# Hindi/Urdu/Panjabi: <āp ke ghar ā rahā hū.n>



## panjabigator

Greetings azīz dosto,

I need some assistance with a grammar point here.  I understand that there is an implicit <ko> in the sentence "<āp ke ghar ā rahā hū.n>" which is the reason for <ke> to go in the oblique.  My question is why and how would I explain this rule to a beginner?  Is it that locations don't take <ko> ever?

Best wishes,
PG


----------



## omlick

Say that this happens mainly with verbs of motion only.  जाना, आना, etc, the को  is omitted but is still implicit.   If you don't omit the को, then it sounds wrong to the native ear. This seems to be arbitrary, but that is the way it evolved I guess.

This is the opposite of Spanish where the preposition "a" seems to be required with verbs of motion all the time.


----------



## BP.

gator, you could sneak a _ko_ before the location i.e. _g-har_ and still produce a valid sentence. _ko_ seems to become implicit sometimes, but we say your sentence both ways. _mai.n chalaa apnii manzil ko_...


----------



## panjabigator

Good to know.  

Any Panjabi experts have an opinion on this:
<mai.n ghar jā rihā hā.n>
and
<mai.n ghare jā rihā hā.n>
sound alright to me.  But the <nū.n> doesn't.  Is there a grammatical explanation why <ghare>, which uses the locative case, works and why the <nū.n> would not?


----------



## bakshink

Dear PG
Sorry We couldn't meet. I was very busy. Back in China now.
Ghare is not used by all Punjabi speaking communities( We for one never do). Main ghar chalyaa.n and Main ghar nu.n chalyaa.n both are correct though nu.n is seldom used but is not unheard of. And as BP has mentioned "Main chalyaa.n apne ghar nu.n", stylish but not wrong.


----------



## lcfatima

PG I was told many years ago by my grammar teacher that one shows respect to a house by using the oblique, i.e., aapke ghar. I always say it that way for that reason.


----------



## panjabigator

Good to know!

So if I were going to Patiala, I could say <mai.n patiāle jā rihā hā.n> and show the city respect.


----------



## bakshink

Don't know the respect part but that's how we always say. If you are going towards Patiala then you will say "Main Patiale wal chalayaa.n, Rajpura reste ch paindha ai. Ok- Ttheek ai par dhyan nal jana rah ch baRRe gadde ne. Wekhna kite toye ch gaddi da tyre na phas jaye. Barash wich toyaa.n da pata naee.n chalda.


----------



## lcfatima

You know, I am mistakenly saying I was taught to say _ghar_ with oblique but it is really because ghar is a plural for respect, like saying _mere mia.N/pati_ instead of _mera_. I have noticed in speaking that some people follow the thing about respecting _ghar_ and others don't.


----------



## Faylasoof

doostaan-e-giraamii,

I think we need to keep in mind that the use of <ko> dpends on the verb being used. For <_aanaa & jaanaa_> we do not need it! 

Omlick, I know what you were trying to say but it doesn't necessarily have to be anything to do with the verbs of motion per se, as BP's good example shows - <_chalnaa_> is also a verb of motion.  

Niether has this anything to do with respect for _ghar_- sorry Fatima!

All to do with what verb is used and the object of this verb being a genitive construct. 

<_aap kaa ghar_> =  house of you =  your house - (formal / polite ; use of _aap_)
<_teraa / tumaaraa ghar_> = house of you  = your house - (informal / rude ; use of _teraa / tumaahraa_).


<_aap ke ghar aayaa_> = (came to house of you) = came to your house - (formal / polite). 
<_tere / tumaahre ghar aayaa_> = (came to house of you) = came to your house - (informal). 

In all the above, politness is determined by the use of _aap_; while _kaa_ and _ke_ both indicate the genitive state.

_..mai.n ghar aayaa_ = I came home - we don't say _mai.n ghar ko aayaa_. 
_..mai.n skool / iskool / madrase gayaa_ = I went to school - again we don't use <ko> here.

But,

.._mai.n ghar chalaa_ OR _main ghar ko chalaa_ - both are grammatically correct but used slightly differently. The first used normally as a simple statement of fact, the second is usually used by us in a given context with words like <jab / tab etc.> to give an idea of some condition, although even this usage is loose!


----------



## omlick

Faylasoof said:


> doostaan-e-giraamii,
> 
> I think we need to keep in mind that the use of <ko> dpends on the verb being used. For <_aanaa & jaanaa_> we do not need it!
> 
> Omlick, I know what you were trying to say but it doesn't necessarily have to be anything to do with the verbs of motion per se, as BP's good example shows - <_chalnaa_> is also a verb of motion.
> 
> Niether has this anything to do with respect for _ghar_- sorry Fatima!
> 
> All to do with what verb is used and the object of this verb being a genitive construct.
> 
> <_aap kaa ghar_> = house of you = your house - (formal / polite ; use of _aap_)
> <_teraa / tumaaraa ghar_> = house of you = your house - (informal / rude ; use of _teraa / tumaahraa_).
> 
> 
> <_aap ke ghar aayaa_> = (came to house of you) = came to your house - (formal / polite).
> <_tere / tumaahre ghar aayaa_> = (came to house of you) = came to your house - (informal).
> 
> In all the above, politness is determined by the use of _aap_; while _kaa_ and _ke_ both indicate the genitive state.
> 
> _..mai.n ghar aayaa_ = I came home - we don't say _mai.n ghar ko aayaa_.
> _..mai.n skool / iskool / madrase gayaa_ = I went to school - again we don't use <ko> here.
> 
> But,
> 
> .._mai.n ghar chalaa_ OR _main ghar ko chalaa_ - both are grammatically correct but used slightly differently. The first used normally as a simple statement of fact, the second is usually used by us in a given context with words like <jab / tab etc.> to give an idea of some condition, although even this usage is loose!


 

Well, it does have to do with verbs of motion because normally nouns are not in the oblique unless there is some kind of post position that follows them. But usually with verbs of motion I see this not be true of the nouns that indicate the vector of the motion.

If the location is a known location between the speakers, this is particularly true. But what if the location is something quite arbitrary, then some post position, such as kii or, kii taraf, me.n, par would be correct to use.

I was told that proper nouns of geographical places that end in "aa" may be used in the oblique form, but not every speaker does this. So agraa might not change to agre, depends on the speaker.


----------



## Faylasoof

omlick said:


> Well, it does have to do with verbs of motion because normally nouns are not in the…..


 Yes I know what you mean, but your original statement was: 





omlick said:


> Say that this happens mainly with verbs of motion only. ..


 I was merely replying to this when I said: 





Faylasoof said:


> … I think we need to keep in mind that the use of <ko> depends on the verb being used. For <_aanaa & jaanaa_> we do not need it!





Faylasoof said:


> …. but it doesn't necessarily have to be anything to do with the verbs of motion per se, as BP's good example shows - <_chalnaa_> is also a verb of motion. ….
> 
> .._mai.n ghar chalaa_ OR _main ghar ko chalaa_ -  both are grammatically correct but used slightly differently. ….


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

Indeed, as Faylasoof says, ko is normally not used with verbs of movement, only to show emphasis, I think, it should be interesting trying to define when ko is actually used with verbs of movement. I just wrote emphasis above, as in the examples mentioned in previous posts.

But I was also thinking of an example apparently not implying emphasis, such as:

*yeh saRak kidhar ko jati hai ??*


----------



## omlick

Cilquiestsuens said:


> Indeed, as Faylasoof says, ko is normally not used with verbs of movement, only to show emphasis, I think, it should be interesting trying to define when ko is actually used with verbs of movement. I just wrote emphasis above, as in the examples mentioned in previous posts.
> 
> But I was also thinking of an example apparently not implying emphasis, such as:
> 
> *yeh saRak kidhar ko jati hai ??*


 
It would be interesting, but is it possible for a non-native speaker to really "feel" when ko would not sound dorky to a non-native speaker.  That is the question I have.


----------



## bakshink

I think there is more to the use of word "ko" then elicited above and I would like the linguists to elucidate more.
In "ye saRak kidhar ko jati hai?" the road doesn't go anywhere. It means where does this road lead to?
Now consider this:
Kahe ko bulaya mujhe bar bar pyar ke naam se? What the experts say about this sentence?


----------



## Faylasoof

Cilquiestsuens said:


> ...But I was also thinking of an example apparently not implying emphasis, such as:
> 
> *yeh saRak kidhar ko jati hai ??*


 Clico, although I’ve heard this as well as its variant (yeh saRak kis _T_araf ko jaatii hai?), to my ear the use of <ko> here is very odd. In fact, normally we would say:

yeh saRak kidhar jaatii hai ? OR yeh saRak kis _T_araf / samt jaatii hai?




bakshink said:


> ...Now consider this:
> Kahe ko bulaya mujhe bar bar pyar ke naam se? What the experts say about this sentence?


kahe ko = kis liye = kis wajah se = kis maqsad se etc. = for what reason / purpose = why for = for what = why on earth = why then = on what basis ---- depending on the context. 

kahe ko bulaya mujhe bar bar pyar ke naam se? = kahe ko bulaya mujh ko bar bar pyar ke naam se? (Good to have a second <ko> to show how the two are being used.) 

For what reason / purpose OR Why for have you time and again shown me / showered me with love and affection. 


One can also rephrase the original as:  
kahe ko bulaya mujhe / mujh ko bar bar pyar se?

For what reason / purpose Or why for have you time and again shown me / showered me with love and affection. 

The use of alternatives <show me / shower me> would depend on the situation and the intensity of emotions desired.

We can also have:

kahe / kiyoo.n bulaya mujhe / mujh ko bar bar pyar se?

Why have you time and again shown me / showered me with love and affection.


----------



## panjabigator

Bakshink ji,
I thought <kāhe ko> was a set phrase.


----------



## Faylasoof

Yes, <kāhe ko> is indeed standard but I think what Bakshink may be trying to demonstrate here are the various uses of <ko>.

Of course there is Amir Khusrau's famous lyric that uses this:

_kaahe ko byaahe bides _
_are lakhiyan baabul more _

_ham to babul tore bele ki kaliyan _
_are ghar-ghar maange hain jaaye_


----------



## panjabigator

Wah Wah at the Khusrau lines, FLS.  Is it <lakhiyan> or <ladkiyan>?  Just revising this thread - it makes a lot more sense now reading it one year later.

Was wondering if we could get into the second verse a bit.  Is there some explicit phallic imagery here?  I understand the repetitiveness of <ghar-ghar>, but I don't know what to make of the <hain>.  Does it go with <maange> or <jaaye>?

ham to babul tore bele ki kaliyan 
are ghar-ghar maange hain jaaye

Father, we are like the buds on your vine (bel - vine?)


----------



## Faylasoof

panjabigator said:


> Wah Wah at the Khusrau lines, FLS.  Is it <lakhiyan> or <ladkiyan>?  Just revising this thread - it makes a lot more sense now reading it one year later.



It is most certainly <lakhiyan>! 


panjabigator said:


> Was wondering if we could get into the second verse a bit.  Is there some explicit phallic imagery here?  I understand the repetitiveness of <ghar-ghar>, but I don't know what to make of the <hain>.  Does it go with <maange> or <jaaye>?
> 
> ham to babul tore bele ki kaliyan
> are ghar-ghar maange hain jaaye
> 
> Father, we are like the buds on your vine (bel - vine?)



Don't know about this! I didn't feel so!

Instead of the expression <maange jaanaa> we have <maange hain jaaye>. I think this is Khusrau is trying to convey here the feel of the dialect.  

_bel _is vine. We use this in Urdu too - the _vine_ of any creeper.


----------



## panjabigator

> Instead of the expression <maange jaanaa> we have <maange hain jaaye>.



Could you explain this a bit more?


----------

