Urdu: Maine

Alfaaz

Senior Member
English
^ (Edit: Read your post after posting!)
but I can't imagine myself speaking Punjabi like this.
So does that mean that the example above was wrong...and the quote below was a sarcastic remark.....?
:) Why, mukarramii, maiN nuuN lai chal would be perfectly good Punjabi!
So does that mean that nuuN isn't used at all, or just wouldn't be used in "mainnu othe jaane e" for "mujhe wahaaN jaana hai".....?

Another example scenario, not sure, maybe it is a different kind of sentence/word usage:


Punajbi:
Son: maiNRuu otthe jaaNR de maaN! Oyeeeee Shaukeya (with a Sultaan Rahi accent)! kitthe rakhiiyaa ae mera gandaasa? Bandook kitthe ae? ( :mad: with thundering music in the background)
Mother: Main tennu Hukam deni aaN, Ruk jaa we paagLaa! ( :( :eek: with disturbing/depressing music in the background...Punjabi film mother style)

Urdu translation:
Son: Mujhe wahaaN jaane daiN/dijiye Ammi Huzuur! Are O Shaaauuukat (with a Dilip Kumar or Nadeem accent)! kahaaN rakhaa hai humara gandaasa? Banduuq kahaaN hai? (with violin crescendos in bckgd)
Mohter: Hum tumhein Hukm dete hain, ruk jaa'o bewuquf shakhs! (Sabiha Khanum style, as in Ladlaa, with sad high pitched flute music in the background)
 
  • Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    ^ Alfaaz, without resorting to the dramatics of cinema, "mainuuN" (mujhe) is perfectly fine in Punjabi but NOT "mainuuN jaaNRaa e".
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    Does Gujarati construct X ko and X ne?
    lcfatima SaaHibah, if I understand your question correctly, Gujarati ''ko'' is not the same as Urdu and Hindi ''ko''. In Gujarati, it is a pronoun, which in Hindi and Urdu is ''ko'ii''. As for ''ne'', your question is certainly not off-topic, because Urdu ''ko'' translates into Gujarati as ''ne''!

    A Gujarati dictionary describes ''ne'' as follows:

    termination of the accusative and dative cases, and of the possessive case of a noun used in conjunction with a noun in the instrumental or locative case; used at end of sentence or after verb in imperative mood in the sense of importunity, reality; with a verb in the interrogative mood it expresses importunity or affirmation.
    Urdu ''mujhe'' ---> Gujarati ''mane''.
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    So does that mean that the example above was wrong...and the quote below was a sarcastic remark.....?

    So does that mean that nuuN isn't used at all, or just wouldn't be used in "mainnu othe jaane e" for "mujhe wahaaN jaana hai".....?

    Another example scenario, not sure, maybe it is a different kind of sentence/word usage:

    As already explained by Qureshpor SaaHib, the first sentence you wrote is wrong. My comment referred to the first clause of your second sentence, which is correct. I don't understand where you managed to find sarcasm in that question of mine, I simply addressed QP SaaHib to say that not the whole of your text was wrong, indeed, the first clause of your second sentence was correct (although not related to the topic!).
     
    Last edited:

    Alfaaz

    Senior Member
    English
    ^ I still detect doubt! What is it that is not quite clear, Alfaaz ?
    I appreciate your asking; after discussing it with a few "pure Panjabi" speakers, I understand it now (and the problem above).

    maiN ne kal wahaaN se kitaab uThaa'ii (thi).
    maiN kal uthoN kitaab chuki (si).

    mujhe aaj wahaaN se kitaab uThaani hai.
    maiN ajj uthoN kitaab chukni ae.

    mujhe kaam karne ke liye khaamoshi chahiye.
    mainuN kam karan aaste/laeii khamoshi chaidi ae/di loR ae.

    (Didn't mean to drag my Punjabi questions into the Urdu thread, but thanks to everyone for helping!)
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    I appreciate your asking; after discussing it with a few "pure Panjabi" speakers, I understand it now (and the problem above).

    maiN ne kal wahaaN se kitaab uThaa'ii (thi).
    maiN kal uthoN kitaab chuki (si).

    mujhe aaj wahaaN se kitaab uThaani hai.
    maiN ajj uthoN kitaab chukni ae.

    (Didn't mean to drag my Punjabi questions into the Urdu thread, but thanks to everyone for helping!)
    As my place of birth is not a million miles from Lucknow, I would say "uThaanaa"!:) And, despite my proximity to Lucknow, I have managed to get a good grounding in Punjabi and as a consequence I would say "chukNRii"!:)
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    As my place of birth is not a million miles from Lucknow, I would say "uThaanaa"!:) And, despite my proximity to Lucknow, I have managed to get a good grounding in Punjabi and as a consequence I would say "chukNRii"!:)
    I concur with your remarks, Qureshpor SaaHib :).
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    (Didn't mean to drag my Punjabi questions into the Urdu thread, but thanks to everyone for helping!)
    Alfaaz jii, references to Punjabi have been made from the very beginning of this Urdu ''regional'' thread (be it unjustifiedly), so I believe your queries regarding Punjabi, as long as they deal with expressing intent or the use of ''ne'' (or as has been pointed out, its absence).
     

    Alfaaz

    Senior Member
    English
    As my place of birth is not a million miles from Lucknow, I would say "uThaanaa"!:) And, despite my proximity to Lucknow, I have managed to get a good grounding in Punjabi and as a consequence I would say "chukNRii"!:)
    :D Thanks for the corrections! I also concur with your remarks! (was typing while going through a quick "crash course" in Punjabi...might make new threads in the future, if time permits, about some more concepts!)
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    With the hope of reaching at some conclusions soon, may I ask those friends who possess Urdu lexicons to share what they, for example Nur-ul-Lughaat or Kitabistan say about ''ne''?
     

    UrduMedium

    Senior Member
    Urdu (Karachi)
    With the hope of reaching at some conclusions soon, may I ask those friends who possess Urdu lexicons to share what they, for example Nur-ul-Lughaat or Kitabistan say about ''ne''?
    Following is an entry on "ne" from Feroz-ul-Lughaat Jaami3 (1st ed. 1897)

    ne - (3alamat-i-faa3il) fi3l-i-muta3addii meN faa3il ke ba3d aataa hai. jaise maiN ne xat paRhaa

    I assume the past tense requirement is assumed although not specified.

    Since the OP example (nahiiN, xxxx nahiiN jaanaa) is not in the past tense, the ne should not be there. Did I oversimplify it?
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Following is an entry on "ne" from Feroz-ul-Lughaat Jaami3 (1st ed. 1897)

    ne - (3alamat-i-faa3il) fi3l-i-muta3addii meN faa3il ke ba3d aataa hai. jaise maiN ne xat paRhaa

    I assume the past tense requirement is assumed although not specified.

    Since the OP example (nahiiN, xxxx nahiiN jaanaa) is not in the past tense, the ne should not be there. Did I oversimplify it?
    UP SaaHib, OP examples are:

    1) Aapne nahin jaana hai?"
    2) "Nahin, maine nahin jaana."

    The correct forms in Standard Urdu ought to be..

    1) (to) aap ko nahiiN jaanaa hai?

    2) nahiiN, mujhe nahiiN jaanaa (hai).
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    UP SaaHib, OP examples are:

    1) Aapne nahin jaana hai?"
    2) "Nahin, maine nahin jaana."

    The correct forms in Standard Urdu ought to be..

    1) (to) aap ko nahiiN jaanaa hai?

    2) nahiiN, mujhe nahiiN jaanaa (hai).
    Qureshpor SaaHib, I beg to differ; there is absolutely nothing wrong with the sentences as given in OP! I bet even the supporters of Punjabi-theory will agree with it.

    1) aap ne nahiiN jaanaa hai? 2) nahiiN, maiN ne nahiiN jaanaa. 3) bha'ii aap to jaaneN ge bhii nahiiN!
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Qureshpor SaaHib, I beg to differ; there is absolutely nothing wrong with the sentences as given in OP! I bet even the supporters of Punjabi-theory will agree with it.

    1) aap ne nahiiN jaanaa hai? 2) nahiiN, maiN ne nahiiN jaanaa. 3) bha'ii aap to jaaneN ge bhii nahiiN!
    "jaane jaane" meN bhii farq hotaa hai janaab!:)
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    My apologies, marrish saahab. Somehow I missed the question addressed to me until seeing my name in this post. Yes the sentence sounds familiar to me, with the exception of what QP saahab suggested above (hameN to replace ham ne). Although ham ne is also commonly heard. Normally the nah or nahin is not repeated in such statements, but it is understood to apply in both cases.

    Also from what I was able to gather from your post #26, "ham is kii qiimat (nah) baRhaanii thii" does not sound correct.
    UM saaHib,

    Could you please expand a little on this point if possible. What sort of linguistic background were the speakers whom you heard using "maiN ne jaanaa hai" type of sentence? Do you use it at all?
     

    UrduMedium

    Senior Member
    Urdu (Karachi)
    Honestly, it is hard to replay in one's mind specific instances of something like this. Sufficient it is to say that it does not sound unfamiliar. No, I do not use the maiN ne in such situations. Neither do I think I use mujhko, but exclusively mujhe, for some unknown reason. Also, hard to classify the linguistic background when we are talking in such broad brushstrokes. However, for whatever it is worth, I asked someone in my family about this and the person immediately replied, "that's 'Lahore-style'". Hope this does not get me in trouble now. :)
     
    Last edited:

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Honestly it is hard to replay in one's mind specific instances of something like this. Sufficient it is to say that it does not sound totally unfamiliar. No, I do not use the maiN ne in such situations. Neither do I think I use mujhko, but exclusively mujhe, for some unknown reason. Also, hard to classify the linguistic background when we are talking in such broad brushstrokes. However, for whatever it is worth, I asked someone in my family about this and the person immediately replied, "that's 'Lahore-style'". Hope this does not get me in trouble now :)
    Thank you UM saaHib. Whatever the label might be, do you remember Urdu mother-tongue speakers ever using these types of sentences or do you think janaab-i-Iftikhar Arif SaaHib's case was just one off?
     

    BP.

    Senior Member
    Urdu
    I bring what some of us would call bad news: I very recently had conversations with a number of people, from a generation older than mine, living in Khi and identifying Urdu as their first language, and many of them have begun using nee for the future e.g. main nee, us nee [e.g. fulaana kaam karnaa hai]. Quite a culture shock it was.
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    I bring what some of us would call bad news: I very recently had conversations with a number of people, from a generation older than mine, living in Khi and identifying Urdu as their first language, and many of them have begun using nee for the future e.g. main nee, us nee [e.g. fulaana kaam karnaa hai]. Quite a culture shock it was.
    Thank you for sharing. Do you interpret it as the future?
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    I bring what some of us would call bad news: I very recently had conversations with a number of people, from a generation older than mine, living in Khi and identifying Urdu as their first language, and many of them have begun using nee for the future e.g. main nee, us nee [e.g. fulaana kaam karnaa hai]. Quite a culture shock it was.
    Thank you for sharing. Do you interpret it as the future?
    I'm afraid so.
    I share your assessment. Another question, or maybe a re-versified one: is the construction maiN ne kaam karnaa hai used for the future tense, in other words, does this construction fall into the category of the future tense?
     

    greatbear

    Banned
    India - Hindi & English
    કો પું - કોઇ; કોઇ પણ. [ko m. - koi; koi paNR

    I'd like to disagree, I believe what I've said is correct.
    You've every right to disagree, but being a Gujarati speaker since my childhood, it doesn't hold much water to me and nor will to any Gujarati speaker.
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    You've every right to disagree, but being a Gujarati speaker since my childhood, it doesn't hold much water to me and nor will to any Gujarati speaker.
    Relax, it is not colloquial language that I quoted. You have every right to assert that no Gujarati speaker will know it in the ages to come.
     
    Last edited:

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    I bring what some of us would call bad news: I very recently had conversations with a number of people, from a generation older than mine, living in Khi and identifying Urdu as their first language, and many of them have begun using nee for the future e.g. main nee, us nee [e.g. fulaana kaam karnaa hai]. Quite a culture shock it was.
    BP SaaHib, can we be certain that these Urdu speakers who are one generation removed from you have n't just begun to use the "ne" form but have been using it before now, i.e. in the past.
     

    BP.

    Senior Member
    Urdu
    Fairly well in some cases and with complete certitude in others, in order of increasing closeness. It is one of several bi3aat that have crept in within just this decade, the other major one being aap...[karoo], which is worse!
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Fairly well in some cases and with complete certitude in others, in order of increasing closeness. It is one of several bi3aat that have crept in within just this decade, the other major one being aap...[karoo], which is worse!
    If I were to ask you, BP SaaHib, to be a bit "mathematical" about the whole thing, could you draw some sort of a timeline and say when you first became aware of your close friends or relatives using the "ne" form (a decade, two decades or more) and the same for people whom you have heard speaking but you are not close to them?
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    I am specifically asking about the mujhe becomes maine thing. I hear this construction a lot.

    another example:

    agar tumne maaf nahin kiya to maine khaana nahin khaana hai.

    Here you see the "ne" in the first clause marking the ergative case as usual, then in the second clause it is that Punjabi-ish maine meaning mujhe/mujhe ko.

    Francois, why do you find "mujhe jaana hai" as marked? Can you explain more?
    In Punjabi, this would be..

    je tusaaN maaf na kiitaa te maiN khaaNRaa na'iiN khaaNRaa

    No "ne" !
     

    panjabigator

    Senior Member
    Am. English
    But, in the plural:

    je tusāN lokāN ne māf na kītā te maiN khāNRā na'īN khānā.

    Ne in some constructions. And then, of course, some dialects don't use the "ne" at all in past tense constructions that involve ergativity, but that's an entirely different conversation.
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    My husband says mainu jaaNa a and also tenu jaaNa a are used. Maybe in dialects of Pakistani Punjabi this is the nu to ne.
    The Punjabi "nuuN" (ko) is completely different from "ne". I have never heard sentences of the type:

    "mainu jaaNa a" and " tenu jaaNa a"

    mainuuN jaaNRaa chaahiidaa e = mujhe jaanaa chaahiye (hai)

    mainuuN jaaNRaa chaahiidaa e = mujhe jaanaa chaahiye thaa
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    With the hope of reaching at some conclusions soon, may I ask those friends who possess Urdu lexicons to share what they, for example Nur-ul-Lughaat or Kitabistan say about ''ne''?
    Nur-ul-LuGhaat, interestingly, does n't even have the "ne" entry! Farhang-i-Asafiyyah has the following:-

    ne- ism-i-muzakkar- 3alaamat-i-faa3il jo muta3addii fi3l meN aa kar kalaam meN rabt paidaa kartii hai- va niiz Huruuf-i-muGhayyirah meN kaa ek Harf.

    ham ne maanaa kih taGhaaful nah karo ge lekin
    xaak ho jaa'eN ge ham tum ko xabar hote tak (Ghalib)

    raat bhar kyaa kyaa jagaayaa naalah-i-shabgiir ne
    aisii sotii thii kih karvaT tak nah lii taqdiir ne (naa-ma3luum)

    Kitaabistaab has..

    Particle. It follows subject of transitive verb used in the past tense; not translated into English.

    So marrish SaaHib. The contents are not all that helpful!
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Thank you for sharing. Do you interpret it as the future?
    Although your question is addressed to BP SaaHib, in the "maiN ne Lahore jaanaa hai" type of sentence, the want/intent is there and hence it has a future significance. It does not (always) translate to "I will go to Lahore". Here is an example from BBC's Urdu News.

    ادارے کے اہلکاروں نے اسی ہفتے مذاکرات کے لیے تہران جانا ہے

    Members of the organisation are to go to Tehran this (very) week for negotiations.

     
    Last edited:

    BP.

    Senior Member
    Urdu
    If I were to ask you, BP SaaHib, to be a bit "mathematical" about the whole thing, could you draw some sort of a timeline and say when you first became aware of your close friends or relatives using the "ne" form (a decade, two decades or more) and the same for people whom you have heard speaking but you are not close to them?
    Yes no problem, most of them post 2006, half a decade.
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    Although your question is addressed to BP SaaHib, in the "maiN ne Lahore jaanaa hai" type of sentence, the want/intent is there and hence it has a future significance. It does not (always) translate to "I will go to Lahore". Here is an example from BBC's Urdu News.

    ادارے کے اہلکاروں نے اسی ہفتے مذاکرات کے لیے تہران جانا ہے

    Members of the organisation are to go to Tehran this (very) week for negotiations.

    I find it a precise translation of the verbal form.
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    I shall take the liberty and make an attempt to summarise this thread.

    Firstly, the time span of this (ab)usage of "ne".

    With regard to the written language, an Urdu speaking non-Punjabi, Indian friend of mine who is no where near from the Punjab or Delhi area said in 2008 in an Urdu poetry Newsgroup, "This sort of usage has been seen in Urdu writings for many many years....". This gentleman would be in his eighties or even older. It is of course difficult to work out when the earliest example of this kind of "ne" usage took place and the ethnicities of the authors of these writings. I have provided one example from a Pakistan Television Drama serial "tanhaa'iyaaN" by Haseena Moin but in her defence one could say one of two things. Either she was possibly depicting a Punjabi character (I don't know if this was the case) or she herself has been influenced by her non-Kanpur environment.

    For the spoken language, Faylasoof SaaHib puts this usage on the timeline to a period beginning before the partition, "This grammatically incorrect use of "maine jaanaa hai" is new in the sense that, I believe, it was n't common (amongst the educated) before partition. (Post 11). This implies that this usage did exist before partition albeit it was n't common. Faylasoof SaaHib does not mention the etnicity/ethnicities of the speakers but in Post 10 he states, "It is quite likely Punjabi influence". C.M. Naim in his Urdu grammar mentions that "Since the fifties, influenced by standard usage in Punjabi, many Pakistani Urdu writers and speakers commonly use the postposition "ne" in this indirect construction, instead of the original "ko". (Post 20). According to BP SaaHib, "It has become widespread during the last 50 something years". As BP SaaHib's post was written in 2008, this would put it in the region of 1958. So, it appears that the timeline begins at least before the partition and we may have become aware of it more so because of the higher frequency of its occurrence in the media and in people's speech.

    Now going back to the thread's beginnings. Fatima SaaHibah asks the one million dollar question "Can someone explain precisely why in for Urdu speakers who are influenced by Punjabi you get the mujhe/mujhko construction as maine, aapne, tumne, etc. In Post 2 she goes onto mention the "Punjabi-ish maine". From this it is clear that she believes that this usage has its beginnings within the Punjabi speaking communities. BP SaaHib in his Post 9 confirms that "I've only heard Punjabi colleagues say "maiN ne"" and if there was any doubt in anyone's mind about its background, in Post 12 he puts the cause of this usage on Punjabi's influence on Urdu. Illuminatus in Post 15 lends support to this by saying that "In India, this usage is typical of Punjabi people..".C.M.Naim (Post 20) has been mentioned above who says, "Since he Fifties, influenced by standard usage in Punjabi, many Pakistani Urdu writers and speakers commonly use the postposition "ne" in this indirect construction, instead of the original "ko". Faylasoof SaaHib, not in so certain terms as above in Post 10 mentions that "It is quite likely Punjabi influence".

    The "evidence" for Punjabi influence seems overwhelming. It would be nice if there was in existence an academic study on this subject and there may very well be one. It is quite possible that this usage has indeed come into existence as a result of Punjabi language and Punjabi people. But, in this thread, francois_auffret SaaHib, PG SaaHib, marrish SaaHib and yours truly are not so certain. Firstly, and most importantly, Punjabi grammar does not lend itself to this usage as has been shown in earlier posts. Secondly (and not necessarily a convincing argument), mother-tongue Urdu (and Hindi*) speakers do employ this usage in their daily lives, one example being Mr. Iftikhar Arif. Most likely and logical explanation would be that these people have been influenced by their Punjabi brethren. I don't know. What I would like to know is how other language communities such as Sindhi and Pashto speakers fit within this language issue. Do they say "mujhe jaanaa hai" or "maiN ne jaanaa jai"?

    Whoever may be responsible for this "ne" construction, one can not deny that it is not exactly identical in meaning to the "mujhe" form. This "ne" form brings with it an added dimension and as a consequence the language becomes richer and not poorer.

    * A friend of mine (of Hindu background) who spent his childhood in Dehli said that he not only heard this usage there but also employed it too.
     
    Last edited:

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    Nur-ul-LuGhaat, interestingly, does n't even have the "ne" entry! Farhang-i-Asafiyyah has the following:-

    ne- ism-i-muzakkar- 3alaamat-i-faa3il jo muta3addii fi3l meN aa kar kalaam meN rabt paidaa kartii hai- va niiz Huruuf-i-muGhayyirah meN kaa ek Harf.

    ham ne maanaa kih taGhaaful nah karo ge lekin
    xaak ho jaa'eN ge ham tum ko xabar hote tak (Ghalib)

    raat bhar kyaa kyaa jagaayaa naalah-i-shabgiir ne
    aisii sotii thii kih karvaT tak nah lii taqdiir ne (naa-ma3luum)

    Kitaabistaab has..

    Particle. It follows subject of transitive verb used in the past tense; not translated into English.

    So marrish SaaHib. The contents are not all that helpful!
    It's a pity there is no more information in those dictionaries but don't worry, there is one dictionary which attested still another usage of 'ne' in 1884 as follows:

    نے ने ne [for orig. le, Ap. Prk. लइए, or लहिए; S. लब्धे], postp. of the agent or active case in High Hindī, and Urdū (orig. a dialec.dat. affix of W. Hindī).
    The dictionary is Platts'.
     

    marrish

    Senior Member
    اُردو Urdu
    Qureshpor SaaHib has prepared a handy synopsis of the opinions expressed here in this thread.:)

    There remain some points which still deserve an answer and I agree with Qureshpor SaaHib’s approach to stipulate them and I hope my attempt is going to shed some more light on them. In order to get my point through I’m going to have to continue on some details in the convention of proposed summary.

    Further on, lcfatima said she thought mujhe was preferred to maiN neby Hindustani origin native Urdu speakers, for example by the muhaajir origin Karachi vallay”.

    At first glance, I couldn’t understand the meaning of “Hindustani origin native Urdu speakers” correctly for I’d thought Urdu speakers of the Republic of India were being referred to and this too would have an interesting component for discussion. However upon seeing further example of residents of Karachi I realized that Pakistani Urdu native speakers were the reference group. Subsequently in post #6 it was revealed that Indian origin Urdu speakers, who were not Punjabis, were consulted as well and they classified this usage as ‘paindu’ (a Punjabi word!).

    The purpose behind making this summation is to gather different contributions and to address the points being made. I do not intend to be judgmental since the belief that Punjabi influence is the cause for the prevalence of this construction is nothing new and this false notion is so dominant that jokes and anecdotes have come into existence! It would be nice to sum up all the references to various groups of people who might be using it or who consider it not proper Urdu, in order to ascertain the concept of ‘regionalism’ as per the title thread. One cannot be ungrateful to lcfatima SaaHibah for initiating this important topic a couple of years ago since her input could be the catalyst for reaching important conclusions. This is the beauty of this forum!

    Further along into the discussions, panjabigator SaaHib made a very important remark saying that in India, only people with knowledge of Punjabi were heard using this construction, while in Lahore, maiN ne prevails. What is even more important is the reference to Essential Urdu Grammar, the opinion of whose author I appreciate very much because she wisely didn’t even mention any Punjabi influence. Panjabigator SaaHib states that “this construction is so widespread that it is ubiquitous even among non-Panjabi Urdu wallas. BP SaaHib expressed his view about the grammatical incorrectness of this form.

    In post #10 panjabigator SaaHib has posted a crucial question, from my point of view:
    Is this a new function of <ne> in Urdu, and if not, how long has it been around?
    The contribution of Faylasoof SaaHib has been recalled by QP SaaHib above.

    Let me reiterate also that Illuminatus SaaHib has shared the opinion regarding Punjabi influence, stating it sounded a bit silly to his ears, and adding further that it was never spoken in Rajasthan /Maharashtra/UP/MP etc. I’ll return to this point soon. Koozagar SaaHib rightly pointed out that Punjabi was not the cause of this construction.

    As our time-machine gains acceleration, Qureshpor SaaHib makes a substantial contribution in post #20, where he poses four questions, which he himself subsequently addresses. I shall copy a passage because it contains a good reference, but not without a reason – I am compelled to question that reference on one point, which is the core business of this thread; this being the alleged ‘regionalism’.

    3) What are the literary trends of this usage?

    Modern Urdu grammar books (e.g. Ruth Laila Schmidt and C.M.Naim mentioned above) are beginning to include the "ne" form. Whilst Schmidt, a European scholar states that.." This usage is not correct in the standard Urdu of Delhi", Naim from Barabanki says, "Both usages are now equally correct in Urdu".

    In his answer 3) he goes on to cite some instances of the “main ne jaanaa hai” form by a couple of Urdu speakers and states graciously where they were born (Kanpur, Lucknow, India). Proceeding further onto the opinion of linguists, he quotes a Elena Bashir, who says in her paper:
    This change has been long noted and much discussed in the literature and has by now become emblematic of Pakistani Urdu as a separate variety".

    With respect to the sentence which I once posted to discuss it and I’ll be dealing with later, QP SaaHib said that that sentence would be deemed faulty grammar (by the purists).


    As it is very difficult for me to join the club of the Punjabi theory, I’d say I'm equally reluctant to subscribe to the idea that this usage is a new phenomenon and it supposedly occurred after the Partition of the Subcontinent. This view has been expressed in the books of C.M. Naim, R.L. Schmidt and in E. Bashir ‘s paper. Both grammarians agree on its correctness however they try to make us believe that it is not an ‘Urdu-e mu3allaa’ phenomenon (incorrect in Delhi), suggesting that this is a Pakistani phenomenon. E. Bashir says that this makes Urdu in Pakistan a separate variety.

    I have a strong feeling that their opinions must be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. E. Bashir says this change has been long noted (in the context of Pakistan) but I am going to prove that this is far from reality and it can be interpreted as an attempt at imposing the author’s wishful thinking!

    First of all, there have been many voices that this construction is also used by the native speakers of Urdu including those in India or more specifically, Delhi. I have heard Urdu speakers from Delhi using it and also Qureshpor SaaHib shared a reference which indicates it was present there.

    According to Illuminatus, this is never heard in Rajasthan, but I’ll have to disagree with this. Far from reality! In Marwari dialect for example, mujhe is mana, in Haryanvi – manne, Brajbhasha speakers say: ‘tum ne jarur ra:no chaye ‘you must remain here’.
    If this hint weren’t sufficient we can take a look at a linguistic paper of Myriam Butt who mentions that
    • The ergative can appear with infinitive+auxiliary constructions in Lahori and Delhi dialects of Urdu/Hindi (Butt and King 1991, Bashir 1999). Surprisingly E. Bashir who is the reference here is the author of the thesis of separate Pakistani variety but we see that even she seemingly had acknowledged the occurrence of this verbal construction in the Urdu of Delhi.


    Regarding the question whether it occurs in the speech of Hindi speakers, let me quote several examples from the net: बाबा हम ने खरीदना तो नही था baabaa ham ne khariidnaa to nahii thaa उसने कहा - मैंने नहीं खाना us ne kahaa – mainne nahiiN khaanaa अब निर्णय आपने लेना है कि आप किसका साथ देते हैं ab nirNRay aapne lenaa hai ki aap kiskaa saath dete haiN ऐसा उसने नहीं करना था aisaa usne nahiiN karnaa thaa अगर किसी ने चाय पीनी हो तो स्टेशन के बाहर जाना पड़ता है agar kisii ne chaay piinii ho to sTeshan ke baahar jaanaa paRtaa hai

    Qureshpor SaaHib, the meaning of ‘ko’ and ‘ne’ construction catches something different and this has been aptly described in that short sketch of M.Butt as follows:
    • The ergative/dative alternation on subjects coincides with a difference in modality
    • Bashir (1999) speculates that the ergative is encroaching on the domain of the dative.
    – In this infinitive construction, the ergative is marked and entails a subject who has control over the action.
    – The dative is unmarked (Elsewhere Case): the subject may or may not have control over the action, the precise interpretation depends on the context.

    A couple of posts ago I posted a sentence which I’m offering as a proof of ‘maiN ne jaanaa hai’ not only being on the tongues of Delhi’s ahl-e zabaan but also having been commited in print in 1917. In the preface to a lexicon of idioms of Urdu as heard from the noble ladies of Delhi court, it reads:

    go aaj se taqriib-an do saal peshtar jo ham ne is luGhaat kii qiimat kaa taxmiinah lagaayaa thaa wuh saaRhe tiin ruupayah fii jild thaa. aur ab jo kaaGhaz kii giraanii ne aaNkheN dikhaa diiN to hamaarii siTTii gum ho ga'ii. magar ham ne is kii qiimat baRhaanii thii nah baRhaa'ii.

    The author of the sentence is Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii – the compiler of the major Urdu lexicon – Farhang-e Asafiyyah. I consider it a sufficient sanad for at least the Western variety of Urdu, which encompasses Delhi, of course.
     

    Faylasoof

    Senior Member
    English (UK) & Urdu (Luckhnow), Hindi
    ..
    Modern Urdu grammar books (e.g. Ruth Laila Schmidt and C.M.Naim mentioned above) are beginning to include the "ne" form. Whilst Schmidt, a European scholar states that.." This usage is not correct in the standard Urdu of Delhi", Naim from Barabanki says, "Both usages are now equally correct in Urdu".

    In his answer 3) he goes on to cite some instances of the “main ne jaanaa hai” form by a couple of Urdu speakers and states graciously where they were born (Kanpur, Lucknow, India).

    ..

    The author of the sentence is Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii – the compiler of the major Urdu lexicon – Farhang-e Asafiyyah. I consider it a sufficient sanad for at least the Western variety of Urdu, which encompasses Delhi, of course.
    Thank you marrish SaaHib for this!

    I'd like to reiterate that in our Urdu, constructions like maiN ne jaanaa / karnaa etc. are considered simply wrong (!) and while I really appreciate the effort, it really doesn’t matter whether one cites a person or two from here and there having been born in Kanpur or Lucknow to have used it. I know some lakhnaviis who say اِژْدِحام izhdiHaam instead of our اِزْدِحام iZdiHaam, and yet اِژْدِحام izhdiHaam we consider wrong! If you all want to discuss this word further then please make a new thread!

    « maiN ne jaanaa » hamaare naHwii liHaaZ se bilkul GhalaT samjhaa jaataa hai chaahe jo bhii ise SaHiiH qaraar de aur woh luGhatsaaz hii kyoN nah ho! dilli kii zabaan par uske gird o nawaaH kaa bhii athar huaa is hii wajh se dehlavii urdu aur lakhnavii urdu meN kuchh kuchh farq paayaa jaataa hai, bil-xuSuuS aaxir adwaar meN, chaahe woh farhang ho yaa ba3Dh naHwii nikaat, warnah yeh ek hii zabaan hai! lughatsaazii kaa fan hamaare yahaaN bhii maujuud hai aur naHwii taraakiib se ham log bhii waaqif haiN aur hamaare 3etibaar se yeh (main ne jaanaa / karnaa wa ghairah) har giz SaHiiH nahiiN hai!… aur janaab ahl-e-zabaan to ham bhii haiN !


    The point of all this is that one may come across a person from a city which boasts a preponderance of native Urdu speakers and may still use variant form(s) , but that doesn’t make it standard speech. Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii's usage that you provide is an interesting example and could just as surely be quoted to show how his Urdu changed and came to be affected by neighbouring influences, deviating from the standard Urdu of Delhi.

    I quite agree with Schmidt’s remark that "This usage is not correct in the standard Urdu of Delhi" - and it isn’t correct standard Urdu of Lucknow either! If anyone accuses us of being purists or speaking "prescriptively" then they are forgetting an important point. We have a standard grammar and standard speech forms and constructs like maiN ne jaanaa / karnaa just don't belong there.
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    A couple of posts ago I posted a sentence which I’m offering as a proof of ‘maiN ne jaanaa hai’ not only being on the tongues of Delhi’s ahl-e zabaan but also having been commited in print in 1917. In the preface to a lexicon of idioms of Urdu as heard from the noble ladies of Delhi court, it reads:

    go aaj se taqriib-an do saal peshtar jo ham ne is luGhaat kii qiimat kaa taxmiinah lagaayaa thaa wuh saaRhe tiin ruupayah fii jild thaa. aur ab jo kaaGhaz kii giraanii ne aaNkheN dikhaa diiN to hamaarii siTTii gum ho ga'ii. magar ham ne is kii qiimat baRhaanii thii nah baRhaa'ii.

    The author of the sentence is Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii – the compiler of the major Urdu lexicon – Farhang-e Asafiyyah. I consider it a sufficient sanad for at least the Western variety of Urdu, which encompasses Delhi, of course.
    marrish SaaHib, we are all indebted to you for your detailed presentation of the "maiN ne jaanaa hai" type of construction from its grammar perspective and "regional" usage. Thank you also for including a few examples from Hindi. The icing on the cake for me is the quote you have been able to find from the tongue of a person of no less a calibre than Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii himself. I do not believe this is just one exception to the rule. There are bound to be many other examples in our literature of its usage by "ahl-i-zabaan". And without wishing to create any further antagonism between Lucknow and Dehli, this is what one "dihlavii" says about his Urdu.

    Naseem-i-Dihlavii ham muujid-i-baab-i-fasaaHat haiN
    ko'ii Urdu ko kyaa samjhe kih jaisaa ham samajhte haiN!

    Asghar Ali Khan Naseem Dihlavii (1794-1864)

    One can understand "external influences" on the likes of Iftikhar Arif and Haseena Moin for their usage of the "maiN ne" form even though I can not imagine how someone who has shifted from Lucknow in his mid 20s will have his language affected by external influences. The learned author's credentials can be judged from reading the preface to the first volume of his four volume dictionary in the section entitled "sabab-i-taalif" on page 20. He may have visited and even stayed in Lahore but I do not believe his language would have been adversely affected by this move, considering that he was born and bred in a place not too far from the "Lahori Darvaazah" of "Qil3ah-i-mu3allah". I would personally go by what he, originating from Delhi, says about himself in the above given reference than what Schmidt says about Delhi speakers!

    This is what I would say is the "nichoR" of this thread.

    1) One can not say with any degree of certainty that the "maiN ne" form has its basis on the tongues of Punjabi speakers. The claim that it is a Punjabi phenomenon is probably based more on prejudice than on any academic research.

    2) With much more certainty one can now say that, to use Fatima SaaHibah's words "Hindustani origin native Urdu speakers" use this construction as well. Examples being Iftikhar Arif, Haseena Moin, Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii, all the people UM SaaHib has heard using this construction as well as many others who used such constructions in their writings, according to my Urdu speaking friend.

    3) Could it be possible that the "maiN ne" construction employed by Punjabis (and others) is based on "dabistaan-i-dihlii" rather than originating from one that they have created themselves in the Punjab? ( BP SaaHib's Post 12). I must say that I am somewhat disappointed that Maulvii Sayyid SaaHib's quote has denied the existence of a "dabistaan-i-Punjab"!:)
     
    Last edited:

    BP.

    Senior Member
    Urdu
    ...One can understand "external influences" on the likes of Iftikhar Arif and Haseena Moin for their usage of the "maiN ne" form even though I can not imagine how someone who has shifted from Lucknow in his mid 20s will have his language affected by external influences....
    I can imagine with facility and in HD. People who would have corrected me for this usage 20 years ago are now using it themselves. The same people wouldn't ever say pataa instead of ma3luum but now say that too. We forget that people live in an environment and imbibe it unconsciously. Mr. Iftikhar Arif left Lakhnou in while in his 60s I think he'd still have changed.
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    I can imagine with facility and in HD. People who would have corrected me for this usage 20 years ago are now using it themselves. The same people wouldn't ever say pataa instead of ma3luum but now say that too. We forget that people live in an environment and imbibe it unconsciously. Mr. Iftikhar Arif left Lakhnou in while in his 60s I think he'd still have changed.
    Thanks. I suppose it depends on the person. I could live amongst people for a century (if I could live that long) who say "mere ko" or "aap baiTho" or "We was going" but I would never end up using any of these constructions! The question is, "Where did Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii pick the "maiN ne" construction from?"
     

    BP.

    Senior Member
    Urdu
    Yes QP we agree on this that it depends on the person. The other people I talked about do not pay conscious attention to their diction as you, that's maybe because, unlike them, language is an important indulgence in your life. Wonder which case this reasoning puts Mr. IA in!
     

    Faylasoof

    Senior Member
    English (UK) & Urdu (Luckhnow), Hindi
    ...
    The icing on the cake for me is the quote you have been able to find from the tongue of a person of no less a calibre than Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii himself. I do not believe this is just one exception to the rule. There are bound to be many other examples in our literature of its usage by "ahl-i-zabaan". And without wishing to create any further antagonism between Lucknow and Dehli, this is what one "dihlavii" says about his Urdu.

    Naseem-i-Dihlavii ham muujid-i-baab-i-fasaaHat haiN
    ko'ii Urdu ko kyaa samjhe kih jaisaa ham samajhte haiN!

    Asghar Ali Khan Naseem Dihlavii (1794-1864)
    Naseem Dehlavi is perfectly entitled to his opinion! I detect a "sour grapes" attitude in the remark. Who is he anyway? In poetic stature he is nothing compared to lakahnavii poets like Anis, Dabir, Auj, 3ishq and ta3ashshuq, not to mention the brothers Safi and Zariif and a good few more. The poetry of most of these poets is hardly known. Ignorance is bliss! It seems some people here have an issue with Lucknow and they too are entitled to their ossified opinions which really don't matter in the least to us because we know what Urdu is!
    One can understand "external influences" on the likes of Iftikhar Arif and Haseena Moin for their usage of the "maiN ne" form even though I can not imagine how someone who has shifted from Lucknow in his mid 20s will have his language affected by external influences. The learned author's credentials can be judged from reading the preface to the first volume of his four volume dictionary in the section entitled "sabab-i-taalif" on page 20. He may have visited and even stayed in Lahore but I do not believe his language would have been adversely affected by this move, considering that he was born and bred in a place not too far from the "Lahori Darvaazah" of "Qil3ah-i-mu3allah". I would personally go by what he, originating from Delhi, says about himself in the above given reference than what Schmidt says about Delhi speakers!
    You seemed to be ignoring the fact that the Delhi dialect was affected by its surroundings. How do you think KhaRii Bolii evovled in the first place? It was not a "pure" dialect as it finally took shape. The process continued and we do see differences between Delhi and Lucknow Urdu dialects, some we've even discussed before. Besides, Schmidt's remark ("This usage is not correct in the standard Urdu of Delhi") cannot be ignored just because she is a "foreigner". One would assume she has based this remark after some study and unlike Maulavii Ahmad has obviously not pandered to what one suspects were local influences affecting the latter's Urdu. It was a "foreigner" - an 3ajamii - called Sibawayh who wrote the best grammar of Classical Arabic that even the later Arabs bowed to!! So being "foreign" on itself doesn't disqualify you to make a valid comment on a language or indeed write a grammar of a language. It all depends on how well one has studied the language. To use your own argument from previous posts, being a native doesn't guarantee correctness of language usage. But now you are contradicting yourself because it suits your purpose!!

    This is what I would say is the "nichoR" of this thread.
    1) One can not say with any degree of certainty that the "maiN ne" form has its basis on the tongues of Punjabi speakers. The claim that it is a Punjabi phenomenon is probably based more on prejudice than on any academic research.
    Yes, we do need more research on this but there is no need to be so sensitive about this! One notices a huge sensitivity in many of your remarks in various posts over time when it comes to suspected Punjabi influence on some forms of Urdu speech. I think you need to cool down!
    2) With much more certainty one can now say that, to use Fatima SaaHibah's words "Hindustani origin native Urdu speakers" use this construction as well. Examples being Iftikhar Arif, Haseena Moin, Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii, all the people UM SaaHib has heard using this construction as well as many others who used such constructions in their writings, according to my Urdu speaking friend.
    This is hardly an argument! In fact it is quite absurd to mention those who moved to a new environment and adopted what happens to be prevalent, wrong though it is, as evidence of any kind! Ghalat-ul-3aam! Never heard of it?:)
    3) Could it be possible that the "maiN ne" construction employed by Punjabis (and others) is based on "dabistaan-i-dihlii" rather than originating from one that they have created themselves in the Punjab? ( BP SaaHib's Post 12). I must say that I am somewhat disappointed that Maulavii Sayyid SaaHib's quote has denied the existence of a "dabistaan-i-Punjab"!:)
    There is no evidence for this though I'd be happy to read anything you bring to this aspect of the discussion. Maulavii Sayyid SaaHib's "denial" of the existence of a "dabistaan-i-Punjab" might imply that: i) He didn't consider such a thing to exist in the first place, ii) His judgement on matters linguistic was clouded and cannot be trusted! Therefore, use of constructs like "maiN ne karnaa hai" that might be used by him and others like him too comes under great doubt as to their validity!! :):) In fact, we consider these types of "maiN ne .." constructs to be completely wrong and in complete agreement with Schmidt's remark mentioned above about the same as far as standard Delhi Urdu goes!
     

    Qureshpor

    Senior Member
    Panjabi, Urdu پنجابی، اردو
    Naseem Dehlavi is perfectly entitled to his opinion! I detect a "sour grapes" attitude in the remark. Who is he anyway? In poetic stature he is nothing compared to lakahnavii poets like Anis, Dabir, Auj, 3ishq and ta3ashshuq, not to mention the brothers Safi and Zariif and a good few more. The poetry of most of these poets is hardly known. Ignorance is bliss! It seems some people here have an issue with Lucknow and they too are entitled to their ossified opinions which really don't matter in the least to us because we know what Urdu is!
    I don't quite understand your "sour grapes" reference, Faylasoof SaaHib. Naseem Dehlavii. Who is he? Who are you? Who am I? All of us are very small cogs in God's vast creation.

    I did not have his poetic stature in mind at all when I quoted his couplet. Before this I had quoted DaaGh who you would agree does not need any introduction. And just as you claim to know what Urdu is, they too are making a similar claim and their claim can not be ignored at the expense of any one else's. It is best to leave the merits of individual poets and their relative stature to those literary critics who really know their subject. For you and I this is irrelevant for this discussion. Some people may have an "issue" with Lucknow and may even have "ossified" opinions but I don't see how this is relevant to me or to my post. But I would like to make one point, if I may. However sure one might be of some matter, it is good to have an open mind, just in case!

    You seemed to be ignoring the fact that the Delhi dialect was affected by its surroundings. How do you think KhaRii Bolii evovled in the first place? It was not a "pure" dialect as it finally took shape. The process continued and we do see differences between Delhi and Lucknow Urdu dialects, some we've even discussed before. Besides, Schmidt's remark ("This usage is not correct in the standard Urdu of Delhi") cannot be ignored just because she is a "foreigner". One would assume she has based this remark after some study and unlike Maulavii Ahmad has obviously not pandered to what one suspects were local influences affecting the latter's Urdu. It was a "foreigner" - an 3ajamii - called Sibawayh who wrote the best grammar of Classical Arabic that even the later Arabs bowed to!! So being "foreign" on itself doesn't disqualify you to make a valid comment on a language or indeed write a grammar of a language. It all depends on how well one has studied the language. To use your own argument from previous posts, being a native doesn't guarantee correctness of language usage. But now you are contradicting yourself because it suits your purpose!!
    Your powers of deduction are remarkable, Faylasoof SaaHib. How did you manage to work out that I gave preference to Maulavii Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii's knowledge of Urdu over Schmidt's because of the latter's "foreign" origins? This discriminatory line of thinking, in my view, would be bordering on racism! In my post I provided a reference where Sayyid Ahmad Dihlavii SaaHib gives a kind of curriculum vitae. I don't know if you looked up that reference or not but based on that and my knowledge of Schmidt's linguistic background I formulated an opinion in favour of Dihlavii. The fact that "Schmidt" is a "foreigner" is purely coincidental. Had Schmidt been Lakhnavii or Dihlavii or Lahorii or whatever, I would have said the same. And I am well aware of Sibawayh's "al-kitaab" as well as many other 3ajamii scholars who have contributed and excelled over their "native" counterparts in various fields of human endeavour. But we need not go that far. Within our own countries non-native Urdu speakers have reached sublime heights which the "natives" not only appreciate but also envy. So, my dear Faylasoof SaaHib, I am not contradicting myself. Just being a native of any language does not make him/her an undisputed expert in his/her language.

    Yes, we do need more research on this but there is no need to be so sensitive about this! One notices a huge sensitivity in many of your remarks in various posts over time when it comes to suspected Punjabi influence on some forms of Urdu speech. I think you need to cool down!

    This is hardly an argument! In fact it is quite absurd to mention those who moved to a new environment and adopted what happens to be prevalent, wrong though it is, as evidence of any kind! Ghalat-ul-3aam! Never heard of it?:)
    First paragraph. Thank you for your kind advice. Anyone with an open mind who cares to read the archives of this forum will see that over and over again a certain stereotypical, anti-Punjabi attitude has been displayed by some participants. One can either sit back and accept the truth and validity of certain assertions as Gospel or one can respond to them. I have decided to respond and I hasten to add, not in an emotional way. My responses or rebuttals have been carefully thought out and wherever possible, I have provided literary references. Just look at the first post of this thread. The case has been proven even before the trial has begun! These are the exact words, "Can someone explain precisely why in for Urdu speakers who are influenced by Punjabi you get the mujhe/mujhko construction as maine, aapne, tumne, etc". The "Punjabi influence" has been given as a proven fact when we know that this not the case.

    You may remember the Hindi/Urdu: chahiye thread. I would like you and other forum members to look at your post no. 23 and my posts 65 and 70. This is just one example of incorrect information being provided concerning the so called "Punjabi influence".

    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1398107&highlight=chahiye

    And now please allow me to offer you some sincere advice in the same vein that you have offered me. In this forum you have set out a stall which only sells Lakhnavii goods. Whilst this is a cause for pride, at the same time one has to admit with a heavy heart that the factory producing these goods is now practically non-existent. Your stall will be totally empty very soon and you need to stock up with some Dihlavii, Hyderabadi, Aurangabadi, Bhopali, Pakistani and other goods if you are to survive in your business. Otherwise there will just be Xaliil Xaan and his faaxtah and nothing else!!

    There is no evidence for this though I'd be happy to read anything you bring to this aspect of the discussion. Maulavii Sayyid SaaHib's "denial" of the existence of a "dabistaan-i-Punjab" might imply that: i) He didn't consider such a thing to exist in the first place, ii) His judgement on matters linguistic was clouded and cannot be trusted! Therefore, use of constructs like "maiN ne karnaa hai" that might be used by him and others like him too comes under great doubt as to their validity!! :):) In fact, we consider these types of "maiN ne .." constructs to be completely wrong and in complete agreement with Schmidt's remark mentioned above about the same as far as standard Delhi Urdu goes
    The focus of this thread has been on the alleged Punjabi influence on Urdu speakers' usage of the "maiN ne" form in place of the "mujhe" form. It has been suggested that this is a purely Punjabi "orchestrated" phenomenon. A number of people in this thread have expressed doubts about this ready made conclusion. I (along with others) have sought to explain that this line of thinking is not logical because in equivalent Punjabi constructions, there is no place for "ne". To prove that this is not just Punjabi usage, I have given two examples (one verbal and one written) of educated mother-tongue Urdu speakers employing the "maiN ne" form. marrish SaaHib has come up with a written piece by another mother-tongue speaker depicting this usage. These illustrations have not been provided to prove that the "maiN ne" form is grammatically correct but to say that the "culprits" are found amongst the mother-tongue speakers too. Of course, the best example is the latest one and I have no doubt there will be many more. I asked a hypothetical question, "Could it be possible that the "maiN ne" construction employed by Punjabis (and others) is based on "dabistaan-i-dihlii" rather than originating from one that they have created themselves in the Punjab?" No, I don't have any evidence to bring to you but it was posed based on its usage by a Dihlavii gentleman of some considerable literary merit. If we ignore Professor Mahmood Sherani's "Punjab meN Urdu", who brought Urdu education into the Punjab? Was it people like Azad (Dehli) and Hali (Panipat) or did the Punjabis invent their own version? I would say that they have taken on board the language they have been given wholesale, warts and all!
     
    Last edited:

    Faylasoof

    Senior Member
    English (UK) & Urdu (Luckhnow), Hindi
    QURESHPOR said:
    Originally Posted by Faylasoof
    Naseem Dehlavi is perfectly entitled to his opinion! I detect a "sour grapes" attitude in the remark. Who is he anyway? In poetic stature he is nothing compared to lakahnavii poets like Anis, Dabir, Auj, 3ishq and ta3ashshuq, not to mention the brothers Safi and Zariif and a good few more…etc, etc.
    QURESHPOR said:
    I don't quite understand your "sour grapes" reference, Faylasoof SaaHib. Naseem Dehlavii. Who is he? …….
    I shall ignore much of what was said above since I do not have time for long-winded and fruitless arguments. Besides, they’ll only serve to derail this thread! … and we don’t want that!

    I think we need to get one or two points cleared up. Firstly, the Urdu of the two recognized dabistaans (Delhi and Lucknow) is essentially the same. There are some differences, e.g. a few noun genders and idioms etc., but the overall grammar is the same. So quoting a second or third rate poet in support of an argument no matter how direct or indirect but essentially faulty, is meaningless. Using such props to imply that the language of one is somehow superior to the other not only confuses the issue at hand but is plainly wrong. In both, this usage is a grammatical blunder!

    QURESHPOR said:
    …….

    The focus of this thread has been on the alleged Punjabi influence on Urdu speakers' usage of the "maiN ne" form in place of the "mujhe" form. It has been suggested that this is a purely Punjabi "orchestrated" phenomenon. …….."Could it be possible that the "maiN ne" construction employed by Punjabis (and others) is based on "dabistaan-i-dihlii" rather than originating from one that they have created themselves in the Punjab?" No, I don't have any evidence to bring to you but it was posed based on its usage by a Dihlavii gentleman of some considerable literary merit. If we ignore Professor Mahmood Sherani's "Punjab meN Urdu", who brought Urdu education into the Punjab? Was it people like Azad (Dehli) and Hali (Panipat) or did the Punjabis invent their own version? I would say that they have taken on board the language they have been given wholesale, warts and all!
    Yes, the focus of the thread is indeed what you say it is, which brings me to my second point. By saying that Maulavi Sayyed Ahmed’s use of “maiN ne karnaa” type statement is “icing on the cake” one is agreeing to an earlier comment by someone that as a native speaker he knows what he is talking about and therefore his use of this grammatically incorrect form should be trusted over the statement made by a non-native like Schmidt who has written one of the best if not the best modern Urdu grammar and who says this is not standard Delhi Urdu – and, BTW, it isn’t standard Lucknow Urdu either. The latter is hardly surprising since the language moved from one to the other because Delhi Urduphones moved to Lucknow, including, as I’ve said before, my own ancestors. The fact that “a Dihlavii gentleman of some considerable literary merit” uttered such a grammatical monstrosity is just that. One gentleman! It matters little what his literary merits were. What is wrong is wrong and this usage is totally incorrect according to our standard Urdu. There is little known as to what influences this person was under. He certainly wasn't using the standard form. That is for sure.

    The bottom line is that sentences like “main ne karnaa” are grammatically incorrect in the standard Urdu of both Delhi and Lucknow and it doesn’t matter who uses it! However, we do note that Urdu spoken by many though not all in Pakistan employs this grammatically incorrect form as the norm. Now whether this is Punjabi influence or not is still open to discussion but one shouldn’t get sensitive about this issue! Your link above once again shows you being hypersensitive about this point. We were merely discussing the possibility in that thread too of such influence. So again I’d urge you to just cool down!

    This is highly presumptuous! Once again, there is no evidence for this!

    Also, please let us worry whether our lakhanvii Urdu stall gets empty or not! By the sounds of it, Urdu employed by most in Pakistan speaks for itself. That stall may not be empty but whatever is in there certainly does not smell right – full of grammatical monstrosities like maiN ne karnaa and all that arrant nonsense.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top