# Hindi, Urdu: proximal correlatives



## MonsieurGonzalito

Friends,

 Can proximal words like _je, yahaaN,  itnaa, idhaar, aisaa, ab, _etc. be the correlatives in a relative-correlative construction?
In other words, are phrases like: 

_jo laRkii khaRii, *ye *laRkii lambii hai

jitnii ho sake, *itnii *madad karnii chaahie

jidhar tuu jaae, *idhar *maiN bhii jauuN_gaa

jaise sharaab kaa nashaa hotaa hai, *aise *hii settaa kaa bhi nashaa hotaa hai_

... idiomatic?

At first thought, I would assume that no, because the relative construction already  forces us to talk about the thing being introduced in an abstract, mentally detached (hence, distant) way.
But I don't really know. Are constructs like the above possible?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## littlepond

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> _jo laRkii khaRii, *ye *laRkii lambii hai_


This sentence does not make much sense from common sense point of view, but anyway, just for the sake of it, it should be "jo laRkii khaRii hai, *voh* lambii hai." You cannot avoid "hai" and you cannot repeat "laRkii": and you cannot have "yeh."



MonsieurGonzalito said:


> _jitnii ho sake, *itnii *madad karnii chaahie_


_*utnii*_


MonsieurGonzalito said:


> _jidhar tuu jaae, *idhar *maiN bhii jauuN_gaa_


_vahaaN, *udhar*_ (usually, one wouldn't use _bhii _here).


MonsieurGonzalito said:


> _jaise sharaab kaa nashaa hotaa hai, *aise *hii settaa kaa bhi nashaa hotaa hai_


_jaisaa _and _*vaisaa*_. And I am assuming you mean _saTTaa_, as there is no word like _settaa_ I know of. Also, there is no point to repeat _nashaa_! In other words, "jaisaa sharaab kaa nashaa hotaa hai, vaisaa hii saTTe kaa bhi hotaa hai."

Note that _jaise _and _vaise _would indicate the procedure of getting into _nashaa_ (for example, what exactly happens in the brain, the chemical processes, etc.), and I don't think you meant those.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

littlepond said:


> saTTaa


I am sorry, sattaa 
Paraphrasing this person here
Are you saying that the word choice with _sattaa _and _nashaa _is weird, or that the whole idea of being "drunk with power" is not idiomatic?




littlepond said:


> You cannot avoid "hai" and you cannot repeat "laRkii":



(I mistakenly thought that Hindi allowed some lassitude in repeating the main word)
That means I cannot say, for example:

_jo saaRii sel maiN hai, maayaa us *saaRii *ko xariidegii ?_


----------



## littlepond

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> I am sorry, sattaa
> Paraphrasing this person here
> Are you saying that the word choice with _sattaa _and _nashaa _is weird, or that the whole idea of being "drunk with power" is not idiomatic?


Ah, if you meant "sattaa," that is fine. As you had misspelled it as "settaa," I thought you had meant "saTTaa." Drunk with power would be idiomatic universally, I guess.



MonsieurGonzalito said:


> (I mistakenly thought that Hindi allowed some lassitude in repeating the main word)
> That means I cannot say, for example:
> 
> _jo saaRii sel maiN hai, maayaa us *saaRii *ko xariidegii ?_



You _can_. But why would you commit such a horrible redundancy? (In certain situations, for example, when conspirating _saas-bahu_ make a plan in a Hindi soap, they would repeat: because, such repetition is usually for low IQ, extra drama.) Most people wouldn't even say all that: they would simply say "Maayaa sel vaalii saaRii khariidegii." But let's imagine a better situation: "jis saaRii pe maiN ne neelaa nishaan lagaa diyaa hai, tum usii ko le lenaa."

By the way, "meN," not "main," and most Hindi speakers would say "khariidegii."


----------



## amiramir

The dictionary link above says सत्ता is masculine ('nm'). But I assume it must be feminine because it is not declining in the examples above?


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

I believe you are right. In the examples at the Urdu Lughat we have
(from the Bhagavad Gita)
_jis *kii *sattaa se sab jagat cheSHTaa kartaa hai  ..._


----------



## littlepond

amiramir said:


> The dictionary link above says सत्ता is masculine ('nm'). But I assume it must be feminine because it is not declining in the examples above?



"sattaa" is feminine.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Today I stumbled upon a couple of examples that "mix" correlative types.
By "mixing" I mean that they use a relative word from one category (say, relative pronouns) and a a correlative word from another category (for example, an adverb). 

One of the examples is from the song and movie "Sarfarosh"

_yaaro, *aise *gulshan ko [*jise *sar-faroshoN ne lahuu de ke siiNchaa hai] ujRne se bachaa lo_
"Comrades, such garden [to which the fearless watered givin their blood] let's preserve it from being devastated"

The other is the famous poem by Faiz:
_ 
raat *yuuN *dil meN terii khoii huii yaad aaii [*jaise *viiraane meN chupke se bahaar aa jaae]_
"In the night your lost memory (in this way)  came to (my) heart, as spring comes quietly to a barren place" 

What called my attention is that the words in bold (*aise*, _*yuuN*_), wich are acting as a counterpart of the relative clause in the main sentence, are both proximal variants (as opposed to _vaise_, _vuuN_).

I am not sure how to interpret this.
Could it be that, in the context of relative-correlative sentences of a "mixed" type, using proximal correlatives is acceptable?


----------



## littlepond

Regarding your first example, I don't see at all why "jaise," "jise," etc., should force any "vaise" in any kind of sentence, not just this one. For example, "us ne aise kaam kiyaa jaise kuchh huaa hii naa ho." You cannot even have "vaise" here instead of "aise," forget being acceptable or not.

Regarding your second example, "yuuN" (or "jyuuN" for some people) is an adverb, meaning "in such a way, style": in other words, "aise." There is no "vuuN"--or, if it exists, it must be so rare that I have never heard it. Or, rather, "vuuN" in my experience exists to replace the impersonal "voh," as in "vuuN jaa rahaa hai tiin pair vaalaa aadmii" ("there goes the man with three legs"). "yuun" here would, rather, mean "the man with three legs is going in this way."

amaa @MonsieurGonzalito jii, yuuN kareN ki hindustaanii ko hindustaanii meN hii raihne deN, duusrii bolii se naa aTaak jaayaa kareN.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

littlepond said:


> Regarding your second example, "yuuN" (or "jyuuN" for some people) is an adverb, meaning "in such a way, style": in other words, "aise." There is no "vuuN"--or, if it exists, it must be so rare that I have never heard it.


Interesting!

Grammars present these kind of words in groups of 5:

- the relative in _j_ : jo, jahaaN, ...
- the proximal in _i _or  _y_: ye, _yahaaN_, ...
- the distant in _u_ or _v_ : vo, _vahaaN _...
- the old "pure correlative" in _s_ or _t_:  _so_, _tahaaN _...
- the interrogative in _k_:  _kaun_?, _kahaaN_?, ...

So I assumed that _jyuuN_, and _vuuN _would follow the same pattern, this is:

- relative: _juuN or jyuuN
- _proximal_:  yuuN or yoN
- _distant_: vuuN or voN
- _"pure correlative"_:  tyuuN or tyoN
- _interrrogative (oddball in terms of meaning)_:  kyuN? or kyoN?_

So "_yuuN_" would not be the same as "jyuuN": one is the proximal (="in this way"), and the other the relative (="in such a way").

vuuN definitiely exists in Urdu, with the correlative sentence I indicate (although it must be so rare, that it is difficult to find examples, even in Urdu). I asked about it in a thread a few days back. The sentence says:

_juuN juuN liyaa teraa naaoN, vuuN vuuN maaraa saaraa gaaoN_
"As I invoked Your name, I conquered the whole village"

But if you never heard of it, I would assume it doesn't exist in Hindi. 
Neither does_ voN?  _It is in Platts



PLATTSवोंوونوون वों woṅ, or वूं wūṅ [Ap. Prk. एम्वइ, loc. sing. of एम्व, Prk. एव, fr. S. इयत् (Ved. ईवत्)], adv. In that manner, thus, so, like that:—woṅ-kā woṅ-hī, adv. Exactly the same as before or originally:—woṅ-hī, or wūṅ-hī, or woṅ-hīṅ, or wūṅ-hīṅ, adv.=wahīṅ or wǒhīṅ, q.v.





littlepond said:


> "vuuN jaa rahaa hai tiin pair vaalaa aadmii" ("there goes the man with three legs"). "yuun" here would, rather, mean "the man with three legs is going in this way."


In light of what I just said, could _vuuN _and _yuuN _be simply 2 aspects (proximal and distant)  of the same modal adverb ("he walks this way" versus  "he walks that way")?


----------



## desi4life

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> Interesting!
> But if you never heard of it, I would assume it doesn't exist in Hindi.



vuuN/voN certainly exists in Hindi. Here’s an entry from Oxford Hindi-English:

वों voṁ , adv. in that way, thus, like that (cf. यों 'like this').

It’s not ubiquitously used in spoken language like yuuN/yoN.


----------



## Qureshpor

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> One of the examples is from the song and movie "Sarfarosh"
> 
> _yaaro, *aise *gulshan ko [*jise *sar-faroshoN ne lahuu de ke siiNchaa hai] ujRne se bachaa lo_
> "Comrades, such garden [to which the fearless watered givin their blood] let's preserve it from being devastated"





MonsieurGonzalito said:


> The other is the famous poem by Faiz:
> _
> raat *yuuN *dil meN terii khoii huii yaad aaii [*jaise *viiraane meN chupke se bahaar aa jaae]_
> "In the night your lost memory (in this way) came to (my) heart, as spring comes quietly to a barren place"



This pairing is quite normal..

ek jaan-var *aisaa,* *jis* *kii* dum par paisaa (Riddle - Answer- mor)

*aise* gulshan ko *jise*/*jis ko* sar-faroshoN ne lahuu de ke siiNchaa hai..

Such a garden which has been irrigated by the blood of those prepared to gamble their lives..

raat (ko) *yuuN* dil meN tirii (not terii) yaad aa'ii
*jaise* viiraane meN chupke se bahaar aa jaa'e
*jaise* saHraa'oN meN haule se chale baad-i-nasiim
*jaise* biimaar ko be-vajh qaraar aa jaa'e

Here *juuN*/*jyuuN* could have replaced *jaise *to depict manner with the same meaning.

Here is a link to "kalark kaa naGhmah-i-muHabbat", a nazm by Miraji in Urdu in which you'll find yuuN ..vuuN

میراجی - نظم


----------



## littlepond

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> But if you never heard of it, I would assume it doesn't exist in Hindi.



It may well exist, but as I have not heard it, only a limited set of speakers must still be using it. In other words, obsolete already or becoming obsolete.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

This is the part of the poem by Miirajii that @Qureshpor jii suggested.

What is the meaning of the expression _wo(h) yuuN kɛhtaa hai vuuN kɛhtaa hai_ ?
It seems to be idiomatic.
The context is: some dreamy office clerk thinking of the beloved, and of a better life in general.

_afsar ...
*yuuN *kɛhtaa hai *vuuN *kɛhtaa hai lekin bekaar hii rɛhtaa hai
maiN us kii aisii baatoN se thak jaataa huuN thak jaataa huuN

"He spoke as he spoke?"  "No matter how he spoke?"

(This __site __suggests: "He told me to do this and that")
(This __other site__ suggests:  "He speaks forward and backwards")._


----------



## Qureshpor

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> This is the part of the poem by Miirajii that @Qureshpor jii suggested.


Yes, Qureshpor Jii did indeed suggest this poem by Miraji. His real name was Muhammad Sana Ullah Dar (1912-1949). He fell in love with a young lady called Mira Sen, in Lahore and in her love, changed his name to Miraji.



MonsieurGonzalito said:


> What is the meaning of the expression _wo(h) yuuN kɛhtaa hai vuuN kɛhtaa hai_ ?
> It seems to be idiomatic.


The background with regard to the line in question is that he works in an office which he considers "bandii-xaanah" (prison) where his boss, the afsar/officer turns up to work whenever he feels like it while the poet himself has a deluge of work which drives him senseless..

"*juuN-tuuN* rastah kaT jaataa hai aur bandii-xaanah aataa hai"

One way or another, the journey comes to an end and I arrive at the prison!

"phir kaam kaa daryaa bahtaa hai aur hosh mujhe kab rahtaa hai"

Then a torrent of work flows, so how could I maintain my senses!

At last the Afsar turns up and sends his chapraasii (peon) to summon him to his office and...

"*yuuN* kahtaa hai* vuuN *kahtaa hai lekin be-kaar hii rahtaa hai"

He tells me *one thing *and *then anothe*r without offering any reasons while he himself sits idle.


Urdu Lughat (See 4)


----------

