Hindi: chhoR diyaa jaae

[MonsieurGonzalito]

Friends,

In a Hindi child story about some eskimo (inuit) people, a bear saves three hunters from drowning. Later on, when these people are part of a hunting party that stumbles upon that same bear, they convince their companions to let it go.
The phrase used is:

tiinoN ne us_ke saathiyoN se aagrah kiyaa ki(h) us_ko chhoR diyaa jaae

My question is: what is the verbal tense of chhoR diyaa jaae? Specifically, what is the purpose of jaae in that construction?

[Youtube _hZjt9T2dgk at 1:58]

Thanks in advance for any answer.

 

[Alexu]

"jaae" - 3rd person singular subjunctive mood. Combination [simple perfect participle + "jaae"] expresses the intention, the desire to implement some action. Often used when the speaker is not completely sure that the action will be implemented.

Soc rahaa huuN ki un se mil liyaa jaae. - I'm thinking of meeting him.
Calo kahiiN ghuum aayaa jaae. - Let's go for a walk somewhere.
Calo mere saath kahiiN baahar niklaa jaae. - Come with me to go somewhere.
Ham log aslii pikcar dekh sakte haiN agar abhii cal diyaa jaae. - We can watch a good movie if we go out now.

- Ab kyaa ho? - Ab soyaa jaae. - Now what? - Now sleep. (I can't find an exact English translation for this example 😗)

 

[MonsieurGonzalito]

Both the participle and jaae are invariably singular, as your examples seem to imply, independently of the number of the person(s) involved?
i.e. it is never jaaeN?

 

[Alexu]

Both the participle and jaae are invariably singular, as your examples seem to imply, independently of the number of the person(s) involved?
i.e. it is never jaaeN?

Most likely - yes. In any case, I did not meet other forms.

 

[MonsieurGonzalito]

I was wondering if the English expression " ... go ahead and ..." would be an idiomatic enough approximation:

tiinoN ne us_ke saathiyoN se aagrah kiyaa ki(h) us_ko chhoR diyaa jaae
"The three of them insisted to their companions that they should go ahead and let him go."

 

[littlepond]

I was wondering if the English expression " ... go ahead and ..." would be an idiomatic enough approximation:

tiinoN ne us_ke saathiyoN se aagrah kiyaa ki(h) us_ko chhoR diyaa jaae
"The three of them insisted to their companions that they should go ahead and let him go."

Are the three hungers requesting the bear's companions (which would be odd)? Otherwise, it should be "teenoN ne apne saathiyoN se ..."

And there is no "go ahead" of English here from any stretch of imagination.

Currently, your sentence means "All the three requested the bear's companions to let the bear go."

 

[aevynn]

My question is: what is the verbal tense of chhoR diyaa jaae?

It's the subjunctive of the passive chhoR diyaa jaanaa (to be released) of the compound verb chhoR denaa (to release), so the sentence is literally something like "... requested that he/it be released."

i.e. it is never jaaeN?

As a passive, the construction will have plural agreement in the usual times: eg, kI jaanvar chhoR di'e jaa'eN would mean "... that the animals be released."

 

[Pokeflute]

Both the participle and jaae are invariably singular, as your examples seem to imply, independently of the number of the person(s) involved?
i.e. it is never jaaeN?

My understanding is “usko” in the original passage refers to the bear.

I believe (aevynn ji or Littlepond ji) please correct me if I’m incorrect) is that in the passive voice, human (or human-ish) patients take “ko” and singular agreement. Non-human / non-specific patients behave like @aevynn described

If I’m correct then you’d see

…ki ishaan ko choR diyaa jaae

…ki ishaan aur aaditya ko choR diyaa jaae

…ki pardaa giraa diyaa jaae

…ki parde giraa diye jaaeN

 

[Alexu]

It's the subjunctive of the passive chhoR diyaa jaanaa (to be released) of the compound verb chhoR denaa (to release), so the sentence is literally something like "... requested that he/it be released."


As a passive, the construction will have plural agreement in the usual times: eg, kI jaanvar chhoR di'e jaa'eN would mean "... that the animals be released."

Hmm... what about intransitive verbs?

 

[aevynn]

I believe (aevynn ji or Littlepond ji) please correct me if I’m incorrect) is that in the passive voice, human (or human-ish) patients take “ko” and singular agreement. Non-human / non-specific patients behave like @aevynn described

I think it's about some combination of human-ness and specificity -- in fact, the same combination that one observes in HU's "differential object marking." So, for example, if one takes a generic noun referring to a human, one has two possible passive sentences: laRkaa chhoR diyaa jaa'e might be something like "a/the boy should be released" while laRke ko chhoR diyaa jaa'e might be something like "the specific boy that we're talking about should be released."

what about intransitive verbs?

UH doesn't forbid passive morphology on intransitive verbs (eg, the "incapacitative" construction witnessed in sentences like mujh_se itne shor meN soyaa nahiiN jaataa), so I think it's fine to still say that a construction of the form (intransitive perfective participle) + jaa'e is passive subjunctive morphology. It can have the type of idiomatic meaning that you've described in #2 (though not all of those sentences sound completely natural to me).

 

[Pokeflute]

I think it's about some combination of human-ness and specificity -- in fact, the same combination that one observes in HU's "differential object marking." So, for example, if one takes a generic noun referring to a human, one has two possible passive sentences: laRkaa chhoR diyaa jaa'e might be something like "a/the boy should be released" while laRke ko chhoR diyaa jaa'e might be something like "the specific boy that we're talking about should be released."

Makes sense - I'd assumed it was the same general trend of "ko" blocking ergative alignment in other forms as well (e.g. "maiNe laRkii ko dekhaa")

EDIT: in both cases the choice of using "ko" is the same, and its effect on the verb's agreement is the same as well

 

[aevynn]

its effect on the verb's agreement is the same as well

Yep. A relevant minimal pair to contrast would be laRke chhoR di'e jaa'eN vs laRkoN ko chhoR diyaa jaa'e.

 

[MonsieurGonzalito]

Are the three hungers requesting the bear's companions (which would be odd)? Otherwise, it should be "teenoN ne apne saathiyoN se ..."

I am sorry, it was tiinoN ne apne saathiyoN se ...

while laRke ko chhoR diyaa jaa'e might be something like "the specific boy that we're talking about should be released."

This is consistent with the story, as they are likeky to insisit it is a very specific, one-off circumstance (they can't go on forgiving bears forever).

laRke chhoR di'e jaa'eN vs laRkoN ko chhoR diyaa jaa'e.

So, just to round up my understanding of this: any passive voice can take a sufficiently animated/personal object with ko, or only those passive voices that at the same time are expressing "mild compulsion" (I thought an infinitive was used in those cases)?

 

[aevynn]

any passive voice can take a sufficiently animated/personal object with ko

Or "sufficiently specific," but yes, I think so. The difference between the minimal pair of #12 (or #10) feels to me to be about specificity -- there's no added sense of "mild compulsion" if one marks the patient with ko.

 

[MonsieurGonzalito]

With this new knowledge, now I am paying attention to every Hindi I hear, in order to detect this [passive] + [ko subject] construction.

Would these be other valid examples? (It is complaining about the Tihar jail, which was severely overcrowded).

- mujhe dilli kii badnaam tihaaR jel kaa inspaikTor janral banayaa gayaa hai.
- jahaaN do hazaar paaNch sau qaidiyoN kii jagah thii, vahaaN das hazaar se bhii zyaadaa logoN ko DhuuNs kar rakhaa gayaa thaa


[EDIT: adding a couple of follow-up questions]
BTW, what is DhuuNs ढूंस? It seems to be used on contexts of people crowded, packed, etc.
BTW II: the speaker is a woman, so it is banayaa gayaa because verb agreement is "locked" by the implicit "ko" in "mujhe", or because "inspector general" lends masculinity to the position (hence, kaa inspaikTor)?.

 

[Pokeflute]

धूसना means to jam or to stuff in, as does ठूँसना

These usages would fit in my mind. For [1] I’d expect the verb to agree with “inspector general” which I’m assuming here is a (masculine) title

EDIT: I was wrong; see correction below

 

[aevynn]

what is DhuuNs ढूंस?

Maybe a variant of ThuuNsnaa or Thuusnaa (cf. P, M, SS, UL, ...).

Would these be other valid examples? (It is complaining about the Tihar jail, which was severely overcrowded).

the speaker is a woman, so it is banayaa gayaa because verb agreement is "locked" by the implicit "ko" in "mujhe"

Yes and yes.

For [1] I’d expect the verb to agree with “inspector general” which I’m assuming here is a (masculine) title

I don't think so. There would be default-masculine agreement even when the object complement is feminine. For example, one would also say mujhe naukraanii banaayaa gayaa hai.

 

[Pokeflute]

Oh interesting. I was going to ask about something like

sitaa ko uski sahelii samjhaayaa gayaa / samjhaaii gayii

But the naukraani example also answers that question. Interesting! Thanks for the correction (and apologies for the misinformation)

 

[littlepond]

sitaa ko uski sahelii samjhaayaa gayaa / samjhaaii gayii

What does this sentence mean, though?

 

[Pokeflute]

Sita was considered (Radhika’s) friend (by others)

I was trying to come up with a contrived sentence with a clearly feminine word (eg sahelii, abhinetrii, etc) to test @MonsieurGonzalito ’s question of why inspector general was masculine.

@aevynn ’s example with naukraanii answered my question though

 

[aevynn]

Sita was considered (Radhika’s) friend (by others)

sitaa ko uski sahelii samjhaayaa gayaa

samjhaa (but using the passive voice for this feels a little clunky...)

 

[Alexu]

samjhaa (but using the passive voice for this feels a little clunky...)

Maybe here it's better to put "samajhnaa" in the 3rd person plural active voice🙄

 

[littlepond]

Sita was considered (Radhika’s) friend (by others)

Usage of verb "samajhnaa" is not ideal then (unless it is active voice). Rather, "sitaa raadhikaa kii dost maanii jaa rahii thii" or "sitaa ko raadhikaa kaa dost manaa jaa rahaa thaa." But, like @aevynn jii said, passive is weird here. In active, you can use "samajhnaa": "ve/vo(h) sitaa ko raadhikaa kaa dost samajh/maan rahe the."