# Urdu-Hindi: vahaaN kaun kaun thaa/the?



## Qureshpor

*Which of the two is considered correct:

vahaaN kaun kaun thaa?

vahaaN kaun kaun the?
*


----------



## Faylasoof

QURESHPOR said:


> *
> Which of the two is considered correct:
> 
> vahaaN kaun kaun thaa?
> 
> vahaaN kaun kaun the?
> *



*The first!* _vahaaN kaun kaun thaa? _Same as:_vahaaN kaun thaa?_

 But,  _vahaaN kaun log the? /  vahaaN kaun kaun log the? _


----------



## Qureshpor

Faylasoof said:


> *The first!* _vahaaN kaun kaun thaa? _Same as:_vahaaN kaun thaa?_
> 
> But,  _vahaaN kaun log the? /  vahaaN kaun kaun log the? _



_*Thank you.

This is my "interpretation" of the two variations.

1)  vahaaN kaun kaun thaa?

      vahaaN Akbar thaa, Balraam thaa, Jamiilah thii aur Shakuntala thii.

2) vahaaN kaun kaun the?

vahaaN Ugra Narain, Hashmat Khan, Bilqiis aur Siitaa the.



*_


----------



## Qureshpor

Faylasoof said:


> *The first!* _vahaaN kaun kaun thaa? _Same as:_vahaaN kaun thaa?_
> 
> But,  _vahaaN kaun log the? /  vahaaN kaun kaun log the? _



Maulavii Abdul Haq (Baba-i-Urdu)'s qavaa'id-i-Urdu (page 70) gives:

vahaaN kaun kaun the.


----------



## BP.

QP sahib, for me the repetition of kaun renders the treatment of the people as individuals rather than as a whole, so I'd hvae said the first. Maybe the baba is seeing it from another perspective, possible as deferential addressing of the third person, though I find this a little unlikely.


----------



## Qureshpor

BelligerentPacifist said:


> QP sahib, for me the repetition of kaun renders the treatment of the people as individuals rather than as a whole, so I'd hvae said the first. Maybe the baba is seeing it from another perspective, possible as deferential addressing of the third person, though I find this a little unlikely.



Another example (page 187)

kaun kaun aa'e haiN?


----------



## souminwé

I would say _kaun kaun aayaa hai_ . Perhaps Molvi Abdul Haq is trying reanalyse this 'logically' as_ kaun kaun_ refers to multiple people, but I feel that it's a hypercorrection.


----------



## greatbear

The second sentence is also correct if each "kaun" refers to a group of people rather than one person. For example:

"vahaaN Gurjar the aur Patil the, vahaaN braahman the aur sardaar the".

The first sentence is more for individuals.


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> The second sentence is also correct if each "kaun" refers to a group of people rather than one person. For example:
> 
> "vahaaN Gurjar the aur Patil the, vahaaN braahman the aur sardaar the".
> 
> The first sentence is more for individuals.



This is how I see this too (post 3).


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> This is how I see this too (post 3).



I don't think so: post 3 refers to four individuals, whereas in my example there are four _groups _of people.


----------



## marrish

Both of these are correct but have a different meaning, as indicated before. 
I use both of them, _vahaaN kaun kaun thaa _when inquiring about friends and _vahaaN kaun kaun the_ when asking about persons that should be addressed formally or respectfully. I understand MAH Baba recommended the second usage.

I don't think vahaaN kaun kaun the refers to groups of people.


----------



## greatbear

marrish said:


> I don't think vahaaN kaun kaun the refers to groups of people.



Nobody suggested that - you got it wrong. Rather, I said that if I were talking about communities/groups of people, I'd use "vahaaN kaun kaun the" since "vahaaN kaun kaun thaa" would be simply wrong.


----------



## marrish

greatbear said:


> Nobody suggested that - you got it wrong. Rather, I said that if I were talking about communities/groups of people, I'd use "vahaaN kaun kaun the" since "vahaaN kaun kaun thaa" would be simply wrong.



I'm sorry if I got it wrong. This is only my personal opinion that I would use some other sentence to ask about communities or groups, even _vahaaN kaun kaun se log the?_ sounds more agreeable.


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> *Which of the two is considered correct:
> 
> vahaaN kaun kaun thaa?
> 
> vahaaN kaun kaun the?
> *


First one for me. 

I can buy that the second sentence may have some circumstantial justification. However, with due respect to MAH, I have never heard it this way.


----------



## UrduMedium

^ If_ kaun kaun_ was followed by a plural noun (_log, afraad_), then the ending will clearly be _the_. See example below. Otherwise, I think only _thaa _sounds acceptable to me.

wahaaN kaun kaun log [maujuud] the?


----------



## marrish

UrduMedium said:


> ^ If_ kaun kaun_ was followed by a plural noun (_log, afraad_), then the ending will clearly be _the_. See example below. Otherwise, I think only _thaa _sounds acceptable to me.
> 
> wahaaN kaun kaun log [maujuud] the?



I agree with what has been said about an extra plural noun. Still it seems to me that the can be also used for honorific purposes.


----------



## greatbear

marrish said:


> Still it seems to me that the can be also used for honorific purposes.



I agree that _the_ here could also be used for honorific purposes.


----------



## Qureshpor

When I started this thread, I did not in reality have the "honorific" perspective in mind. Let's think of a situation where you are asking a close friend who is of same or similar age as you about your mutual friends who were invited to a wedding. You ask him.

vahaaN kaun kaun thaa?

He may reply...

vahaaN x thaa, b thaa aur j thaa.

If the question had been "vahaaN kaun kaun the?", the reply could be..

vahaaN x, b aur j the.

Perhaps this is how Maulavi Abdul Haq SaaHib is looking at the situation.

maiN ne yih Buqraat se jaa ke puuchhaa
maraz tere nazdiik muhlik haiN kyaa kyaa

Altaf Hussain Hali

Buqraat might have replied...

mere nazdiik w, x, y aur z muhlik haiN.


----------



## Qureshpor

Interestingly, in Stuart McGregor's "An Outline of Hindi Grammar", there is this exact sentence...

"vahaaN kaun kaun the? Who were there?"


----------

