# Urdu: ان گملوں میں کوئی پودے لگے ہوۓ ہیں؟



## teaboy

Is the verb in this sentence in the present participle?  

ان گملوں میں کوئی پودے لگے ہوۓ ہیں؟

What is the grammatical analysis/description of لگے ہوۓ ہیں ?


----------



## akak

I'd hazard a "yes."

Are there plants [growing] in these pots? 

Can't think of any other appropriate verb for _lage hue _in this context..


----------



## panjabigator

It's an adverbial participle, I think, but my knowledge of the subject has atrophied to the point where I cannot provide a more detailed explanation than this. "lage hue" in this context suggests "sprouting."


----------



## Qureshpor

"lagaa hu'aa" is the past participle. If there was only one plant in a plant pot, one would say..

is gamle meN ko'ii paudaa lagaa hu'aa hai.

There is some (unknown) plant "rooted"* in the plant pot.

"lage hu'e" is simply the plural.

* Sorry I can't think of an idiomatic translation for "lagaa hu'aa" first thing in the morning. The brain is still half asleep!

The sentence being enquired about is in the plural

The causative verb past participle would be "lagaayaa hu'aa" and plural "lagaa'e hu'e".


----------



## teaboy

I think "planted" is the best translation of the meaning of _lage hue_.  "Installed" doesn't really work in English for plants...the question is being asked of a maali.  Past participle.  OK.  Thanks!


----------



## BP.

QURESHPOR said:


> "lagaa hu'aa" is the past participle. ...
> * Sorry I can't think of an idiomatic translation for "lagaa hu'aa" first thing in the morning. ...



I think _lagaa huaa_ is not the tense being used, rather _lagaa huaa hoonaa_, which is the present participle.

I too can't think of an English equivalent to it and teaboy's _planted _shall have to work. However, when we translate from _iistaadah_-ایستاده- we might also use erect e.g. "Many trees were erected thanks to Johnny Appleseed's efforts.".


----------



## Maham

It's 

In gamlon main koi pode (lage hue) hain. There are plants in these pots. (They *are *plant*ed*). Or Im gamlon main pode (lage) hain. And you never say "koi pode" ... that's not called Urdu. It's "kuch pode" or it's only pode, simple.

(be + past participle).


----------



## Qureshpor

BelligerentPacifist said:


> I think _lagaa huaa_ is not the tense being used, rather _lagaa huaa hoonaa_, which is the present participle.
> 
> I too can't think of an English equivalent to it and teaboy's _planted _shall have to work. However, when we translate from _iistaadah_-ایستاده- we might also use erect e.g. "Many trees were erected thanks to Johnny Appleseed's efforts.".




My brain was definitely asleep this morning, since I did not notice that the sentence was a question and not a statement. I now think that the original "growing" may be the best English idiomatic equivalent for "lage hu'e". If we wrote, "Are there any plants planted in these plant pots", the repetition sounds aweful.

Secondly, "lagaa hu'aa" is indeed the past participle, for it is derived from the infinitive "lagnaa".


----------



## teaboy

OK, now I am thoroughly confused.

I thought that the difference between past and present participle is based on the final form of hona in the sentence:

_lagaa huaa hai_ (are/have been planted) would be present participle.

_lagaa huaa thaa_ (were/had been planted) would be past participle.

The _lagaa huaa_ part is the participle, and the _hona_ part determines the present/past.  Am I mistaken?

Can someone point me to an online explanation of participles in Urdu in their favourite online Urdu grammar book?


----------



## Qureshpor

teaboy said:


> OK, now I am thoroughly confused.
> 
> I thought that the difference between past and present participle is based on the final form of hona in the sentence:
> 
> _lagaa huaa hai_ (are/have been planted) would be present participle.
> 
> _lagaa huaa thaa_ (were/had been planted) would be past participle.
> 
> The _lagaa huaa_ part is the participle, and the _hona_ part determines the present/past.  Am I mistaken?
> 
> Can someone point me to an online explanation of participles in Urdu in their favourite online Urdu grammar book?




Let's move away from "lagnaa" and move over to "marnaa".

maraa hu'aa aadamii = a dead man (Past Participle, acting as an adjective)

martaa hu'aa aadamii= a dying man (Present participle, acting as an adjective)

vuh maraa hai (vuh mar gayaa hai) = He has died

vuh maraa thaa (vuh mar gayaa thaa) = He had died

us ne likhaa hai = He has written

us ne likhaa thaa = He had written


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> It's
> 
> In gamlon main koi pode (lage hue) hain. There are plants in these pots. (They *are *plant*ed*). Or Im gamlon main pode (lage) hain. And you never say "koi pode" ... that's not called Urdu. It's "kuch pode" or it's only pode, simple.
> 
> (be + past participle).



I don't believe the writer of the sentence meant "kuchh" instead of "ko'ii". kuchh implies "some" in the sense of an indeterminete number whereas ko'ii refers to undefined variety of plants growing in the plant pots.


----------



## Maham

^ then it would be "In gamlon main pode lage hue hain? (undefined).

I can't see "koi" with a plural form like pode. You never say in urdu "koi cheeze, koi phool" NEVER. At least not in good Urdu. You can say "koi poda", koi awaaz, koi insaan but "koi log" is not urdu. Then it's only "log" or only "pode". 

"Kya is Gamle me koi poda laga hua hai" = RIGHT
"Kya in gamlon main koi pode lage hue hain" = WRONG
"Kya in gamlon main pode lage hue hain" = RIGHT


----------



## Maham

^ In above example with phool I meant "Pool" in plural ..now phool in singular can be used with koi for sure.


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> ^ then it would be "In gamlon main pode lage hue hain? (undefined).
> 
> I can't see "koi" with a plural form like pode. You never say in urdu "koi cheeze, koi phool" NEVER. At least not in good Urdu. You can say "koi poda", koi awaaz, koi insaan but "koi log" is not urdu. Then it's only "log" or only "pode".
> 
> "Kya is Gamle me koi poda laga hua hai" = RIGHT
> "Kya in gamlon main koi pode lage hue hain" = WRONG
> "Kya in gamlon main pode lage hue hain" = RIGHT



Maham Sahibah, aadaab-o-tasliimaat.

C.M.Naim, a well known scholar, originally from Barabanki in his grammar book mentions the use of ko'ii with plural nouns as legitimate. Who are we to question his speech and scholarship?

Also, I dare say, in Barabanki and else where, correct pronunciation for the word for plant is "paudaa", i.e. pe+zabar+vaa'o+daal+zabar+alif. What I mean is that there is a dipthong after the pe and not a straight "o" vowel.

Qureshpor


----------



## Qureshpor

Further to above, there is a Ghazal by Mirza Asadulla Khan Dehlavi which begins..

laazim thaa kih dekho miraa rastaa ko'ii din aur
tanhaa ga'e kyoN, ab raho tanhaa ko'ii din aur

It does seem that "din" is used in the plural here.


----------



## BP.

QURESHPOR said:


> ...
> Also, I dare say, in Barabanki and else where, correct pronunciation for the word for plant is "paudaa", i.e. pe+zabar+vaa'o+daal+zabar+alif. What I mean is that there is a dipthong after the pe and not a straight "o" vowel.
> ...


Confirming.

_koo2ii_-کوئی- can be a-normally used to mean _kyaa_-کیا-, _bhalaa_-بھلا- and _chand_-چند-, so I feel.

Let's read your first question after replacing _kooii _by _kya_:
_in gamloo.n mee.n kyaa paodee lagee haee.n_?

If we replace it by _b.halaa_ then we get a self-affirmating question. I think kyaa and koo2ii could work just fine too to convey the same idea.

The Ghalib couplet you quote carries the second meaning - _chand/zaraa_.

Much thanks for correcting me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Maham

Well, in Urdu language, you will find so many scholars one contradicting the other .. so we can't just define it this way.

anyway, for me, in my SALEES URDU, I will never use koi with plural, nor I have used it until now and I have never heard of it anyways. It just seems so strange to my ears, me having grown up in an urdu speeking family and cities (Karachi & Hyderabad). 

And your remark for PAUDE is absolutely right. I never pay attention when I write roman Urdu, in fact I can't write it the way I pronounce it ..so i use the simpliest way to write of course it's PAUDE like AUR, like GHAUR, like TAUR ...etc

Last but not least Ghalib ke ashaar main aap ko bohot se alfaaz aise milen ge jinka istemaal ab "Urdu" main us taur par bohot kamm hota hai, lekin the way he used it was really is very interesting and deep if only people understand it.  
If you really take it literally then I wonder for you the following sentence might be right?? "koi din aur mera intezaar karo"???


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> Well, in Urdu language, you will find so many scholars one contradicting the other .. so we can't just define it this way.
> 
> I can not say that Urdu language scholars are always in agreement about everything all the time but the liklihood of any differences is very small indeed. This is because they are not offering subjective opinions but rather objective observations of language usage, both spoken and written, amongst educated people within Urdu speaking populations. If we were speaking about interpretations of Urdu poetry, then this becomes personal and differences among scholars would be quite natural.
> 
> anyway, for me, in my SALEES URDU, I will never use koi with plural, nor I have used it until now and I have never heard of it anyways. It just seems so strange to my ears, me having grown up in an urdu speeking family and cities (Karachi & Hyderabad).
> 
> I have no doubt whatsoever about your Urdu language capability but, I am sure you would agree, one's family and regional association, in itself, is no gurantee for grammatically correct language usage.
> 
> Last but not least Ghalib ke ashaar main aap ko bohot se alfaaz aise milen ge jinka istemaal ab "Urdu" main us taur par bohot kamm hota hai.
> 
> I agree with you wholeheartedly.
> 
> If you really take it literally then I wonder for you the following sentence might be right?? "koi din aur mera intezaar karo"???
> 
> Personally I would say that this sentence is correct, even if it appears odd to our eyes and ears. Regarding the original sentence..
> 
> " in gamloN meN ko'ii paude lage hu'e haiN?", the meaning that I take is this.
> 
> In these plant pots, are there some plants growing?
> (Emphasis on (unknown) kinds of plants)
> 
> If the sentence contained "kuchh"..
> 
> "in gamloN meN kuchh paude lage hu'e haiN"?
> 
> In these plant pots, are there some plants growing?
> 
> (Here, the emphasis is on (unknown) number of plants)


----------



## teaboy

Thank you all for this very interesting discussion.  In fact the next sentence is:

 یا کیا وہ صرف گھاس پھوس ہیں؟

So the first sentence is asking, Are there plants (purposely) planted in those pots, or are they just weeds?


----------



## Maham

^ Your question is not clear? "what is *"wo"* here? You want to say ..
Kia in gamlon main kuch paude lage hue hain ya kia yahan srif ghaas phoos hai.
Again ghaas phoos is not plural.

@Qureshposh: you might be right in your vision and me in mine. Nowadays, people don't speak Urdu of Ghalib's time and if you listen to panjabi's Urdu, you will probably not like it if you are a true Urdu speaker ... anyway .. koi for me is still not used in plural in good urdu. Mene bachpan se yehi suna hai ke koi hamesha koi aik hota hai but panjabi speaking people speak the way they want to.

And when we are talking about a family or region where the language is spoken then of course the region and family has much to do with a "pure language". Even in Europe, there are countries which have different regions and in some regions they speak more familiar than in other and there are some regions where the standard of language is high. Of course people adopt karte hain language family se, region se, schools se etc. Now I live in Europe and I have some panjabi friend here from Panjab and they say they speak Urdu and they have always spoken Urdu since childhood but still there is so much different between my Urdu and their Urdu .. they say, "mere sar main dard ho rahi hai", I say mere sar main dard ho raha hai" they say "gaind kahan gai" I say gaind kahan gaya, they say waqat, i say waqt, they say ilfaaz, i say alfaaz, they say ikhlaaq, i say akhlaaq, you can't even imagine, unke ek jumle main hi kitni ghalatiyan hoti hain ..

Bottom line: i just wanted to say that region and family means alot to speak good language and of course you have exceptions everywhere.


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> @Qureshposh: you might be right in your vision and me in mine. Nowadays, people don't speak Urdu of Ghalib's time and if you listen to panjabi's Urdu, you will probably not like it if you are a true Urdu speaker ... anyway .. koi for me is still not used in plural in good urdu. Mene bachpan se yehi suna hai ke koi hamesha koi aik hota hai but panjabi speaking people speak the way they want to.
> 
> *muHtaramah Maham Sahibah, aadaab.
> 
> We could go on arguing forever and that would certainly be a futile exercise. I mentioned C.M.Naim and Ghalib deliberately so that no one could accuse them of not being "true Urdu speakers", to quote your terminology. I have no doubt I can find more recent examples of plural ko'ii usage by the best Urdu writers of more recent vintage but I think that is unnecessary. As I have said earlier, the plural usage is rather uncommon but it is there nevertheless. And, I understand completely your unease at using it because you have not come across this relatively rare occurrence.
> *
> And when we are talking about a family or region where the language is spoken then of course the region and family has much to do with a "pure language". Even in Europe, there are countries which have different regions and in some regions they speak more familiar than in other and there are some regions where the standard of language is high. Of course people adopt karte hain language family se, region se, schools se etc. Now I live in Europe and I have some panjabi friend here from Panjab and they say they speak Urdu and they have always spoken Urdu since childhood but still there is so much different between my Urdu and their Urdu .. they say, "mere sar main dard ho rahi hai", I say mere sar main dard ho raha hai" they say "gaind kahan gai" I say gaind kahan gaya, they say waqat, i say waqt, they say ilfaaz, i say alfaaz, they say ikhlaaq, i say akhlaaq, you can't even imagine, unke ek jumle main hi kitni ghalatiyan hoti hain ..
> 
> *Again I could give you example after example of "true Urdu speakers" whose speech leaves a lot to be desired. As for gender of words, this has always been a bone of contention between the Lucknow and Delhi schools of thought. One need not bring Punjab into the equation. "bulbul" is masculine amongst one group of Urdu speakers and feminine amongst another. Akbar Allahabadi has used "faatiHah" as masculine whereas amongst most Urdu knowing population it is feminine because the word "suurah" (suurat) is feminine. You will pull your hair out if you were listening to, say a Hyderabadi. You will then possibly think that the average educated Punjabi's Urdu is ten times better than a lot of native Urdu speakers.*
> 
> Bottom line: i just wanted to say that region and family means alot to speak good language and of course you have exceptions everywhere.
> 
> *Agreed and it has been a pleasure discussing this topic with you. Thank you.*


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> Now I live in Europe and I have some panjabi friend here from Panjab and they say they speak Urdu and they have always spoken Urdu since childhood but still there is so much different between my Urdu and their Urdu .. they say, "mere sar main dard ho rahi hai", I say mere sar main dard ho raha hai" they say "gaind kahan gai" I say gaind kahan gaya, they say waqat, i say waqt, they say ilfaaz, i say alfaaz, they say ikhlaaq, i say akhlaaq, you can't even imagine, unke ek jumle main hi kitni ghalatiyan hoti hain ..
> 
> *Apologies for the follow up. I meant to include this in my reply but it slipped my memory.
> 
> 1) It surprises me to read that a Punjabi would use "dard" as feminine.
> 
> b) If you were to look up the word "geNd" (ball) in any reputable Urdu/English dictionary (Platts for example), you will find that it is indeed feminine.
> 
> 
> *


----------



## Maham

you are right, we could go on arguing forever and may be never come to an end ... Urdu language has been so disturbed by so many different sub-cultural language speaking people that sometimes the real word has no more its "real identity".  

As far as the word Gaind is concerned, I am not surprised by what you have found in dictionaries. I have 4 different Urdu Lughaat at home, all of them are famous and I often but very very often find contradictions between talaffuz and gender etc etc .. anyway, at school and also in Urdu books / novels, I have always heard gaind as masculin even often in urdu commentary of cricket matches.  I think it depends from which region you are. I am really very concerned when it's about Urdu that's why I have always noticed my panjabi friends (not only friends, there are many panjabis I have met in my life, who rarely use the Urdu word as it should be used. So there is no doubt about it. Yet, as I said, exceptions are everywhere.


----------



## BP.

Try this one for yet another meaning of the word:
یہ(بھی) کوئی بات ہوئی? 

(...) - optional.


----------



## Qureshpor

BelligerentPacifist said:


> Try this one for yet another meaning of the word:
> یہ(بھی) کوئی بات ہوئی?
> 
> (...) - optional.



Not easy, I must admit.

1) What are you on about?

2) You are not making any sense!


----------



## BP.

^It means something is unreasonable or illogical or is preposterous.

The point is, کوئی means different things at different places.


----------



## Qureshpor

BelligerentPacifist said:


> ^It means something is unreasonable or illogical or is preposterous.
> 
> The point is, کوئی means different things at different places.



But I thought we were all already aware of this fact. If you study Mirza Ghalib's Ghazal, "hai baskih har ik un ke ishaare meN nishaaN aur..", you will come across a number of different usages of the word "ko'ii".

I imagined you were after a translation of the sentence you posted and so I provided two possible translations!

Qureshpor


----------



## Qureshpor

کوئی دن غریب خانے میں کرم فرماؤ Grace me with your stay at my humble abode for a few days (Platts Urdu Grammar p 318)

Platts does go on to state that this construction of کوئی followed by a plural noun is rare.


----------

