# Hindi /Urdu: Arabic script in Hindi



## Jack1014

I'm working with an 1855 glossary that includes words from a number of languages in "British India." Although the headwords are in transliterated English, the author often helpfully provides the word set in the original language (and stresses the importance of doing so in his Introduction). My problem is, that some of the words marked as Hindi are accompanied by what is clearly Arabic script.

In writing Hindi, does one ever write Arabic-origin words in Arabic script???  Is it customary in Hindi dictionaries to write certain Hindi words in Arabic? Can any native speaker of Hindi suggest why the author did this?


----------



## Alfaaz

> Can any native speaker of Hindi suggest why the author did this?


It may be that the author is tying to include both Urdu (which uses Arabic script with extra letters added) and Hindi (which uses Nagri script). Basically, both are very similar at the colloquial level, but as you progress to formal/higher registers, you will start to see many differences. Urdu will mostly use borrowed from Arabic and Persian, while Hindi will use words from Sanskrit. (Note: this is just a generalization). Then there are also many other things involved like social and political factors (which you can read about in the articles mentioned below).



> In writing Hindi, does one ever write Arabic-origin words in Arabic script???


Not that I know of...especially (probably) not today; maybe in older books from before the Partition. 


> Is it customary in Hindi dictionaries to write certain Hindi words in Arabic?


It depends on the dictionary. For example, in Platts: A Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi, and English, you will find the words written in both scripts. On the other hand, there might be dictionaries that don't even mention the origin of words. Most "Hindi dictionaries" probably wouldn't include words in Urdu script...(just a guess!) 

Example: Type "dictionary" in Platts and you get this. You will notice that he lists words of Sanskrit/Hindi origin in both scripts, while words of Arabic-Persian origin in only the Arabic/Persian/Urdu script. 

Some helpful Wikipedia articles: Urdu; Hindi; Hindi-Urdu; Hindi Urdu controversy;

Hindi and Urdu Since 1800; If you Google something like "Urdu Hindi difference", you can find multiple articles, debates, fights, etc.


----------



## Jack1014

Thanks. The "Hindu and Urdu since 1800" was particularly helpful. I am beginning to see how my author approached this.


----------



## tonyspeed

The original primary script for the Hindi language was the Arabic Script (Another script called the Kaithi script was also in use since at least the 1500s). The Devanagari script (which is in your glossary) was adapted to write Hindi later on. It gained wider acceptance as the 1800s moved on. At that time, there were still many Indians that only used the Arabic Script. I know older Indians that still only read Arabic Script. See also this article on John Gilchrist, one of the men responsible for Devanagari Hindi.




http://books.google.com/books?id=ThnNjANUtyoC&pg=PP13&lpg=PP13&dq=HH+Wilson++Glossary+of+Indian+Terms&source=bl&ots=G1RyS2I55G&sig=X82u_cJDKTLDhmNyZlD494AuYTU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RyeYT9TNDo-u8QSI04z5BQ&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=HH%20Wilson%20%20Glossary%20of%20Indian%20Terms&f=false


----------



## Qureshpor

Jack1014 said:


> I'm working with an 1855 glossary that includes words from a number of languages in "British India." Although the headwords are in transliterated English, the author often helpfully provides the word set in the original language (and stresses the importance of doing so in his Introduction). My problem is, that some of the words marked as Hindi are accompanied by what is clearly Arabic script.
> 
> In writing Hindi, does one ever write Arabic-origin words in Arabic script???  Is it customary in Hindi dictionaries to write certain Hindi words in Arabic? Can any native speaker of Hindi suggest why the author did this?



Jack1014, can you provide a link to your book at all?


----------



## Jack1014

tonyspeed, It's definitely Arabic, not Devanagari, though of course there are many Devanagari examples.

Qureshpor, The book is A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms and of Useful Words Occurring in Official Documents Relating to the Administration of the Government of British India, from the Arabic, Persian, Hindustani, Sanskrit, Hindi, Bengali, Uriya, Marathi, Guzarathi, Telugu, Karnata, Tamil, Malayalam, and Other Languages. (I omit all the diacritics.) Published in London in 1855. The author is H. H. Wilson, who was Librarian at the East-India Company, and a professor (of Sanskrit, I think) at Oxford. Archive.org has two good free digitized versions. The one from Cornell may be a bit better than the Toronto one.


----------



## greatbear

tonyspeed said:


> The original primary script for the Hindi language was the Arabic Script (Another script called the Kaithi script was also in use since at least the 1500s). The Devanagari script (which is in your glossary) was adapted to write Hindi later on. It gained wider acceptance as the 1800s moved on. At that time, there were still many Indians that only used the Arabic Script. I know older Indians that still only read Arabic Script. See also this article on John Gilchrist, one of the men responsible for Devanagari Hindi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://books.google.com/books?id=ThnNjANUtyoC&pg=PP13&lpg=PP13&dq=HH+Wilson++Glossary+of+Indian+Terms&source=bl&ots=G1RyS2I55G&sig=X82u_cJDKTLDhmNyZlD494AuYTU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RyeYT9TNDo-u8QSI04z5BQ&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=HH%20Wilson%20%20Glossary%20of%20Indian%20Terms&f=false



Your imagination even about historical periods where nobody knows anything for concrete always amazes me! From your comments it would seem that Nagari was suddenly fabricated in the nineteenth century; however, what did happen in the nineteenth century was that Nagari started to be utilised for Sanskrit (which we're not talking of). You might find the following short paragraph instructive to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari#Origins 

There is a lot of literature, especially in the form of temple scrolls, etc., which is there to see even today in Brahmic scripts, so to suggest that Hindi (or rather, Khari Boli and other dialects) was written in Arabic _only _is quite - amusing.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> Your imagination even about historical periods where nobody knows anything for concrete always amazes me! From your comments it would seem that Nagari was suddenly fabricated in the nineteenth century; however, what did happen in the nineteenth century was that Nagari started to be utilised for Sanskrit (which we're not talking of). You might find the following short paragraph instructive to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari#Origins
> 
> There is a lot of literature, especially in the form of temple scrolls, etc., which is there to see even today in Brahmic scripts, so to suggest that Hindi (or rather, Khari Boli and other dialects) was written in Arabic _only _is quite - amusing.



I think you should reread what I wrote. Kaithi (A cursive form of Nagari) was used for Hindi. not Devanagari. Devanagari was ALWAYS used for Sanskrit, but it was not the FIRST nor the ONLY script used for Sanskrit. Devanagari was not used for Hindi until late 1700s, 1800s.


----------



## greatbear

tonyspeed said:


> Devanagari was ALWAYS used for Sanskrit, but it was not the FIRST nor the ONLY script used for Sanskrit. Devanagari was not used for Hindi until late 1700s, 1800s.



That's however the reverse of the accepted truth: Nagari started to be used for Sanskrit only in late eighteenth or early nineteenth century onwards, and hence even the name Nagari became "Deva"-nagari, the language of Gods. Gujarati script, not far removed from Nagari script, was always used in Gujarat (and not Arabic) for Gujarati: according to Wikipedia, the earliest existing hand-written document is from 1592. (And Nagari was used for Gujarati in print.) There are several other Indic languages which either share Nagari script or have another script very close to Nagari. All that considered, it's certainly a huge imagination from your part to say that Arabic was the _only _script used for _Hindi_.


----------



## tonyspeed

Before this goes on forever, let me just place my proof on the table and end there:

http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/sanskrit/script_dev.php

" From about 200 CE, India was ruled by different Hindu Kings and information dissemination continued through inscriptions in stone. In most cases, the text inscribed was Sanskrit and not Prakrit, thus giving credence to the fact that Hinduism was getting reestablished."





greatbear said:


> it's certainly a huge imagination from your part to say that Arabic was the _only _script used for _Hindi_.




I never made that claim. I said it was the original script (which was used for literary Hindi). Kaithi, a form of Nagari, was also used in other settings. Devanagari, another form of Nagari, was generally not used for Hindi to my knowledge.


Early Khari Boli (and Dakhini) documents we have are in Arabic Script...Considering the fact that a large portion of the literates (who were not a large percentage of the population) looked down on Prakrit as the tongue for commoners is it any suprise they didn't write in Prakrit or Khari Boli?

Braj and Avadhi - I cannot find information on them.


----------



## greatbear

The same link however says that Prakrit _was _written in a Brahmic script. So your supposition that things were not written in Prakrit does not seem to be well-founded. In addition, the very same link shows the evolution from Brahmi to Nagari script: if Nagari were already there to write Sanskrit, and Brahmi for Prakrit, I find the so-called evolution puzzling and the cited link self-contradicting.
According to the following link, even in the 12th century I do not find any recognizable Nagari characters: http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/brah11.gif 

The problem seems to me that you are confused between the language and the script. The link you cited only says that Sanskrit is used on the pillars, not Prakrit, but it doesn't mention which script they are in.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> The same link however says that Prakrit _was _written in a Brahmic script. So your supposition that things were not written in Prakrit does not seem to be well-founded. In addition, the very same link shows the evolution from Brahmi to Nagari script: if Nagari were already there to write Sanskrit, and Brahmi for Prakrit, I find the so-called evolution puzzling and the cited link self-contradicting.
> According to the following link, even in the 12th century I do not find any recognizable Nagari characters: http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/brah11.gif
> 
> The problem seems to me that you are confused between the language and the script. The link you cited only says that Sanskrit is used on the pillars, not Prakrit, but it doesn't mention which script they are in.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Nagari_script
"The Eastern Nagari script was originally not associated with any  particular regional language, but was prevalent as the main script in  the eastern regions of Medieval India. The script was originally used to write Sanskrit, which for centuries was the only written language of the Indian subcontinent."

Not a big fan of Wikipedia, but that's what it says as well.


Also see this link : http://www.tnarch.gov.in/epi/ins5.htm 
"Nandi Nagari script was used to  write Sanskrit language, and most of the Sanskrit copper plate  inscriptions of the Vijayanagar period are written in that script."


www.ijst.co.in/papers/vol1issue1/ijst_111105.pdf
"Manuscripts in Nāgarī, Nandināgarī, and
Devanāgarī, which were prevalent in the
North, South and Central part of the Indian
subcontinent respectively, have been
intensively used and studied in modern
indological studies of Sanskrit texts for at
least two centuries."

I did find a reference however that claims Avadhi was written in Devanagari at least in Benares from early times. This is talking about the work "_Ukti-vyakti-prakarana_".

From Wikipedia : "The oldest specimen of Awadhi is found in Ukti-vyakti-prakarana of  Damodara Pandita who flourished during the first half of the 12th  century. He wrote this book to teach Sanskrit through his mother tongue  which was a kind of old Awadhi. The Sufi tradition which became  established in India in the 14th century found a series of writers  mostly Muslim who took a number of poems of medieval Hindu inspiration  and wove them into poems in Awadhi, Maulana Daud was probably the first  of them. The manuscripts of these poems in Awadhi are mostly Persian in  character due to the Muslim influence existing at that point of time."


----------



## Qureshpor

Jack1014 said:


> In writing Hindi, does one ever write Arabic-origin words in Arabic script??? Is it customary in Hindi dictionaries to write certain Hindi words in Arabic? Can any native speaker of Hindi suggest why the author did this?





Jack1014 said:


> tonyspeed, It's definitely Arabic, not Devanagari, though of course there are many Devanagari examples.
> 
> Qureshpor, The book is A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms and of Useful Words Occurring in Official Documents Relating to the Administration of the Government of British India, from the Arabic, Persian, Hindustani, Sanskrit, Hindi, Bengali, Uriya, Marathi, Guzarathi, Telugu, Karnata, Tamil, Malayalam, and Other Languages. (I omit all the diacritics.) Published in London in 1855. The author is H. H. Wilson, who was Librarian at the East-India Company, and a professor (of Sanskrit, I think) at Oxford. Archive.org has two good free digitized versions. The one from Cornell may be a bit better than the Toronto one.




Jack1014, I have found the book and have had the opportunity of looking through it. I hope the following comments prove to be helpful.

1) The script you are talking about indeed has its basis on the Arabic alphabet which was modified by the Persians first of all to depict four further consonants which did not exist in Arabic. In India, this script was further changed to incorporate typical Indian consonants, for example the retroflex consonants T, D and R and the various aspirated sounds bh, ph, th, Th, Dh, dh, Rh, kh, gh etc. So, if one is being accurate, this script is the Urdu script.

2) Urdu has been known by various names in its timeline. Hindi, Hindavii, Rekhta, Hindustani and finally Urdu. It has always been written in this alphabet.

3) Modern Hindi began its life in 1805 at the Fort William College and it is written in Devanagri script and not in Urdu script. Dictionaries representing Modern Hindi do not use Urdu script. The link provided by Alfaaz in post 2 provides samples of this language from its conception to more modern times.

Please do not hesitate to ask if you are not too sure about something in this book, either in the forum or by PM.


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> 1) The script you are talking about indeed has its basis on the Arabic alphabet which was modified by the Persians first of all to depict four further consonants which did not exist in Arabic. In India, this script was further changed to incorporate typical Indian consonants, for example the retroflex consonants T, D and R and the various aspirated sounds bh, ph, th, Th, Dh, dh, Rh, kh, gh etc. So, if one is being accurate, this script is the Urdu script.



I'm posting to add that Urdu script was over a period of time also adapted to represent a vowel, long e in the shape of ے.


----------



## greatbear

tonyspeed said:


> I did find a reference however that claims Avadhi was written in Devanagari at least in Benares from early times. This is talking about the work "_Ukti-vyakti-prakarana_".



And you will find many more. I don't think that Tulsidas wrote his works, which are in Awadhi dialect, in Arabic script!


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> I'm posting to add that Urdu script was over a period of time also adapted to represent a vowel, long e in the shape of ے.



Thank you, marrish SaaHib for this very important observation. And if I might add one or two further innovations to the script.

1) The "h" in its "do-chashmii" (two-eyed) form was used at a very early stage to depict the "aspirants".

2) Originally four dots were used to depict the retroflex consonants. This technique was replaced by the use of the superscript letter "toe".

3) In a word where the final sound is a nasal, the letter "nuun" (n)'s dot was removed (nuun-i-Ghunnah, the nasal nuun) to indicate this, e.g. "jahaan" (The world), "jahaaN" (where, as in where there is smoke, there is fire). This is a similar type of innovation to the one marrish SaaHib has mentioned above where, in his case, the final "majhuul" vowel (unknown to Arabic vowel system) was represented by a "baRii ye" (large y) ے.


----------

