^ As far as I know this is grammatically sound. The "hii" particle employed to provide emphasis is supposed come after the subjectt and before the postposition.
e.g vuh > us with a postposition
us + hii + se
usii se puuchho.................NOT us se hii puuchho.
Of course "hii" can be "displaced" if the need arises to shift the emphasis elsewhere.
Cilquiestsuens SaaHib, giving this matter a little more thought, you are correct and I am wrong with regard to "ne" NOT being a postposition! Apologies.But ne is not a postposition; it is an ergative particle that cannot be compared to se and that is not usually separated from the verb...[..]
Cilquiestsuens SaaHib, giving this matter a little more thought, you are correct and I am wrong with regard to "ne" NOT being a postposition! Apologies.
Regarding the rest, "maiN hii ne" does sound unusual compared with "maiN ne hii" but I think it is not wrong. On the contrary, I believe it is more accurate from a grammatical perspective with "hii" following the subject immediately as opposed to it following "ne".
maiN + ne > maiN ne (NOT mujh ne)...Therefore this "proves" that "ne" is not a postposition
vuh + ne > vuh ne ? NO! us ne! Here it seems to have the postposition effect. What's going on?
marrish SaaHib, I hope other Punjabi speakers will confirm this. In Punjabi, we would n't use "ne" in this sentence.
kyuuN kih maiN-ii e farmaayaa e.
It does not sound like a genuine Punjabi sentence to me. But as they say, to err is human!It's again from some kind of a Christian site in East Punjabi :ਮੈਂ ਹੀ ਨੇ ਤੁਹਾਨੂ ਘੁੱਪ ਹਨੇਰੇ ਵਿੱਚੋਂ ਬਾਹਰ ਕੱਢਿਆ. (maiN hii ne tuhaanuuN k_ùpp hanère vichoN báá_hr káD_hiyaa)Apart from this I couldn't find anything similar.
I think this should clarify your unease about this sentence. Here Shamsur Rahman Faruqi is talking about Maulana Hasrat Mohani's criticism about many faults that crop up in poetry (Urdu).
jise chaahe tuu vuh mahiiN kyoN hu'ii