Urdu: زبانِ خامہ کی چند خامیاں – adj. f. in izāfat?

[marrish]

Hi,

In a book on correct Urdu spelling and enunciation (اصلاحِ تلفظ و املا by Talib al-Hashmi, Lahore 2001), on p. 81 begins a chapter titled
" زبانِ خامہ کی چند عام خامیاں /zabaan-e-xaamah kii chand xaamiyaaN" which caught my attention and I'm wondering about the soundness of the izaafat زبانِ خامہ. /zabaan-e-xaamah/.

Even though this izaafat construction is acquired from the Persian language, yet the latter having basically no grammatical gender doesn't seem to have been behind this, does it.

What in your view should be the analysis and translation of "زبانِ خامہ" zabaan-e-xaamah?
Are you familiar with the correct usage of feminine forms of adjectives in izāfat constructions?

----
PS An unrelated word خامہ /xaamah/ which is a masculine noun, is the topic of this thread

****
(After an edit) In the alternative, does it perhaps amount to "written language" and the second element of the izaafat compound happens to be the very noun on which a thread is linked to in the post-scriptum?

****
Or does xaamah relate to an even less likely kind of zabaan, as mentioned below ?

یا رب ! میرے خامے کو زباں دے
(منقار ہزار داستاں دے (نسیم دہلوی

Spoiler: Transliteration

yaa rab! mere xaame ko zabaaN de
minqaar—e—hazaar~ daastaaN de
(panDit dayaashaNkar nasiim dihlavii)

 

[Alfaaz]

زُبان خامَہ (کس اضا (---فت م) امث

قلم کا وہ حصہ جس میں شگاف دیتے ہیں ، قلم کی نوک.

اسرار نہ یاں کے لکھنے میں آویں
گو دونوں زبانِ خامہ مل جائیں

(۱۸۸۳ ، کلیاتِ نعت ، محسن ، ۱۴۴).

​

 

[Alfaaz]

Are you familiar with the correct usage of feminine forms of adjectives in izāfat constructions?

Are you inquiring about examples like the following?

• عدالت عظمیٰ/عالیہ/خفیفہ
• نفس امارہ، نفس ناطقہ، وغیرہ
• وغیرہ

 

[Qureshpor]

If I have understood your question correctly, marrish SaaHib....

You are assuming that خامہ is a feminine noun, I think.

This is not true. خامہ is a Persian word for "pen" that has been replaced by قلم leaving خامہ to die a slow death.

زبانِ خامہ کی چند عام خامیاں

A few common faults (found in) language of pen = A few common faults in the written language

 

[marrish]

زُبان خامَہ (کس اضا (---فت م) امث
قلم کا وہ حصہ جس میں شگاف دیتے ہیں ، قلم کی نوک.
اسرار نہ یاں کے لکھنے میں آویں
گو دونوں زبانِ خامہ مل جائیں
(۱۸۸۳ ، کلیاتِ نعت ، محسن ، ۱۴۴).

Or does xaamah relate to an even less likely kind of zabaan, as mentioned below ?
یا رب ! میرے خامے کو زباں دے
(منقار ہزار داستاں دے (نسیم دہلوی

Thanks a lot, it didn't occur to me there'd be an entry for the whole expression so I didn't look it up in the Urdu luGhat (UL). Alfaaz SaaHib, you seem to be saying that the UL definition corresponds to the words "zabaan-e-xaamah" from the OP sample, aren't you?

Are you inquiring about examples like the following?

• عدالت عظمیٰ/عالیہ/خفیفہ
• نفس امارہ، نفس ناطقہ، وغیرہ
• وغیرہ

Yes, and then, under وغیرہ ● I'm also wondering whether any Persian adjectives (or Persian nouns, as the 1st element, for that matter) are employed in types of izaafat such as the ones you were kind enough to come forward with.

If I have understood your question correctly, marrish SaaHib....

You are assuming that خامہ is a feminine noun, I think.

This is not true. خامہ is a Persian word for "pen" that has been replaced by قلم leaving خامہ to die a slow death.

زبانِ خامہ کی چند عام خامیاں

A few common faults (found in) language of pen = A few common faults in the written language

Almost there, Qureshpor SaaHib, as a matter of fact a feminine [noun] adjective is my take . Thank you for sharing your ideas by translating the OP.

 

[Qureshpor]

Pardon my dumbness marrish SaaHib. Are you suggesting that خامہ is a feminine noun in Urdu?

 

[marrish]

No, QP SaaHib, I typed a wrong wowrd. I meant 'adjective' but was looking at your 'noun'. Now I've adjusted it.

 

[Qureshpor]

No, QP SaaHib, I typed a wrong wowrd. I meant 'adjective' but was looking at your 'noun'. Now I've adjusted it.

I don't quite follow. Are you hinting at کچّی زبان؟

 

[marrish]

No wonder you think you can't follow, Qureshpor SaaHib: my understanding was: it's a perplexing and dubious usage of the adjective خام turned خامہ to show feminine agreement with زبان and I thought that the author was to blame for an overkill Still I haven't made up my mind yet whether the phrase is alright or not.

 

[Qureshpor]

No wonder you think you can't follow, Qureshpor SaaHib: my understanding was: it's a perplexing and dubious usage of the adjective خام turned خامہ to show feminine agreement with زبان and I thought that the author was to blame for an overkill Still I haven't made up my mind yet whether the phrase is alright or not.

Well, to mind there are two possibilities.

1. The word indeed is خامہ implying a pen.

2. It's a typo for عامّہ

 

[Alfaaz]

Thanks a lot, it didn't occur to me there'd be an entry for the whole expression so I didn't look it up in the Urdu luGhat (UL). Alfaaz SaaHib, you seem to be saying that the UL definition corresponds to the words "zabaan-e-xaamah" from the OP sample, aren't you?

The meaning listed in Urdu Lughat could apply to the quoted couplet, but most likely not to the title you are referring to. Please excuse the misunderstanding. (Post #3 wasn't relevant to the topic either.)

my understanding was: it's a perplexing and dubious usage of the adjective خام turned خامہ to show feminine agreement with زبان and I thought that the author was to blame for an overkill Still I haven't made up my mind yet whether the phrase is alright or not.

After rereading your opening post and seeing your conversation with Qureshpor SaaHib, it is clear that you were pointing out the (*potentially) incorrect formation of xaamah on the pattern of Arabic feminine words with taa marbuuta and that the piece providing guidance on correct Urdu spelling might require اصلاح itself...!

Other examples of feminine forms made (*incorrectly?!) from Persian-origin words: گلوکارہ، اداکارہ، شاہینہ، وغیرہ.

* In some cases, the logic is used that once a word entered Urdu, it became an Urdu word so any alteration shouldn't be considered incorrect. In other cases, references of the language of origin are given and it is suggested that a formation should be considered incorrect and shouldn't be used. This contrast is seen in a few entries of the work you quoted in this thread as well as in other works about اصلاح و تصحیح زبان.