# Hindi/Urdu: yes/no answer



## Joannes

Hi,

Consider these answers 'Yes, I'm eating', of which _I know_ the second one is ungrammatical:

(1) हां, (मैं खाना) खा रहा हूं (yes (1SG food) eat PROG PRES-1SG)
(2) *हां, रहा हूं (yes PROG PRES-1SG)

What I would like to find out:

(a) Did I transliterate them correctly into Devanāgarī?

(b) What would the corresponding question look like?
My humble attempt (entirely based on own inferences (legitimate or not), as I don't know Hindi):
क्या तू खाना खा रहा हो? /kyaa tuu khaanaa khaa rahaa ho/ (Q 2SG food eat PROG PRES-2)
'Are you eating?'

(c) Suppose the question were negative: 'Aren't you eating?' (/kyaa tuu khaanaa nahiin khaa?/ ) Could the answer in (1) still be used, or would you need some other particle than हां?

(d) Would the constructions (both question and answer (1)) be the same for Urdu? How would you write them in Arabic script? An even humbler own attempt:
كيا تو كهانا كها رها هو؟
هان (مے كهانا) كها رها هون
هان رها هون*


Thank you very much in advance!


----------



## macta123

no.. haan raha hoon is not correct

** haan,khaa raha hoon

Kya tu khaana kha raha hain ?
Or Kya tum khanna kha rahey ho?

Kya tu khana nahin kha rahaa? = Aren't you eating?

There are some changes between Urdu and Arabic.


----------



## Joannes

macta123 said:


> Kya tu khaana kha raha hain ?
> Or Kya tum khanna kha rahey ho?


Thank you. Could you give them in Devanagari too, please?


macta123 said:


> Kya tu khana nahin kha rahaa? = Aren't you eating?


Right, I have no idea why I left out *rahaa* there.  Thank you. Could one answer this question with हां 'yes' to say that one _is _eating, or would one need some particle like French *si* for example?


macta123 said:


> There are some changes between Urdu and Arabic.


You mean in the script, right? Could you correct my mistakes please?

(Actually I was also asking whether the Urdu sentences differ from the _Hindi_ ones in form. Do they?)

Thanks for your help!


----------



## linguist786

Joannes said:
			
		

> (d) Would the constructions (both question and answer (1)) be the same for Urdu? How would you write them in Arabic script? An even humbler own attempt:
> كيا تو كهانا كها رها هو؟
> هان (مے كهانا) كها رها هون
> هان رها هون*


Firstly, there are two words for "you" (well, three if you count "aap", the polite form). One is "tu" (*تو*) which is the equivalent of "thou" in English. The second one (the commoner one) is tum (*تم*) Your attempt at the Urdu script is ok, but there are a few errors. Let's write out the sentences:

Kyaa tu khaanaa khaa rahaa hai? (Using "tu")
Urdu:* كيا تو كهانا كها رہا ہے؟*
Hindi: क्या तू खाना खा रहा हैं?

Kyaa tum khanaa khaa rahai ho? (Using "tum")
Urdu: *كيا تم كهانا كها رہے ہو؟*
Hindi: क्या तुम खाना खा रहे हो?

haaN, mai khaanaa khaa rahaaN hooN (Yes, I'm eating)
Urdu: *ہاں، ميں كهانا كها رہاں ہوں*
Hindi: हाँ, मैं खाना खा रहाँ हूँ



> macta123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kya tu khana nahin kha rahaa? = Aren't you eating?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, I have no idea why I left out *rahaa* there.  Thank you. Could one answer this question with हां 'yes' to say that one _is _eating, or would one need some particle like French *si* for example?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Usually you would probably hear "haaN haaN, khaa rahaaN hooN" but more correctly (the more "textbook answer" if you like) is "balke khaa rahaaN hooN"



			
				Joannes said:
			
		

> (Actually I was also asking whether the Urdu sentences differ from the _Hindi_ ones in form. Do they?)


What do you mean? In the script? The sentences are exactly the same here (just script different obviously).


----------



## Joannes

Thank you very much, Mo!  Your answer makes things very clear.

About this *balke* (written like this? बल्के / بلکے), does it have other functions as well? If you were asked to literally translate it into English, would you say 'yes (but only after negative questions)' or rather something else? And do you happen to know about the etymology?

Thanks again!


----------



## linguist786

Joannes said:


> Thank you very much, Mo!  Your answer makes things very clear.
> 
> About this *balke* (written like this? बल्के / بلکے), does it have other functions as well? If you were asked to literally translate it into English, would you say 'yes (but only after negative questions)' or rather something else? And do you happen to know about the etymology?
> 
> Thanks again!


"Balke" is actually an Urdu word, not a Hindi one. (I think so anyway. I don't know what the equivalent in Hindi is.) It is written بلكہ. It's not exactly like "si" in French. For example, if someone says (in Urdu): "Are you not Indian?", you can't say "balke!". It sounds silly. You can however say "balke _hooN_" (emphasis on _hooN_). So I guess you have to have the verb with it.

It is also used like the German "sondern". For example, "Sie sind nicht nur intelligent, *sondern* auch sehr großzügig" (They are not just intelligent, *but* also very generous). For this kind of *but*, "balke" is used in Urdu, like "sondern" is in German.

If you have any knowledge of Arabic, then it's basically the same as بل (bal) in Arabic. Infact, that's where "balke" comes from! (So that answers your question about the etymology)


----------



## cherine

linguist786 said:


> For example, if someone says (in Urdu): "Are you not Indian?", you can't say "balke!". It sounds silly. You can however say "balke _hooN_" (emphasis on _hooN_). So I guess you have to have the verb with it.
> [...]
> If you have any knowledge of Arabic, then it's basically the same as بل (bal) in Arabic. Infact, that's where "balke" comes from! (So that answers your question about the etymology)


I don't know Urdu, but as far as I understood your explanation, then the Arabic word is balá بلى and not bal بل .


----------



## Joannes

I see. Thank you very much!



linguist786 said:


> If you have any knowledge of Arabic, then it's basically the same as بل (bal) in Arabic. Infact, that's where "balke" comes from! (So that answers your question about the etymology)


I'm afraid my Arabic lexicon is about zero (plus a bit Darija), but I can easily look this up, thanks for the reference point. 

The *ke *part in بلكہ seems to be of Persian origin (*ki* كه) but I can't figure out what it means on its own. Someone?



cherine said:


> I don't know Urdu, but as far as I understood your explanation, then the Arabic word is balá بلى and not bal بل .


That would make things more interesting. But بلى  doesn't function as a conjunction, or does it?


----------



## linguist786

cherine said:


> I don't know Urdu, but as far as I understood your explanation, then the Arabic word is balá بلى and not bal بل .


No, it is bal. But you are not wrong either! Because "balaa" is also translated as "balke" (but remember that it can't stand on its own in Urdu, it has to have a verb with it) 
For example:

لا تأكلون الطعام الهندي اليوم؟
بل نأكل!​ 
(Let me know of any mistakes!)

The "bal" here is translated into Urdu as "balke".

Take the example from the Qur'aan: ألستُ بربكم؟ قالوْا بلى
In Urdu this is: كيا ميں تمہارا پروردگار نہيں ہوں؟ انہونے كہا بلكہ (تو) ہے 
(not just "balke", but "balke (tu) hai")

Joannes, the only thing I can think of for the explanation of the "کہ" in بلكہ is that کہ means "that" in Urdu. For example, "unhone mujhe kahaa thaa ke.." (He told me that..).


----------



## Whodunit

linguist786 said:


> No, it is bal. But you are not wrong either! Because "balaa" is also translated as "balke" (but remember that it can't stand on its own in Urdu, it has to have a verb with it)
> For example:
> 
> لا تأكلون الطعام الهندي اليوم؟
> بل نأكل!​
> (Let me know of any mistakes!)



To be honest, I would use بلى there. To my mind, بل works as a conjunction, whereas بلى is just a positive intensifier, i.e. the opposite of كلا. Cherine, please correct me, if I'm wrong here.


----------



## linguist786

Whodunit said:


> To be honest, I would use بلى there. To my mind, بل works as a conjunction, whereas بلى is just a positive intensifier, i.e. the opposite of كلا. Cherine, please correct me, if I'm wrong here.


I understand (and even agree) that you can use بلى here. I just deliberately wrote بل so I could illustrate my example (of how "bal" is translated as "balke" in Urdu)


----------



## Joannes

linguist786 said:


> Joannes, the only thing I can think of for the explanation of the "کہ" in بلكہ is that کہ means "that" in Urdu. For example, "unhone mujhe kahaa thaa ke.." (He told me that..).


Thanks. It looks like it's the same in Persian.


----------



## Joannes

Apparently some other particle *तो* (*to*) is also sometimes used to mean 'yes'. (It usually means 'then'.) Does anyone know if this use as an answering particle needs a specific context?

Is it used in Urdu as well? (Both as a correlative / conjunction and as an answering particle?)


----------



## linguist786

Joannes said:


> Apparently some other particle *तो* (*to*) is also sometimes used to mean 'yes'. (It usually means 'then'.) Does anyone know if this use as an answering particle needs a specific context?
> 
> Is it used in Urdu as well? (Both as a correlative / conjunction and as an answering particle?)


"to" is hard to explain. If you just remember that it means "then" in the sense "if you do this, _then_ this will happen" (not "then" meaning "and next") you will be OK. (Like Arabic "idhan" إذن) It can be used as a question "to?" which would be like "and so?". It doesn't mean "yes" - at least not in any context that I can think of.


----------



## Joannes

linguist786 said:


> It doesn't mean "yes" - at least not in any context that I can think of.


I see. I wished I could give more context but actually that was what I was asking for myself.  My source* only says: "Adverbs of affirmation and negation constitute a small class. 'Yes' is rendered by *haaN* and sometimes *to*." That's all.

Thanks anyway, Mohammed!

* In case you have / know it: Scholberg, H.C. (1955) _Concise grammar of the Hindi language._ London: Oxford University Press.
(They give Devanagari versions, but I can't type them right now.)


----------



## jaxlarus

Joannes said:


> The *ke *part in بلكہ seems to be of Persian origin (*ki* كه) but I can't figure out what it means on its own. Someone?



*Ke که *in Farsi (Persian) is a relative pronoun meaning 'that, who, which', just like the French and Spanish *que *and the Italian *che *- All these languages are Indoeuropean.

*Bale بَله *is yes.

I haven't encountered them together as in '*bale ke...*' but what I do know is that the Persian *ke *passed in Turkish as *ki *and it is sometimes used in the language in that way, like '*ne yazik ki...*' (What a pitty that...) or '*tabii ki...*' (Of course...) 

The word *بلکه* or just *بل* means 'rather, perhaps, but' also passed into Turkish as *belki* meaning 'maybe, perhaps'. I just don't know if it is by anyway related to bale...

Hope that helps


----------



## linguist786

I'm not actually sure about the "bal"＋"ke" theory - it was just a possible suggestion. In Urdu it is also treated as one word.


----------



## Joannes

jaxlarus said:


> *Ke که *in Farsi (Persian) is a relative pronoun meaning 'that, who, which'


That's what I thought. Thanks for confirming!



jaxlarus said:


> The word *بلکه* or just *بل* means 'rather, perhaps, but' also passed into Turkish as *belki* meaning 'maybe, perhaps'. I just don't know if it is by anyway related to bale...


Not to بله, but according to this dictionary, بلکه) بلكہ) consists of (originally Arabic) بل plus Persian که. Maybe Urdu borrowed it from Persian, or بل went through the same evolution (with Urdu کہ) to result in بلكہ (typologically, it doesn't seem to be a peculiar evolution). Either way, in Urdu بلكہ can also be used as an emphatic positive answering particle, like چرا in Persian.  (Edit: Well, not really; as linguist786 explained, بلكہ needs to have a verb with it, so it still functions as a conjunction, while چرا does the job on itself.)


----------

