. This is the language that is the official language of the government of the Republic of India (just have a look at any publication or official website, here an extract for those who really don't know what is being discussed:
    http://commerce.gov.in/hindisite/antidumping/Format_anti_circumvention_invetigation.pdf

    "अपवंचनरोधी जांच हेतु सीमाशुल्क टैरिफ (पाटित वस्तुओं का अभिज्ञान, उन पर पाटनरोधी शुल्क का निर्धारण एवं संग्रहण तथा क्षति निर्धारण) नियमावली apvaNchanrodhii jaaNch hetu siimaashulk Tairiph (paaTit vastuoN kaa abhigyaan, un par paaTanrodhii shulk kaa nirdhaaraNR evaM saNgrahaNR tathaa kSHati nirdhaaraN) niyamaavalii"-

    ...one tadbhav noun, kaa, un par, one English 'tariff'' (seems as if English has been equalized with Sanskrit in terms of the criterion of ''shuddhataa''), the rest ''pure'' tatsam, including such basic parts of speech like particles (evaM, tathaa) and pospositions (hetu).
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2013
  5. tonyspeed Senior Member

    JA- English & Creole
    To some extent I agree with Wolv ji. Shuddh are words chosen from Sanskrit to replace extant and popular words of Persian and English origin. But to me, Shuddh is also an attitude that certain words can be purer and better and more correct than others. When a Hindi speaker says ,'don't use that word. It is Urdu' but that word is commonly used, this is the philosophy behind shudh. That there is gandagii in our colloquial speech and we have to clean it out and eradicate it. It is ethnic cleansing with language.

    Many words originally considered shuddh or written language have become nativised. So that they are no longer purely shuddh. Ruchi may be one such word or not. I don't think we have a good idea as to what the common vocabulary was in India in the 1800s or early 1900s and some things there were no words for. I don't think we can only rely on the origin to label a word shuddh, a mistake I made when I started learning Hindi. It is only a clue. For instance dhyaan will be labeled Sanskrit but no one will argue that it is shuddh speech.

    That being said, I view formal or book language devoid of Persian as shuddh. This form of shuddh in my opinion is dying and never was successful. Someone just told me, 'no one uses Dhanyavad in India anymore'. I don't have anything against Dhanyavad but it was heartening that the language nazis failed. Language in India is growing organically and the artificial shuddh grafts have only enriched the language, not destroyed it fully. But I do feel harm has been done, maybe mistakenly.

    When someone says 'ke through' as opposed to 'ke zariye' or 'ke dwaaraa' could it be because of the Urdu vs Hindi fight? There are several other such English words that have replaced perfectly good words like gift for bhenT or tohfaa. Could this not be because people did not want to skew their language and mark it as either 'Urdu' or Standard Hindi. Has English gained ascendancy partly due to the battle between shuddh and 'Urdu'? Quite possibly, to some extent. In any case, Shuddh Hindi as an attitude is dying or dead. Even the news media and polititians are giving it up. It's one last haunt maybe the language of gurus and religious type figures. But I would not know to what extent that continues.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2013
  6. tonyspeed Senior Member

    JA- English & Creole
    I have heard lagbhag in serials before. There is a Panjabi fellow in Chidiyaghar that always says "lagbhag te almost" as his tag line.

    It is actually takriban that used to strike me not as Hindi but Urdu, but as I heard it more on the news I began to use it more. Now I rarely use lagbhag, possibly because the flow is not as smooth.
     
  7. UrduMedium Senior Member

    United States
    Urdu (Karachi)
    I think this phenomenon is simpler than finding the middle ground between Urdu and shuddh. The same exact phenomenon took place in Pakistan (replacing perfectly fine Urdu words by English equivalents), where no such Urdu/shuddh rivalry was present. I think couple of factors influencing this trend are:

    a) English's being a marker of social status. So more use of English words is considered a sign of upward social mobility.
    b) some of the English words are easier or equally easy on the tongue than the Urdu equivalents (time/waqt, class/jamaat, pen/qalam, etc). This is why words like armpit which are longer/harder to say than baGhal do not take currency.
    c) some names/ideas are only accurately expressed with English words (e.g. hikmat-e-3amali doesn't quite capture strategy, or writ and mandate may not have an Urdu word equivalents).
    d) In the case of Urdu, it has always been open to accept foreign words in prose. I was shocked to see the number of English words used in few pages of Hali's Yadgar-e-Ghalib that I browsed through. Deputy (Molvi) Nazeer Ahmed seems to use them freely as well.
     
  8. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    Yes, you are right. ke thruu is used in ''Urdu'' as well. May I ask a question? Is the Urdu word in Hindi spelt ''ke zariye'' or ''ke zariiye''? I just don't know.
     
  9. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    Hindi: ke zariye

    Urdu: ke ẕarīʻe
     
  10. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    Thanks that you have helped me on this. It seems as if a part of the long ii, together with the consonant 3ayn, has formed part of ''ya'' in Hindi.
     
  11. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    Judging from most of the responses above, it seems that if a word has derived from Sanskrit, or taken whole rather from it, that is deemed to belong to a kind of Hindi that was promoted after a certain period but otherwise wasn't there, which people here have been calling "shuddh Hindi", is that it?

    Because if that is the conclusion, then it beats me what were we using for words like "dhyaan" (as pointed out), "yogaa", "charitr", "adhikaar", "siNhaasan" (and "aasan"), "aatmaa", "grihaNR" (as in taking; also as in eclipse), "surya" and thousands of other words? I think we were using these. (Awadhi is one of the bases of modern Hindi.) In addition, tonyspeed has also got some wrong information: in Rajasthan, it will be difficult to hear a "shukriyaa" or even a "thank you", but it is "dhanyvaad" that rules - even in the remotest hinterlands - I don't think that all these promotion strategies are responsible for that.

    Going by post 5's definition of "shuddh", though, the above words can't be "shuddh": as "yogaa" was always yogaa, now even in English. If that is the case, then how can "ruchi" be shuddh, I wonder? Since, after all, which other word can take place of "ruchii"? "dilchaspii"? "shauk"? I don't think so. As I said before, "dilchaspii" means not some serious interest of something; as for "shauk", it is usually used pejoratively in the sense of "lat" (as in "usko tambaaku kaa shauk hai/lag gayaa hai") - whereas "ruchi" is used rather in the sense of "usko saNgeet meN bohat ruchi hai". Which Persian-Arabic-derived word has "ruchi" replaced? Is that word already extinct?

    As for response to marrish, thanks a lot for establishing the chronology, though you have certainly missed out some posts that could have done it better - but that's maybe because now those posts are deleted by the moderators and you couldn't access them. Anyway, tonyspeed was merely hypothesizing on whether the word is shuddh (acc. to his defn. of "shuddh"; cf. post 5 of this thread) because he hadn't heard it in the media he accesses; it was only you who came up with the (sudden) conclusion that it is.

    Meanwhile, tonyspeed says that one does not know for sure what was the colloquial usages prior to the early 1900s or 1800s: so if one doesn't know that, how does one judge a word to be "shuddh" (as per post 5 definition) or not? As is evident from examples like "aasan" and "yogaa", origins of a word do not serve here. After all, "va" is also shuddh Hindi: and it's origin is not Sanskrit! I thought something well established in colloquial usages since the times of ones fathers and grandfathers would be exempt from the "accusation" of being "shuddh": but apparently that is not the case.
     
  12. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    UM has already responded to this point, but I will add my 2 paise, essentially saying the same thing as UM.

    India was colonised by the British: English was seen to be the marker of belonging to a social elite, and thus using English words became a fashion, and so on. However, that is not really the situation in modern India. Now English is everywhere: we go to English-medium schools, read English newspapers, and often we know the English word but we don't know the Hindi or Urdu word for it (esp. for technical words, as UM mentioned). In addition, English does have a much more extensive vocabulary than any other language in the world: when we can be precise, why to be blurry?

    There has never been any awareness of the kind to use an English word just to avoid saying a shuddh or Urdu word. People who use shuddh Hindi are proud of it; people who use heavily Persianized Hindi/Urdu are proud of it. People who use English words everywhere are proud of it. Languages in a colonised country are often "khichdi" (like what happens in Puerto Rico as well): we are all living with khichdis, some have cooked them well and others not so well. But everyone is happy with his or her own.

    For me, Shuddh Hindi is not some "nazi" movement: it's just another register of Hindi, which does give me pleasure when I hear it at times, simply because I like the "sounds". Similarly, there are many other Indians who don't use any shuddh variants themselves but who do like hearing shuddh Hindi now and then: simply because it is human tendency to love rarity, if expressed beautifully. If we were to talk only in poetry, then it would lose its charm. Poetry has its charm because it is NOT prose. In other words, poetry is valuable for it is rare and the not of everyday prose: it liberates.
     
  13. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    No, not every Sanskrit word is confined to shuddh Hindi. As I mentioned in post #2, some have been a part of common speech for a long, long time, including some of the ones you mentioned. However, suurya, for instance, is shuddh because the colloquial form is suuraj. Others only underwent minimal changes from Sanskrit to Hindi but have now been restored to their original Sanskrit form. For example, as Platts shows, the Sanskrit dhyaan was dhiyaan in Hindi.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2013
  14. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ I would say "suurya" to be high register Hindi, not shuddh as per definition given in post 5: simply because I don't think "suurya" came about post some promotion of Sanskrit-derived Hindi. It was always there, but not colloquial: as you say, the colloquial word has been "suuraj" (also a common male name). It is important to distinguish between high-register Hindi that has always existed and the "promoted" so-called shuddh Hindi, IMO, at least for the sake of this argument.

    Meanwhile, I don't know where did Platts base his data on, but in places like Bihar and eastern UP, even today you find "dhiyaan": however, the Hindi word was "dhyaan" always, I believe, as the word is one of those belonging to Hindu philosophy ("darshan"), and most of those words remained intact.
     
  15. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    yogaa??? Is it Hindi? What does it mean?
     
  16. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
  17. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    Be reassured that I know very much about S يوگ योग yoga, vulg. yog, jog, very well, but not योगा yogaa, which seems as if it were a ''re-borrowing'' from English.
     
  18. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ It has nothing to do with English. The colloquial pronunciation has always been "yogaa" for meditation and "yog" for union. Just like "dev" becomes "devaa" as well: it's a usual habit to add "aa" at the end for several words.
     
  19. tonyspeed Senior Member

    JA- English & Creole
    In the Prakrit languages of North India y tends to become j, conjuncts tended to be broken, and the terminating 'a' was demphasized. So that suurya -> suurayaa -> suuray --> suuraj.

    This y->j information is found in "Grammar of the Hindi Language" by Samuel Kellogg.

    Suurya is Sanskrit full-stop. We have adopted it into Hindi as an alternative to the colloquial form.


    As far as Shuddh goes, I have already explained by position that no one word is shuddh. Shuddh can only be described as an overall kind of speech, where the intention is to eradicate all Persian, (sometimes) English and (sometimes) Prakrit forms.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2013
  20. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    I haven't seen yogaa listed in any Hindi dictionary; only yog. I think yogaa would just be the Anglicized way of saying it, similar to kaarmaa instead of karm. devaa is derived from devataa.
     
  21. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    Yesterday I read a Hindi short story written by Pandey Bechan Sharma 'Ugra'. This author is the very same person from whose work a particular sentence became the topic of discussion in one of the threads initiated by our PG SaaHib. The kind of language employed by the author baffled native Hindi speakers to such an extent that ''birds'' were perceived to be ''Brahmins''! Interested parties can access this thread through this link: Hindi: द्विजगण का कलरव श्रवण करना ही रुचता था। *

    The short story is entitled ''खुदाराम KhudaRam'' - a very meaningful title, by the way!
    It spans only 13 pages. You can read the whole text here (23 Hindi kahaaniyaaN –Saahitya Academy (Academy of Literature).On a couple of pages I found a number of references to the recently discussed threads. For your reading pleasure, I am going to post appropriate quotations.

    Please consider how the Hindi epithet ''shuddh Hindii'', which is after all not English but Hindi, is used in a Hindi literary text and what its context is.

    ‘‘कहो मियाँ इनायत अली, आज इधर कैसे ?’’
    ‘‘आप ही की सेवा में कुछ निवेदन करने आया हूँ।’’
    शर्माजी ने चश्मा उतार लिया। उसे कुरते के कोने से साफ़ करने के बाद पुनः नाक पर चढ़ाते-चढ़ाते बोले-
    ‘‘भाई, इनायत, बड़ी शुद्ध हिन्दी बोलते हो ?’’
    ‘‘जी हाँ, शर्माजी, मैं बहुत शुद्ध हिन्दी बोल सकता हूँ इसका कारण यही है कि मेरी नसों में बहुत शुद्ध हिन्दू रक्त बह रहा है। समाज ने ज़बर्दस्ती मेरे पिता को मुसलमान होने के लिए विवश किया, नहीं तो आज मैं भी उतना ही हिन्दू होता जितने आप या कोई भी दूसरा हिन्दुत्व का अभिमानी। ख़ैर मुझे आपसे कुछ कहना है....!’’
    ‘‘कहिए, क्या आज्ञा है ?’’
    ‘‘मैं पुनः हिन्दू होना चाहता हूँ ।’’

    Transliteration:

    ''kaho miyaaN Inaayat Alii, aaj idhar kaise?''
    ''aaphii kii sevaa meN kuchh nivedan karne aayaa huuN''
    Sharmaajii ne chashmaa utaar liyaa. use kurte ke kone se saaf karne ke baad punah: naak par chaRhaate-chaRhaate bole-
    ''bhaaii, Inaayat, baRii shuddh hindii bolte ho?''
    ''jii haaN Sharmaajii, maiN bahut shuddh hindii bol saktaa huuN. iskaa kaaraNR yahii hai ki merii nasoN meN bahut shuddh hinduu rakt bah rahaa hai. samaaj ne zabardastii mere pitaa ko musalmaan hone ke lie vivash kiyaa, nahiiN to aaj maiN bhii utnaa hii hinduu hotaa jitne aap yaa koii bhii duusraa hindutva kaa abhimaanii. xair, mujhe aapse kuchh kahnaa hai...!''
    ''kahie, kyaa aagyaa hai?''
    ''maiN punah: hinduu honaa chaahtaa huuN''.
    ****************************************************

    एक महाशय बोले-‘‘ऋषि दयानन्द की किरपा होगी तो हमारे वे सब बिछड़े भाई एक न एक दिन फिर अपने आर्य धरम में चले आयेंगे। इन्हें ज़रूर शुद्ध कीजिए।’’
    ek mahaashay bole- ''riSHi dayaanand kii kirpaa hogii to hamaare ve sab bichhRe bhaaii ek na ek din phir apne aarya dharam meN chale aayeNge. inheN zaruur shuddh kiijie.

    *(you can see that the word ruchi which was the incentive to create this thread can be found here in the form of a verb ruchnaa).


    (Background: Inayat Ali is a second-generation Muslim whose father, a Hindu, was deemed ''mlechchh'' and forced by his community to renounce his faith and embrace Islam as a consequence of him having a Muslim lady servant who cooked his food and brought water from a well. Now his son wishes to convert to Hinduism.)
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2013
  22. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ The verb "ruchnaa" isn't being discussed here, anyway: that's a word hardly used, shuddh or non-shuddh, even in literature, and almost never in speech. Your objectives are suspect, marrish.
     
  23. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    How did you arrive at your full stops and the conclusion that it is not Hindi? I wonder about those people bearing very common names like "Surya Pratap": do their acquaintances go to Sanskrit scholars to find out the meaning of their names...
     
  24. tonyspeed Senior Member

    JA- English & Creole

    But such names are very universal across various language communities. Case in point "Aishwariya". Her name is definitely not intended to be Hindi, but it is Sanskrit.
     
  25. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ But "aishwary" is a very commonly used word, too! "veh aajkal baRa aishwary meN jee rahaa hai" is a very common phrase: the Hindi meaning is more "luxury" rather than "wealth". Just because something comes from Sanskrit does not mean that it is outdated or used only after some shuddhikaran movement or whatsoever: words like "aishwary" and "sury" have been part of the culture and spoken language since a long time. The existence of a colloquial register (e.g., "suraj" for sun, or "chaand" for "chandr"/moon) does not mean the former weren't used/comprehended/recognised.

    Most Hindu first names, with a very few exceptions, are commonly understood and used words in Hindi.
     
  26. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    "yogaa" is the usual pronunciation, Wolverine; dictionaries will of course only give "yog" - another instance of TS's book vs. spoken. There are plenty of both audio and written examples on the Net of "yogaa". For the sake of completeness:

    This link has its own perspective on calling "yog" as "yogaa" - I don't agree with the author, but what it does establish is the widespread practice of the "yogaa" pronunciation (note that in the sense of "union", the pron. remains "yog").
     
  27. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    OK, I agree that it is hardly ever used. It was just a footnote information which I gave and you reacted only to this while the body of my post remains unanswered! Can you offer your opinion with regard to my stance? Are my objectives suspect when I try to answer the question ''what is shuddh'' because you happen to have focused on ''ruchnaa''? I don't know about your motives behind chosing not to answer my post and side-tracking the discussion to ''ruchnaa'' but, most certainly my contributions to the thread are as genuine as they come.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2013
  28. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    I don't agree with your explanation. I know yoga is the Sanskrit pronunciation but ''yogaa'' is wrong as it is a re-borrowing from English, as far as I know. You mentioned audio examples. Can you provide a few?
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2013
  29. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    They might certainly be genuine but don't always make sense or try to take the discussion off-topic. I couldn't make much sense of your remaining post: you are quoting a certain Hindi prose piece which has the words "shuddh Hindi" in it ... so? At the most, you are trying to claim that those who espouse Hindutva go for "shuddh" Hindi: ok, that is nothing new. That does not make "shuddh Hindi" some kind of jaundiced thing, just because the Hindutva people are using it, just as swastik is not cast out simply because Hitler used it wrongly.

    We are trying to determine "what's shuddh", to remind you of the discussion. Does this story help? I don't think so. You think so? Ok, then explain why.
     
  30. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    ^I can only waste my time to explain the obvious after you have responded to my request for audio examples for ''yogaa'' in Hindi.
     
  31. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ Maybe you don't know, marrish, but I've rarely access to YouTube (something that most other forum members know). You can watch the numerous TV channels of India: news, etc., and I am sure you will find many examples of "yogaa" in them.

    Meanwhile, you have in fact wasted the time of others in this thread so far, having not provided anything concrete to say, but rather now petulantly trying to make it even some "yogaa"-centric discussion.
     
  32. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Here is how the word "shuddh" and "shuddh Hindi" have been defined by one of the members of this Forum. That thread is "closed awaiting moderation" whenever PG SaaHib gets a moment!

    "Speaking for myself, I've no idea what such a term could mean with respect to any living language. Any "shuddh" language sounds obnoxious to me! A language keeps taking words from here and there, and that is how it lives and that is how it manifests that it is still breathing: different people and different communities will have different registers and different ways of expression, and the more they are the richer the language is."

    If some of the members could have found a Sanskrit-derived word for "saabun," in one of your threads, QP, they would call it "shuddh" Hindi; that's simply my idea of the term. Though in such cases it would more be unnatural or obsolete or pretentious (depends!) Hindi for me!"
     
  33. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ You are quoting me, but adding nothing new. All the frequenters on this forum know that I do not favour this rigid divide between Urdu and Hindi that the likes of you prefer - the higher registers of both languages are quite divorced from each other, but the normal spoken language - which can also be called Hindustani (not at all synonymous with Urdu) - by most Indians and Pakistanis (with of course variances in word choices) isn't so ... divided by the forward slash marks that marrish would have us believe.

    The term "shuddh" is something that I don't recognise, and I can only laugh as always at all these FWC stories. The Indian government may write things in some unnatural fashion, but we hardly care; however, when people, apparently those who haven't had the chance of interacting with the length and breadth of India, begin thinking that words like "ruchi" or "aishwary" got into fashion only post FWC, there's a serious misinformation campaign going on.
     
  34. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Another explanation of what constitutes "shuddh".
     
  35. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    23/09/11 and 25/11/2011
    26/10/2012
    22/03/2013

    Well, can anyone make a head or tail of this?

    1) The writer is not aware what this term (shuddh) could mean with respect to any living language. In fact he finds the very idea of shuddh "obnoxious"!

    2) With regard to Hindi, it is that variety of language in which one would expect to find Sanskrit equivalents of words of Arabic and Persian origins (e.g a Sanskrit equivalent of saabun)

    3) The writer often counts himself as a "shuddh Hindi" speaker, shuddh Hindi being sacrosanct to Hindi speakers and is a "beautiful, poetic and elegant language".

    4) The writer does not recognise the term "shuddh" at all!
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  36. greatbear Senior Member

    India
    India - Hindi & English
    ^ Ever thought of entering politics? Or, worse, journalism, where you will have the utmost liberty to misquote people out of context, dear QP? If not, you should, right now!

    What you have forgotten, my dear QP, is that in all the quotes you have assembled from me, so painstakingly (I hope you are not doing a thesis on me, or on TS for that matter), the word "shuddh" is in scare quotes always. People who are a part of this forum understand what I was saying where, just as people do understand now your brainwashing tactics and your lack of respect to almost all the members on this forum, shown not least by way of indirect barbs, unnecessary threads created just for the sake of trying to humiliate someone, and lack of answering whenever you don't have an answer.
     
  37. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Here is a sample of "shuddh Hindi" from Urdu, Hindi aur Hindustani by Prem Chand (1934). It has been transcribed into Roman by Rajiv Chakravarti SaaHib.

    "desh meiN aise aadmiyoN ki sankhyaa kam naheeN hai jo Urdu aur Hindi ki alag alag aur svatantr unnati aur vikaas ke maarg meiN baadhak naheeN hona chaahte. unhoN ne yeh maan liya hai k. aarambh meiN in donoN ke svaroopoN meiN chaahe jo kuchch ektaa aur samaantaa rahi ho, lekin phir bhi is samay donoN ki donoN jis raaste par jaa rahi haiN, use dekhte hue in donoN meiN mel aur ektaa honaa asambhav hi hai. pratyek bhaashaa ki ek praakr_tik pravr_tti hoti hai. Urdu kaa Faarsi aur Arabi ke saath svaabhaavik sambandh hai. unki yeh pravr_tti ham kisi shakti se rok naheeN sake. phir in donoN ko aapas meiN milaane ka prayatn kar ke ham kyoN vyarth in donoN ko haani pahuNchaaveN?

    yadi Urdu aur hindi donoN apne aapko apne janm_sthaan aur prachaar kshetr tak hi parimit rakheN to hameN inki vr_ddhi aur vikaas ke sambandh meiN koi aapatti na ho. Banglaa, Marathi, Gujarati, Tamil, Telgu* aur KannaD* aadi praanteey bhaashaaoN ke sambandh meiN hameN kisi prakaarki chinta naheeN hai. unheN adhikaar hai k. ve apne andar chaahe jitni Sanskr_t, arabi yaa Latin aadi bharti chaleN. un bhashaaoN ke lekhak aadi svayaM hi is baat ka nirNay kar sakte haiN; parantu Urdu aur Hindi ki baat in sab se alag hai. yahaaN to donoN ko Bhaaratvarsh ki raashTreey bhaashaa kahlaane ka daava karti haiN. parantu ve apne vyaktigat roop meiN raashTreey aavashshyaktaaoN kee poorti naheeN kar sakeeN aur isi lilye saNyakt roop meiN svayaM hi unkaa saNyog aur mel aarambh ho gayaa. aur donoN ka voh sam_milit svaroop utpann ho gaya jise ham bahut Theek taur par Hindustaani zabaan kahte haiN. vaastavik baat to yeh hai k. Bhaaratvarsh ki raashTreey bhaashaa na to voh Urdu hi ho sakti hai jo Arabi aur Farsi ke aprachalit tathaa kaThin shabdoN ke bhaar se ladi rahti hai aur na voh Hindi hi ho sakti hai jo Sanskr_t ke kaThin shabdoN se ladi hui hoti hai. yadi in donoN bhaashaaoN ke paksh_paati aur samarthak aamne-saame khaRe ho kar apni saahityik bhaashaaoN meiN baateN kareN to shaayad ek doosre ka kuchch bhi matlab na samajh sakeN. hamaari raashTreey bhaasha to vohi ho sakti hai jis ka aadhaar sarva-saamaanya bodh_gamyata ho - jise sab log sahaj meiN samajh sakeN. voh is baat ki kyoN parvaah karne lagi(!) k. amuk shabd is liye chhoR diya jaana chaahiye k. voh Faarsi, Arabi athvaa Sanskr_t ka hai? voh to keval yeh maandaND apne saamne rakhti hai k.jan_saadhaaraN yeh shabd samajh sakte haiN yaa naheeN? yaa jan_saadhaaraN meiN Hindu, Musalmaan, Punjaabi, Bangaali, MaharaasTreey aur Gujarati sabhi sam_milit haiN. yadi koi shabd yaa muhaavra yaa paaribhaashik shabd jan_saadhaaraN meiN prachalit hai to phir voh is baat ki parvaah naheeN karti k. voh kahaaN se niklaa hai aur kahaaN se aaya hai. aur yehi Hindustaani hai. aur jis prakaar angrezoN ki bhaashaa Angrezi, Jaapaan ki bhaashaa Jaapaani, Iran ki Irani aur Cheen ki Cheeni hai, usi prakaar Hindustaan ki raashTreey bhaashaa ko isi taur par Hindustaani na kah kar keval Hind kaheN to iski bhaashaa Hindi kah sakte haiN. lekin yahaaN ki bhaashaa ko Urdu to kisi prakaar kahaa hi naheeN jaa sakta, jab tak ham Hindustaan ko Urdustaan na kahne lageN, jo ab kisi prakaar sambhav hi naheeN hai. praacheen kaal ke log yahaaN ki bhaashaa ko Hindi hi kahte the."
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  38. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    See Woveine9's # Posts 80 and 82 in "Origins of the Division" thread.

    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2140277&page=4&highlight=Origins+of+the+Division
     
  39. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    One more for Post 35. From the thread "Good Day Good night", in reply to post 12 (which I have quoted in Post 35 of this thread), I add..
    And this is the reply (contained in Post 67 of the "Best way to learn Hindustani thread".

    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1586560&page=4
    Context for all quotes in Post 35 can easily be obtained by typing a small section from it in the search field. If this proves difficult for any one, I can help in posting links to threads with post numbers.
     
  40. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    ^ The threads and the concerned posts can be easily consulted by clicking on the button next to the poster's name inside the quotes.
     
  41. Chhaatr Senior Member

    Hindi
    "Ruchii", "lagbhag" etc are definitely not shuddh Hindi but Hindi in the letters that you receive from Govt Depts and what you find on their websites certainly is. I'm irritated (I won't say ashamed) to admit I don't understand it even though I'm a native speaker who has written three exams of 3 hrs each in this subject in my 12th standard!
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  42. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    It's ironic that Premchand appears to be in favor of Hindustani, yet is writing in a nearly shuddh Hindi.
     
  43. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Extremely ironic, considering that he was one of the top Urdu short story and novel writers before he turned his hand to Hindi. I would need a dictionary for a good number of words used by him in this short piece.
     
  44. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    In my opinion there is no irony whatsoever because Premchand, being an accomplished writer and having both best Urdu and Modern Standard Hindi at his disposal, could chose which language he used for a particular piece. If the aim of writing was the ideas to be read and understood by a specific kind of readers, the choice of language he did, according to the developments at that time, doesn't appear to be questionable.
     
  45. jakubisek Junior Member

    Czechia
    Czech
    If you mean vaa used as "or", that is pure (śuddh :) Sanskrit
     
  46. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    I'm sure he doesn't. He means va as ''aur'' not ''or''- similar, aren't they?. This is shuddh faarsii.

    You might find this thread interesting: Hindi: व
     
  47. jakubisek Junior Member

    Czechia
    Czech
    I see! Stupid me ... Rather shuddh Arabic, then :), if we should be really shuddh (also similar, aren¨t they :) )
     
  48. Wolverine9 Senior Member

    American English
    va = Arabic; -o- = Farsi (MP ud)
     
  49. Qureshpor Senior Member

    Punjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
  50. marrish

    marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    A rather brief post. I don't know how to answer. Arabic is wa by the way and I don't agree. Persian and Urdu and Hindi can also be pronounced as ''va''. See the posts in the attached thread. Perhaps it is better not to prolong this thread and post in the thread on topic instead.

    Afghan speakers of Persian articulate it as ''wa''.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2013

Share This Page