# Persian: آنچه نمايان است چه حاجت به بيان است



## Moon boy

آنچه نمايان است چه حاجت به بيان است

What does this mean? "That which is obvious, what need is there for explanation"? It doesn't make sense.
It should have been

آنچه نمايان است، آن چیز حاجت به بيان ندارد


----------



## colognial

I'd try this version: آن را که عیان است، چه حاجت به بیان است --- "That which is visible does not need to be put into words."
Naturally, the را can cause some confusion, as it is not in its usual place within the sentence. This would be the standard placement: آن که عیان است را چه حاجت به بیان است


----------



## James Bates

My dictionary gives this version:

آنجا که عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است


----------



## Asadullah

آنجا که عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است

is even worse! It doesn't explain WHAT thing is عيان!


----------



## PersoLatin

James Bates said:


> آنجا که عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است


As colognial has already said, the correct version is: آن را که عیان است، چه حاجت به بیان است

You can rephrase it without را:
آن چه كه عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است
That which is obvious needs no words

Similar to:
Actions speak louder than words
A picture is worth a thousand words


----------



## soheil1

Moon boy said:


> آنچه نمايان است چه حاجت به بيان است
> 
> What does this mean? "That which is obvious, what need is there for explanation"? It doesn't make sense.
> It should have been
> 
> آنچه نمايان است، آن چیز حاجت به بيان ندارد


Why?
The original version (چیزی که عیان است چه حاجت به بیان است) is very rhythmic.
Remember, rhythm matters!


----------



## colognial

آن جا که and چیزی که are acceptable, too, I suppose,  but I still think آن را که is more robust, grammatically speaking.


----------



## Stranger_

> but I still think آن را که is more robust, grammatically speaking


Totally agree.


----------



## marrish

Asadullah said:


> James Bates said:
> 
> 
> 
> My dictionary gives this version:
> آنجا که عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است
> 
> 
> 
> آنجا که عيان است چه حاجت به بيان است
> is even worse! It doesn't explain WHAT thing is عيان!
Click to expand...

How can you call it ''even worse!''? If I may reference you to the following, you might want to sleep on it.

چون مطلبی آنقدر واضح و روشن باشد که احتیاج به تعبیر و تفسیر نداشته باشد، به مصراع بالا استناد جسته و ارسال مثل می کنند.

این مصراع از شعری است که ناظم ِ آن را نگارنده نشناخت:
پرسی که تمنای تو از لعل لبم چیست........... آنجا که عیانست چه حاجت به بیانست
طبسی حائری در کشکولش آن را به این صورت هم نقل کرده است:
خواهم که بنالم ز غم هجر تو گویم............آنجا که عیانست چه حاجت به بیانست
ولی چون بنیانگذار سلسله گورکانی هند مصراع بالا را در یکی از وقایع تاریخی تضمین کرده و بدان جهت به صورت ضرب المثل درآمده است، به شرح واقعه می پردازیم:[... see more here]
*منبع:*
«ریشه های تاریخی امثال و حکم» تألیف زنده یاد مهدی پرتوی آملی


----------



## PersoLatin

marrish said:


> آنجا که عیانست چه حاجت به بیانست


But this is not grammatically correct, it is saying: 'no need to explain where is obvious' and it should say 'no need to explain that which is obvious'. I believe this is a misreading of آنچه, which in Urdu may be pronounced as ânča which is close to ânjâ/آنجا.


----------



## James Bates

PersoLatin said:


> But this is not grammatically correct, it is saying: 'no need to explain where is obvious' and it should say 'no need to explain that which is obvious'. I believe this is a misreading of آنچه, which in Urdu may be pronounced as ânča which is close to ânjâ/آنجا.



Yes, because that was its pronunciation in Classical Persian.


----------



## PersoLatin

Hi James,
So are you saying/agreeing that آنجا is a misreading of ânča?


----------



## James Bates

Well, I'll have to think about it. I was just saying that it's a possibility due to the way it used to be pronounced.


----------



## marrish

PersoLatin said:


> But this is not grammatically correct, it is saying: 'no need to explain where is obvious' and it should say 'no need to explain that which is obvious'. I believe this is a misreading of آنچه, which in Urdu may be pronounced as ânča which is close to ânjâ/آنجا.


As the author was معلم فقید مهدی پرتوی آملی، فرزند برومند آمل، چشم و چراغ فرهنگ مازندران - ریشه یاب حکم و امثال زبان شیرین فارسی، گردآورنده فرهنگ عوام آمل و گزیده های تاریخ، معلمی دانادل و دلسوز که از آغاز جوانی تا آستانه بازنشستگی *در ساری، بابل، آمل، گیلان و تهران در کار تعلیم و تربیت* و تا واپسین دم حیات در کار تحریر و تألیف بود, I can't think of any connection to Urdu.


*ânča* is pronounced *ānčĕ* or *āNčĕ* in Urdu. N stands for نونِ غُنّه that is a nasal, which comes into pronunciation wherever required by the metre. There is also a clear distinction with ân*j*â because of the 'j' consonant which is distinct from three other similar consonants which Urdu differentiates, 4 in total*!
1) ج j d͡ʒ
2) جھـ jh d͡ʒʱ
3) چ ch t͡ʃc (or *č *if you if you prefer)
4) چھـ chh t͡ʃʱ
* these are different from e.g. j+h combination like in مجہول.

From that angle too, Urdu cannot be the case here.

Back to Persian, I'd rather stay quiet about Persian grammar and meanings! and follow the thread instead. Steingass' Classical dictionary has these meanings/usages:
*آنجا كه *_*ānjā ki*,_ In that place where; so that, by which.

(For those happening to know Urdu it is of course  جہاں بات عیان ہے وہاں بیان کرنے کی کیا حاجت ہے۔).

Still another possible path is

--_az ānjā ki,_ On account of, because.

... without 'az'.

The choice is yours.

PS. Just because of Urdu I have reasonable doubt whether it was pronounced *ânča *in Classical Persian, but I have no further information at hand.


----------



## Stranger_

> Yes, because that was its pronunciation in Classical Persian.


Are you sure sir? I do not think چه was ever pronounced _cha_. I have never heard anyone say it this way even in eastern Persian (Dari). Dictionaries also do not mention this pronunciation.


----------



## PersoLatin

marrish said:


> As the author was معلم فقید مهدی پرتوی آملی، فرزند برومند آمل، چشم و چراغ فرهنگ مازندران - ریشه یاب حکم و امثال زبان شیرین فارسی، گردآورنده فرهنگ عوام آمل و گزیده های تاریخ، معلمی دانادل و دلسوز که از آغاز جوانی تا آستانه بازنشستگی *در ساری، بابل، آمل، گیلان و تهران در کار تعلیم و تربیت* و تا واپسین دم حیات در کار تحری


Hi marrish, I read the link you posted, مهدى پرتوى is stating that the original source for the saying '...چيزى كه اعيان', is '....آنجا كه اعيان', but the people he then mentions as the originators, are not Persian, they are mainly Turkish rulers of India, in sny case he is not the author of the saying, but of the article.

The version popular in Iran, i.e. چيزى كه اعيان است چه حاجت به بيان است, although a little less elegant, is grammatically correct, and مهدى پرتوى doesn't explain why this has been changed, from '......آنجا كه اعيان' to the current version.


----------



## PersoLatin

marrish said:


> Back to Persian, I'd rather stay quiet about Persian grammar and meanings! and follow the thread instead. Steingass' Classical dictionary has these meanings/usages:
> *آنجا كه *_*ānjā ki*,_ In that place where; so that, by which.


None of the three meanings given here, although prefectly correct, make the saying, as it is, any better:
1) '*in that place where *is obvious...'
2) *'by which* is obvious...'
3) '*so that* is obvious...'


----------



## Stranger_

*سخن عشق تو بی آن که برآید به زبانم
رنگ رخساره خبر می‌دهد از حال نهانم
گاه گویم که بنالم ز پریشانی حالم
بازگویم که عیانست چه حاجت به بیانم*
سعدی


----------



## PersoLatin

^ That's it, you can't get a better reference than Saedi.


----------

