# Hindi: pronunciation of धन्यवाद



## James Bates

Is धन्यवाद (thank you) pronounced धनेवाद?


----------



## Shounak

No. it is "dha" "nya" "bad". Nya as in "Tania". "Dha" + "Nya"+"Bad" = Dhanyabad


----------



## James Bates

Weird. When i said it that way I got made fun of. I was told it was pronounced धनेवाद.


----------



## Shounak

No, certainly not. It is like 'Ta*nya' *If you say it you are right. May be when it is spoken fast it sounds like that.


----------



## James Bates

Oh, I see. By the way, shouldn't it be "dhanya*v*ad"?


----------



## Shounak

No. Not *v* it is *w.* and *wad* the pronunciation of 'a' is in *'Amen'. *You have to pronounce 'a' by opening your mouth*.*


----------



## James Bates

I see. Why did you spell it with a b?


----------



## Shounak

I pronounced it with b, if you are pronouncing in Bengali dialect then 'bad' is pronounced with *b.* If you are speaking in Hindi (which I feel you are willing to do) then it is pronounced with *'w',* wad.


----------



## James Bates

Thanks


----------



## lachesisdecima

Hey Bates.

I will just add one more thing to what Shounak has said. It is not exactly a *w* or a *v*. It is somewhere in between these two sounds.

It is actually this sound here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labiodental_approximant

Play the sound file and hear the difference! It even gives you the way to pronounce it in text on the page itself.

" It is similar to an English w pronounced with the teeth and lips held in the position used to articulate the letter vee."


----------



## Khaanabadosh

धनेवाद isn't the correct pronunciation, but it's not uncommon to hear it, as it's quicker to pronounce it that way as opposed to धन्यवाद.


----------



## James Bates

I see. Thank you!


----------



## Dib

lachesisdecima said:


> Hey Bates.
> 
> I will just add one more thing to what Shounak has said. It is not exactly a *w* or a *v*. It is somewhere in between these two sounds.
> 
> It is actually this sound here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labiodental_approximant
> 
> Play the sound file and hear the difference! It even gives you the way to pronounce it in text on the page itself.
> 
> " It is similar to an English w pronounced with the teeth and lips held in the position used to articulate the letter vee."



Thanks a lot for this exposition. However, I should probably add a bit about perception to explain why Shounak equated it to "w" and emphatically not to "v", while native Hindi speakers usually write it with a "v" in Romanized Hindi.

1) To Bengali speakers (like me and Shounak), Hindi व and English "w" usually sound same/similar. On the other hand, Hindi भ and English "v" sound similar.
2) To Hindi speakers, Hindi व, English v and English w - all three sound same/similar, while Hindi भ sounds different from all of them. The thing is that Hindi व, can span the whole range v~ʋ(labio-dental approximant)~w, depending on context and speaker, though ʋ may be the dominant form.


----------



## marrish

Here and here are links to three Forvo pronunciation samples of this word. I hope it can clarify it better! Are these pronunciations correct?


----------



## tonyspeed

James Bates said:


> Weird. When i said it that way I got made fun of. I was told it was pronounced धनेवाद.



I suspect you are pronouncing "a" wrong. It is not an 'a' in the typical sense. It is pronounced like the 'u' in 'up'. It is a short sound most of the time.


----------



## bakshink

Let me add a little more to it. There are two different sound 'b' and 'bh' in Hindi. 'b' 'ब' as in 'बाद' 'after' has a different sound than 'भ' 'bh' has in 'भेद' (bhed- Difference).


----------



## tonyspeed

Khaanabadosh said:


> धनेवाद isn't the correct pronunciation, but it's not uncommon to hear it, as it's quicker to pronounce it that way as opposed to धन्यवाद.



To expound more on this, there are some speakers that tend to replace "ya" with "e" in certain contexts. Other examples are swargiie for swargiiya. Where are the speakers you refer to from in India?


----------



## littlepond

Khaanabadosh said:


> धनेवाद isn't the correct pronunciation, but it's not uncommon to hear it, as it's quicker to pronounce it that way as opposed to धन्यवाद.



Well, I have never heard "dhanevaad"! I don't think that that exists in any region of India!


----------



## Dib

tonyspeed said:


> To expound more on this, there are some speakers that tend to replace "ya" with "e" in certain contexts. Other examples are swargiie for swargiiya. Where are the speakers you refer to from in India?





littlepond said:


> Well, I have never heard "dhanevaad"! I don't think that that exists in any region of India!



They sound conflicting, but I think, I have a way to reconcile them, drawing on my personal impression. Like tonyspeed, I also have the impression that the "ya" of the "dhanyavaad" is sometimes pronounced - especially in fast speech - in a way phonetically rather similar to "e". However, its phonological properties are quite different from the normal Hindi "e", which is a phonologically long vowel, while this ya > e-like thingie is a short one. As a result, the word accent remains on the first syllable. If there was a real (phonological) e in "*dhanevaad", the accent would be on the second syllable. This may explain why native Hindi speakers don't perceive it as an "e", while some non-natives may hear it as a kind of an "e", like I do. I am assuming, tonyspeed is also non-native.

But, probably more important is tonyspeed's earlier comment:


tonyspeed said:


> I suspect you are pronouncing "a" wrong. It is not an 'a' in the typical sense. It is pronounced like the 'u' in 'up'. It is a short sound most of the time.


----------



## Khaanabadosh

littlepond said:


> Well, I have never heard "dhanevaad"! I don't think that that exists in any region of India!


लिट्टिलपौंड साहब, आज कल के ज़माने में कोइ धनेवाद ही बोल दे तो खुश्-क़िस्मती समझिएगा!


----------



## James Bates

ख़ानाबदोश साहिब ने बिलकुल सही फ़रमाया।


----------



## lachesisdecima

Dib said:


> Thanks a lot for this exposition. However, I should probably add a bit about perception to explain why Shounak equated it to "w" and emphatically not to "v", while native Hindi speakers usually write it with a "v" in Romanized Hindi.
> 
> 1) To Bengali speakers (like me and Shounak), Hindi व and English "w" usually sound same/similar. On the other hand, Hindi भ and English "v" sound similar.
> 2) To Hindi speakers, Hindi व, English v and English w - all three sound same/similar, while Hindi भ sounds different from all of them. The thing is that Hindi व, can span the whole range v~ʋ(labio-dental approximant)~w, depending on context and speaker, though ʋ may be the dominant form.



The labiodental approximant (ʋ) sounds a lot like the English *v* in most contexts. Which is why James has probably seen the word धन्यवाद transliterated as dhanya*v*ad. It is actually quite accurate in this case. However, after a sibilant (श, ष, स), व is transliterated as a *w*. I think it has do with the sibilants changing the way the labiodental approximant sounds. Therefore, श्वेत (white) is transliterated as shweth or something similar with a *w*.


----------



## James Bates

शुक्रिया!


----------



## Dib

I think, I have another piece of the ya~e puzzle. This e-like sound seems to be the result of an (attempted) schwa-deletion on "ya".


----------



## Khaanabadosh

बचपन में मज़ाक़ में धनबाद भी बोलते हुए सुना है। (धनबाद झारखंड प्रांत का एक शहर है)


----------



## Wolverine9

lachesisdecima said:


> The labiodental approximant (ʋ) sounds a lot like the English *v* in most contexts.



I don't think that's true. Hindi speakers often pronounce English *v* incorrectly. It's as Dib described: Hindi व can span the whole range v~ʋ(labio-dental approximant)~w, depending on context and speaker, with ʋ as the dominant form. ʋ is neither v nor w.


----------



## lachesisdecima

Wolverine9 said:


> I don't think that's true. Hindi speakers often pronounce English *v* incorrectly. It's as Dib described: Hindi व can span the whole range v~ʋ(labio-dental approximant)~w, depending on context and speaker, with ʋ as the dominant form. ʋ is neither v nor w.



Yeah. You are right. ʋ is neither v nor w. Probably why most Hindi speakers get the English v incorrectly. This could show that it was the dominant form. However, English does not have the labiodental approximant. The closest thing they would hear would be the standard v sound that they have. However, after sibilants, the labiodental approximant sounds a lot like the w sound instead. Hence, when you transliterate Hindi words into English, you end with either v or w depending on the Hindi word.


----------



## James Bates

जी, उसका सब से बड़ा शहर है।


----------



## Dib

Dib said:


> I think, I have another piece of the ya~e puzzle. This e-like sound seems to be the result of an (attempted) schwa-deletion on "ya".



Just to point out something, the e~y variation marginally shows up even in Hindi spelling, in forms like gaay/gaae. We have had threads about these in the past.


----------



## tonyspeed

It is easier to explain the approximant if one considers what the mouth is doing. For w in English the mouth puckers like a kiss. For v, the top front teeth bite down and vibrate against *top* of the bottom lip.

For the L-D approximant, the front of the top teeth _sometimes_ vibrates against the *back* of the bottom lip, _IF_ the bottom lip is in a position to do so. In this case it will sound like a V to an English speaker. When the lip is not in a resting position, then the teeth fail to vibrate against the bottom lip and the result sounds like a W to an English speaker. Hence, the mechanics of the L-D approximant makes it impossible to say words like 'Vote' correctly. The lips have already puckered to say the following 'o' vowel sound, hence no vibration is heard.


----------



## lachesisdecima

tonyspeed said:


> It is easier to explain the approximant if one considers what the mouth is doing. For w in English the mouth puckers like a kiss. For v, the top front teeth bite down and vibrate against *top* of the bottom lip.
> 
> For the L-D approximant, the front of the top teeth _sometimes_ vibrates against the *back* of the bottom lip, _IF_ the bottom lip is in a position to do so. In this case it will sound like a V to an English speaker. When the lip is not in a resting position, then the teeth fail to vibrate against the bottom lip and the result sounds like a W to an English speaker. Hence, the mechanics of the L-D approximant makes it impossible to say words like 'Vote' correctly. The lips have already puckered to say the following 'o' vowel sound, hence no vibration is heard.



Thanks a lot for this. This would explain the Indians not being able to pronounce the "v" sound in English properly. So, I posited this thing about the sibilants (s, ʃ, ɕ) affecting the way the LD approximant sounds like a w. I wonder if this 





			
				tonyspeed said:
			
		

> When the lip is not in a resting position, then the teeth fail to vibrate against the bottom lip and the result sounds like a W to an English speaker.


 has something to do with that. The sibilants taking the lips out of the resting position and all. Would this be true as well?


----------



## James Bates

I believe that in Sanskrit, which I am currently learning, व had the exact same pronunciation as the English "v".


----------



## lachesisdecima

James Bates said:


> I believe that in Sanskrit, which I am currently learning, व had the exact same pronunciation as the English "v".



Hey James. This seems kind of unlikely. Sanskrit phonology classifies व as a semivowel (sounds like ya etc). These are all approximants (though not all approximants are semivowels). So, I think the original Sanskrit pronunciation would still be the LD approximant as compared to the English v.


----------



## James Bates

I see. I guess that means the Hindi pronunciation of व is the same as the Sanskrit one.


----------



## lachesisdecima

James Bates said:


> I see. I guess that means the Hindi pronunciation of व is the same as the Sanskrit one.



The range of pronunciations, v~ʋ(labio-dental approximant)~w, would apply for Hindi. Remember, Hindi is not Sanskrit. So, expect there to be a lot of changes, especially phonology wise. However, the LD approximant is the dominant pronunciation for Hindi. Maybe the other pronunciations may creep in from time to time. For instance, while Hindi has lost the distinction between श and ष for the most part, you may hear the original ष sound in conjuncts like ष्ट and ष्ठ. Same thing here probably happens. LD approximant mostly with v and w creeping up on occasion or as part of a dialect etc.I would say stick to the LD approximant if possible.


----------



## tonyspeed

James Bates said:


> So, I posited this thing about the sibilants (s, ʃ, ɕ) affecting the way the LD approximant sounds like a w. I wonder if this  has something to do with that. The sibilants taking the lips out of the resting position and all. Would this be true as well?



Well, when the sh and s sound are made, the upper and lower teeth are pressed together at the front of the mouth, this prevents the top front teeth from getting anywhere near the lips. Hence, to an English speaker the approximant will sound like 'w' again.


----------

