# Urdu-Hindi: mujhe burii tarH piiTaa gayaa



## Qureshpor

In "Urdu:The house was built" thread Tony SaaHib wrote:

_*mujhe* burii tarah piitaa gayaa

_I thought about this sentence and was in two minds as to whether this was correct or not. In the end I decided that this was incorrect and replied to Tony SaaHib by saying..

I would possibly say, "_*maiN*_ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa". You can see my uncertainty in the wording of my reply. 

marrish SaaHib, then quite diplomatically suggested that both forms are correct. To be honest, I am not convinced. Could we please have a little discussion on this topic and come to some form of conclusion.

Thank you all in advance.


----------



## marrish

As the subsidiary source of the discussion I prefer to abstain from taking part in the proceedings, for the sake of objectiveness and an opportunity for me to learn something. I encourage everybody, be it speakers of Hindi or Urdu or both, because this grammar is common, I believe to share on this topic.


----------



## tonyspeed

http://books.google.com/books?id=vvuP8sD1wloC&lpg=PA136&dq=passive%20hindi&pg=PA135

Statement at bottom of page 135.


----------



## marrish

I would say that this 135 mujhe is _fasiiH urduu_. It has a different shade of meaning.


----------



## tonyspeed

marrish said:


> I would say that this 135 mujhe is _fasiiH urduu_. It has a different shade of meaning.



Ha. you are right. I didn't read the example closely enough.


----------



## Qureshpor

This is how I see this issue.

us ne sher ko talvaar se maaraa.

(He/she killed the lion with a sword)

sher us ke haathoN talvaar se maaraa gayaa

(The lion was killed by him/her with a sword)

us ne mujhe daNDe se burii tarH piiTaa.

(He/She beat me horribly with a stick)

maiN us ke haathoN daNDe se burii tarH piiTaa gayaa.

(I was beaten horribly with a stick by him/her.)

us ne mujhe xat likhaa.

(He wrote me a letter)

us ke haathoN mujhe xat likhaa gayaa.

(The letter was written to me by him/her)

And here is an Urdu shi3r which illustrates my line of thought.

yaas kahtii hai kih qaasid raah meN maaraa gayaa
aas kahtii hai kih xat kaa javaab aane ko hai!

Tony/marrish SaaHibaan's point of view would have this shi3r to be, "...qaasid ko...."


----------



## Faylasoof

QURESHPOR said:


> In "Urdu:The house was built" thread Tony SaaHib wrote:
> 
> _*mujhe* burii tarah piitaa gayaa
> 
> _I thought about this sentence and was in two minds as to whether this was correct or not. In the end I decided that this was incorrect and replied to Tony SaaHib by saying..
> 
> I would possibly say, "_*maiN*_ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa". You can see my uncertainty in the wording of my reply.
> 
> marrish SaaHib, then quite diplomatically suggested that both forms are correct. To be honest, I am not convinced. Could we please have a little discussion on this topic and come to some form of conclusion.
> 
> Thank you all in advance.


  QP SaaHib When I first read the first sentence I thought it rather humorous. It is as if a drink was complaining, say, to a poet:
مجھے بری طرح پیتا گیا
_mujhe burii TarH piitaa* gayaa_
He kept drinking me badly!

So you are indeed correct that this is not the same as the one below:

مجھے بری طرح پیٹا گیا
_mujhe burii TarH piiTaa gayaa_
I was beaten in a terrible manner / way! i.e. I was beaten badly!

In meaning, the above is the same as this: 
میں بری طرح پیٹا گیا
_maiN burii TaraH piiTaa gayaa_

… and even the one below:

میں بری طرح پٹا
_maiN burii TarH piTaa_

* If we assume that this is _piiTaa _and not _piitaa_, then the first and the second mean the same! I'd agree with marrish SaaHib!


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> This is how I see this issue.
> 
> us ne sher ko talvaar se maaraa.
> 
> (He/she killed the lion with a sword)
> 
> sher us ke haathoN talvaar se maaraa gayaa
> 
> (The lion was killed by him/her with a sword)
> 
> us ne mujhe daNDe se burii tarH piiTaa.
> 
> (He/She beat me horribly with a stick)
> 
> maiN us ke haathoN daNDe se burii tarH piiTaa gayaa.
> 
> (I was beaten horribly with a stick by him/her.)
> 
> us ne mujhe xat likhaa.
> 
> (He wrote me a letter)
> 
> us ke haathoN mujhe xat likhaa gayaa.
> 
> (The letter was written to me by him/her)
> 
> And here is an Urdu shi3r which illustrates my line of thought.
> 
> yaas kahtii hai kih qaasid raah meN maaraa gayaa
> aas kahtii hai kih xat kaa javaab aane ko hai!
> 
> Tony/marrish SaaHibaan's point of view would have this shi3r to be, "...qaasid ko...."



Though your reasoning sounds right, I have never heard "maiN buurii tarah piiTaa gayaa". I have always heard phrases like:
"Mujhe chaar mahine baad chhoR diyaa gayaa"
"Mujhe maar bhi daalaa jaaye, to bhi maiN nahiN boluNgaa" and so on.

Substitution of "mujhe" with "maiN" in all these phrases and in the sentence in the opening post looks odd: I've at least never heard them, and I would have even thought of "maiN buurii tarah piiTaa gayaa" as odd Hindi.

However, conversely, in the sentence "Aaj maiN buurii tarah piTaa", "maiN" is normal and "mujhe" would be odd.


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> Though your reasoning sounds right, I have never heard "maiN buurii tarah piiTaa gayaa". I have always heard phrases like:
> "Mujhe chaar mahine baad chhoR diyaa gayaa"
> "Mujhe maar bhi daalaa jaaye, to bhi maiN nahiN boluNgaa" and so on.
> 
> Substitution of "mujhe" with "maiN" in all these phrases and in the sentence in the opening post looks odd: I've at least never heard them, and I would have even thought of "maiN buurii tarah piiTaa gayaa" as odd Hindi.
> 
> However, conversely, in the sentence "Aaj maiN buurii tarah piTaa", "maiN" is normal and "mujhe" would be odd.




I accept that "mujhe" sounds fine in the sentences we have been quoting. As far as "aaj maiN burii tarH piTaa", "piTaa" is already passive and it has not required the verb "jaanaa" to make it passive. I think we need to look at the grammatical principle. Both ways sound and look good to me but on closer inspection I see an anomaly with the "mujhe" form. Let's write these sentences down once again, leaving out the manner of the beating and the instrument.

*us* ne *mujhe* maaraa 

*He/She* beat *me
*
In Urdu, in reality us = vuh but, as we all know, the postposition "ne" changes it to "us".

Here "*us/vuh*" is the *subject *and *mujhe *is the *object.*

In the passive construction, the subject/agent is indicated in English by "by" and in Urdu by "ke haathoN". The object now becomes the subject! (from "mujhe" to "maiN")

*maiN* *us *ke haathoN maaraa gayaa

*I* was beaten by* him

us *ne *mujhe **xat *likhaa 

*He* wrote (to) *me* a *letter

**us *ke hathoN* xat **mujhe *likhaa gayaa

Here xat is the direct object, "mujhe" is the indirect object and "vuh/us" is the subject/agent (ke haathoN =by).

So, you can see that in essence " mujhe chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa" ought to be..

maiN chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> So, you can see that in essence " mujhe chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa" ought to be..
> 
> maiN chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa



Yes, your reasoning is logical, at least I don't see any flaw in it. Yet I have never heard a "maiN" in the sentence above.


----------



## marrish

I would not like to say _maiN chhoR diyaa gayaa_.


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> I would not like to say _maiN chhoR diyaa gayaa_.



marrish SaaHib, this is fair enough. Right in the begining I did say that I had my doubts in what I had said. However, it does seem to me that as far as Urdu/Hindi grammar is concerned, in the passive voice the object from the active voice ends up in the nominative case (direct case). I did concede to gb that "mujhe" form sounds correct (and I might add perhaps even more correct).


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> marrish SaaHib, this is fair enough. Right in the begining I did say that I had my doubts in what I had said. However, it does seem to me that as far as Urdu/Hindi grammar is concerned, in the passive voice the object from the active voice ends up in the nominative case (direct case). I did concede to gb that "mujhe" form sounds correct (and I might add perhaps even more correct).


It is good because we have some progress about the understanding of both variants. All I can say they are equally possible but maiN piT gayaa means it it does pain but mujhe piiTaa gayaa means they happened to beat me. Sorry to complicate the matter.


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> It is good because we have some progress about the understanding of both variants. All I can say they are equally possible but maiN piT gayaa means it it does pain but mujhe piiTaa gayaa means they happened to beat me. Sorry to complicate the matter.



The difference between "maiN piT gayaa" and "maiN piiTaa gayaa" is the same as "vuh mar gayaa" and "vuh maaraa gayaa".


----------



## marrish

Let me answer concisely, and I don't mean gb here, I agree with you here!


----------



## lafz_puchnevala

QURESHPOR said:


> I accept that "mujhe" sounds fine in the sentences we have been quoting. As far as "aaj maiN burii tarH piTaa", "piTaa" is already passive and it has not required the verb "jaanaa" to make it passive. I think we need to look at the grammatical principle. Both ways sound and look good to me but on closer inspection I see an anomaly with the "mujhe" form. Let's write these sentences down once again, leaving out the manner of the beating and the instrument.
> 
> *us* ne *mujhe* maaraa
> 
> *He/She* beat *me
> *
> In Urdu, in reality us = vuh but, as we all know, the postposition "ne" changes it to "us".
> 
> Here "*us/vuh*" is the *subject *and *mujhe *is the *object.*
> 
> In the passive construction, the subject/agent is indicated in English by "by" and in Urdu by "ke haathoN". The object now becomes the subject! (from "mujhe" to "maiN")
> 
> *maiN* *us *ke haathoN maaraa gayaa
> 
> *I* was beaten by* him
> 
> us *ne *mujhe **xat *likhaa
> 
> *He* wrote (to) *me* a *letter
> 
> **us *ke hathoN* xat **mujhe *likhaa gayaa
> 
> Here xat is the direct object, "mujhe" is the indirect object and "vuh/us" is the subject/agent (ke haathoN =by).
> 
> So, you can see that in essence " mujhe chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa" ought to be..
> 
> maiN chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa



A good revision for me! On a side note, I think simple 'se' can replace 'ke haathoN' here. Never heard the latter much, at least in Hindi...


----------



## JaiHind

QURESHPOR said:


> In "Urdu:The house was built" thread Tony SaaHib wrote:
> 
> _*mujhe* burii tarah piitaa gayaa
> 
> _I thought about this sentence and was in two minds as to whether this was correct or not. In the end I decided that this was incorrect and replied to Tony SaaHib by saying..
> 
> I would possibly say, "_*maiN*_ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa". You can see my uncertainty in the wording of my reply.
> 
> marrish SaaHib, then quite diplomatically suggested that both forms are correct. To be honest, I am not convinced. Could we please have a little discussion on this topic and come to some form of conclusion.
> 
> Thank you all in advance.



It is better to use impersonal words while creating a thread. No need to honor, pamper or target any other member - just an advice to make it better. 

_*mujhe* burii tarah peetaa gayaa_ is correct.


----------



## Qureshpor

JaiHind said:


> It is better to use impersonal words while creating a thread. No need to honor, pamper or target any other member - just an advice to make it better._*mujhe* burii tarah peetaa gayaa is correct._



Please do elaborate. I don't quite follow your thought process concerning "to honour, pamper or target any other member..".

Is n't "_*mujhe* burii tarah peetaa gayaa" s_aid by someone who has been a victim of a Dracula blood-sucking attack?


----------



## greatbear

lafz_puchnevala said:


> A good revision for me! On a side note, I think simple 'se' can replace 'ke haathoN' here. Never heard the latter much, at least in Hindi...



In fact, lafz, "se" would be wrong; "ke haathoN" or "ke dwaaraa" are the common words a Hindi speaker would use here.

Leaving aside for the moment whether it should be "maiN" or "mujhe", an example:

"Mujhe ek baRe soTe _se _piiTaa gayaa" (I was beaten by a heavy stick)
"Mujhe us ke dostoN _ke haathoN_ piiTaa gayaa" or "Mujhe us ke dostoN _ke dwaaraa _piiTaa gayaa" (I was beaten by his friends)

I hope you understand the difference now, though in English both become "by". The first "by" can have the synonym of "through", the second one cannot.


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> In fact, lafz, "se" would be wrong; "ke haathoN" or "ke dwaaraa" are the common words a Hindi speaker would use here.
> 
> Leaving aside for the moment whether it should be "maiN" or "mujhe", an example:
> 
> "Mujhe ek baRe soTe _se _piiTaa gayaa" (I was beaten by a heavy stick)
> "Mujhe us ke dostoN _ke haathoN_ piiTaa gayaa" or "Mujhe us ke dostoN _ke dwaaraa _piiTaa gayaa" (I was beaten by his friends)
> 
> I hope you understand the difference now, though in English both become "by". The first "by" can have the synonym of "through", the second one cannot.




I believe "with" is used in English for the "instrument".


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> Is n't "_*mujhe* burii tarah peetaa gayaa" s_aid by someone who has been a victim of a Dracula blood-sucking attack?


I have the impression it is! Due to the drastically lowered blood pressure the survivor has his grammar not correct.


----------



## Faylasoof

marrish said:


> Originally Posted by *QURESHPOR* Is n't "_*mujhe* burii tarah peetaa gayaa" s_aid by someone who has been a victim of a Dracula blood-sucking attack?
> 
> 
> 
> I have the impression it is! Due to the drastically lowered blood pressure the survivor has his grammar not correct.
Click to expand...


I prefer the more poetic interpretation mentioned earlier:


Faylasoof said:


> Originally Posted by *QURESHPOR*
> In "Urdu:The house was built" thread Tony SaaHib wrote:
> 
> _*mujhe* burii tarah piitaa gayaa
> _
> 
> 
> 
> QP SaaHib When I first read the first sentence I thought it rather humorous. It is as if a drink was complaining, say, to a poet:
> مجھے بری طرح پیتا گیا
> _mujhe burii TarH piitaa* gayaa_
> He kept drinking me badly!
> 
> So you are indeed correct that this is not the same as the one below:
> 
> مجھے بری طرح پیٹا گیا
> _mujhe burii TarH piiTaa gayaa_
> I was beaten in a terrible manner / way! i.e. I was beaten badly!
> 
> .........
> 
> * If we assume that this is _piiTaa _and not _piitaa_, then the first and the second mean the same! I'd agree with marrish SaaHib!
Click to expand...

As for the rest of the discussion, please allow me to butt in here. As far as these sentences go, we use all the following in Urdu and they all give the same meaning:

_mujhe__ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
mujhko burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
maiN burii tarH piiTaa gayaa_

All are correct and idiomatic! … and just to repeat, we even say:

_maiN burii tarH piTaa_ 

BTW, in each of the above you can add ‘*se*’ for _added effect and emphasis_, e.g. 

_mujhe burii tarH *se* piiTaa gayaa_

etc.

Similarly we can have _mujhe, mujhko, maiN_, all three, as used here:

_mujhe__ chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_
_mujhko chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_
_maiN __chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_

and also,

_maiN chaar mahiine ba3d chhoRaa gayaa_


----------



## marrish

Faylasoof said:


> I prefer the more poetic interpretation mentioned earlier:



Your interpretation is the only one possible, Faylasoof SaaHib, the other having faulty grammar!



> As for the rest of the discussion, please allow me to butt in here. As far as these sentences go, we use all the following in Urdu and they all give the same meaning:
> 
> _mujhe__ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
> mujhko burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
> maiN burii tarH piiTaa gayaa_
> 
> All are correct and idiomatic! … and just to repeat, we even say:
> 
> _maiN burii tarH piTaa_
> 
> BTW, in each of the above you can add ‘*se*’ for _added effect and emphasis_, e.g.
> 
> _mujhe burii tarH *se* piiTaa gayaa_
> 
> etc.
> 
> Similarly we can have _mujhe, mujhko, maiN_, all three, as used here:
> 
> _mujhe__ chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_
> _mujhko chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_
> _maiN __chaar mahiine ba3d chhoR diyaa gayaa_
> 
> and also,
> 
> _maiN chaar mahiine ba3d chhoRaa gayaa_



All three manners are equal, indeed. Such is the richness of the language that the fourth one is also possible! 
I think the same applies to Hindi, am I right Faylasoof SaaHib?


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> marrish said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not like to say _maiN chhoR diyaa gayaa_.
> 
> 
> 
> marrish SaaHib, this is fair enough. Right in the begining I did say that I had my doubts in what I had said. However, it does seem to me that as far as Urdu/Hindi grammar is concerned, in the passive voice the object from the active voice ends up in the nominative case (direct case). I did concede to gb that "mujhe" form sounds correct (and I might add perhaps even more correct).
Click to expand...

Qureshpor SaaHib, I hadn't grammar in my mind when I was writing this comment - I meant the meaning alone! 
As to the object becoming nominative, this is the rule in English, amongst others, but Urdu allows more possibilities.


----------



## Faylasoof

marrish said:


> ....
> All three manners are equal, indeed. Such is the richness of the language that the fourth one is also possible!
> I think the same applies to Hindi, am I right Faylasoof SaaHib?


 I agree with you on all counts, marrish SaaHib! All these sentences are equally valid in Hindi, not just Urdu! At this level (and even higher levels) our grammars are _virtually_ the same! 

BTW, in our speech we actually use the fourth one as well! Very idomatic for us!


----------



## bakshink

How about "Mujhe burii tarah se piiTTa gaya"


----------



## marrish

Do you mean the two T's or ''se''?


----------



## lafz_puchnevala

I think I get the difference, it seems that with people 'ke dvaaraa/haathoN' is used while with objects 'se' would be used. Also like QP mentioned, using a 'with' in these kind of sentences would also help in the differentiation. So, I assume that 'Mujhe ek baRe soTe _ke dvaaraa piiTaa gayaa' _​would also be wrong.


----------



## Faylasoof

bakshink said:


> How about "Mujhe burii tarah se _pii*TT*a_ gaya"


 I guess you mean _pii*T*aa_? Yes of course! In fact I mentioned it above!



Faylasoof said:


> ....
> As for the rest of the discussion, please allow me to butt in here. As far as these sentences go, we use all the following in Urdu and they all give the same meaning:
> 
> _mujhe__ burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
> mujhko burii tarH piiTaa gayaa
> maiN burii tarH piiTaa gayaa_
> 
> All are correct and idiomatic! … and just to repeat, we even say:
> 
> _maiN burii tarH piTaa_
> 
> BTW, in each of the above you can add ‘*se*’ for _added effect and emphasis_, e.g.
> 
> _mujhe burii tarH *se* piiTaa gayaa_
> 
> etc.


----------



## bakshink

Hahaha.. This is not correct unless "soTaa" can beat someone on it's own. Mujhe soTe ( actually in Hindi you should use chhadhee or DaNDaa) 'se' piTTa gayaa. Here 'se' stands for 'with the aid of'.

 "Vah pulis dwara DaNDe se piTTaa gaya." He was beaten by the police with a baton.


----------



## marrish

lafz_puchnevala said:


> I think I get the difference, it seems that with people 'ke dvaaraa/haathoN' is used while with objects 'se' would be used. Also like QP mentioned, using a 'with' in these kind of sentences would also help in the differentiation. So, I assume that 'Mujhe ek baRe soTe _ke dvaaraa piiTaa gayaa' _​would also be wrong.


You may find it interesting to refresh the memory by visiting the following thread, where in post #10 I had given a couple of words of advice regarding this matter, as an answer to one of your questions.

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2357828


----------



## Faylasoof

bakshink said:


> Hahaha.. This is not correct unless "soTaa" can beat someone on it's own. Mujhe soTe ( actually in Hindi you should use chhadhee or DaNDaa) 'se' piTTa gayaa. Here 'se' stands for 'with the aid of'.
> 
> "Vah pulis dwara DaNDe se piTTaa gaya." He was beaten by the police with a baton.


 I see you are replying to LP's post (#28) above! Apart from your correction, and just as a side note, it is *سونٿا सोंटा soṅṭā *[Prk. सुंडओ; prob. S. शुण्ड+कः; but cf. _sāṅṭā_], s.m. A staff, club, cudgel, truncheon, mace; ...]! We also use _sanTii_ [H سنٿي संटी _saṅṭī_, सन्टी _sanṭī_ (see _saṭiyā_), s.f. A switch, a cane, a thin stick] and of course chhaRii and Dandaa!


----------



## marrish

bakshink said:


> Hahaha.. This is not correct unless "soTaa" can beat someone on it's own. Mujhe soTe ( actually in Hindi you should use chhadhee or DaNDaa) 'se' piTTa gayaa. Here 'se' stands for 'with the aid of'.
> 
> "Vah pulis dwara DaNDe se piTTaa gaya." He was beaten by the police with a baton.


Do you mean वह पुलिस द्वारा डंडे से पिटा गया?


----------



## bakshink

Yes I mean so but the word will be piiTTaa with baDhii 'ee'. Sorry because I made the mistake. At present, I am using the computer which doesn't have Hindi text editor.


----------



## marrish

Ah, then is everything perfect!


----------



## greatbear

lafz_puchnevala said:


> So, I assume that 'Mujhe ek baRe soTe _ke dvaaraa piiTaa gayaa' _​would also be wrong.



No, it would be correct! What you cannot say is "Mujhe ek baRe soNTe ke haathoN piTaa gayaa" unless the stick was a magical one having animate powers of its own!

All Faylasoof's four suggestions are equally good in Hindi; I had already mentioned the fourth one in post no. 8.


----------

