# Hindi - I thought you were not



## Lol999

I was thinking of conversations with one of my friends who is unpredictable to say the least. He will often turn up unexpected so I wanted to be able to say to him "*I thought you was not coming today*". I know the verb to *think* is Socnā, and the verb to* come* is ânâ so I had a go using perfective past " I thought" and continuous past "was coming" negated with nahi.m
These are what I have, is it okay or does such a simple statement need a different approach?

āj maĩ socâ thā āp nahi.m âe rahe the

maĩ socâ thā āp nahi.m âe rahe the āj

Thanks, Lol


----------



## Faylasoof

The translation of:

<I thought you were not coming today>

maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aa rahe the
maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aa rahe the

or 

<I thought you are not coming today>

maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aa rahe hai.n
maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aa rahe hai.n

You can also put the same idea like this:

<I thought you were not going to come today>

maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aane vaale the
maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aane vaale the


[* <keh> is used in Urdu, while in modern Hindi <ki> is used instead; otherwise they are the same]


----------



## Lol999

I see, so I wasn't too far off. Does the *maine* signify the use of ne postposition? Does that mean socna is a transitive verb or is it just one of Hindi's peculiarities? The use of ki in the Hindi version is interesting, does this roughly equate to "having thoughts of" i.e. with regard to the original sentence " I thought *of* you were not coming today"?

Thanks, Lol


----------



## BP.

Lol999 said:


> ...The use of ki in the Hindi version is interesting, does this roughly equate to "having thoughts of" i.e. with regard to the original sentence " I thought *of* you were not coming today"?


This is not that _ki_. Do not confuse the two.




Lol999 said:


> ...Does that mean socna is a transitive verb or is it just one of Hindi's peculiarities?


_sochna_ appears to be transitive here, since you were thinking _about their not coming_. _sochna_ could be intransitive e.g. _miaa.n apni zehni sakat sai ziaada sochna chhoR do_.


----------



## BP.

Faylasoof said:


> The translation of:
> ...
> <I thought you are not coming today>
> 
> maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aa rahe hai.n
> maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aa rahe hai.n...



In speach we tend to do away with 'that' and reduce the past to a preterit, simplifying the first to:
_
mai.n nai sochaa aaj aap na aai.n gai
......................................aaiyai gaa_ (more formal 'aap')

Or, as I like to say it:
_mai.n sochai tha aaj aap na aaiyai gaa_! (not a fidel translation, but rather in past continuous-'I was thinking you weren't coming today').

But I'm not sure I'm speaking Hindi in these examples, just replied to F's response.


----------



## Lol999

BelligerentPacifist said:


> This is not that _ki_. Do not confuse the two.



I've found the _ki_ in question, it means _that_ when used as a conjunction. Is that correct?

Thanks, Lol


----------



## bakshink

Dear Lol,

"*I thought you were not coming today*" 

Literally it translates to:
maine socha tum nahin. aa rahe thhe aaj. 
It will be spoken as "Maine socha thha ki tum aaj nahin. aaoge". Which literally translates to:
I thought that you today will not come.
Rearranging the words and re-writing.
I thought that you will not come today.
'that' stands for 'ki' and this 'ki' is different from 'kee' which means belongs to or of.
"Meri bahen kee shadi". "Mere kamre kee chabi" etc.
'ki' and 'thha' both can be omitted from the sentence. 
Maine socha aaj tum nahin aaoge. or Maine socha tum aaj nahin aaoge. "thha" and 'ki' both are understood here.
'Aane wale ho" is a phrase which means 'going to come'.
'Tum' is informal and will be used for friends and people younger than you.
"Aap' is formal and respectful. Though using 'aaoge' with 'aap' is perfectly Ok and accepted way of speaking, yet 'ayeinge' is still more humble and more respectful.
We have had a discussion on the propriety of 'aaoge' and aayeinge' in this forum in the thread “Come to my party” and if you are interested, you can click on this link: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1326098


----------



## Faylasoof

BelligerentPacifist said:


> In speach we tend to do away with 'that' and reduce the past to a preterit, simplifying the first to:
> _
> mai.n nai sochaa aaj aap na aai.n gai
> ......................................aaiyai gaa_ (more formal 'aap')



Yes and no! In speech we have both! Sometimes it is with at other times without <keh>. 



BelligerentPacifist said:


> ...._mai.n sochai tha aaj aap na aaiyai gaa_! (not a fidel translation, but rather in past continuous-'I was thinking you weren't coming today').
> 
> But I'm not sure I'm speaking Hindi in these examples, just replied to F's response.



The above alternative is also used ... and yes BP we are speaking both Hindi and Urdu in these examples. Something we discussed a while back, i.e. when is it meant to be Urdu and when Hindi. 

Actually, we speak two different (and upgraded) variants of <KhaRii Bolii - the original lingo of old Delhi> when we say it is Hindi or Urdu. Once it was also known as <Hindustaanii>.


----------



## BP.

F, I'm not sure modern Hindi has the _aayai gaa_ construct, I speak Urdu and the kind I do has it. Just made the disclaimer so they use it at their own risk!


----------



## Lol999

bakshink:
"Dear Lol,

"*I thought you were not coming today*" 

Literally it translates to:
maine socha tum nahin. aa rahe thhe aaj. 
It will be spoken as "Maine socha thha ki tum aaj nahin. aaoge". Which literally translates to:
I thought that you today will not come."

I see that you have used the Future Perfective form of ânâ. Does that mean my literal translation is incorrect to use?

Thanks, Lol


----------



## bakshink

āj maĩ socâ thā āp nahi.m âe rahe the

 maĩ socâ thā āp nahi.m âe rahe the āj


<I thought you were not going to come today>

 maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aane vaale the
 maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aane vaale the

 There are two parts of this sentence. First part is an assumption. "Maine socha thha". The second part should therefore convey what I had thought.
"Aap to nahin aane wale thhe" is just stating what you had learnt from your friend.In this statement what you had thought has no place to be. 
So either you should say what you had learnt from your friend with an element of surprise, like raised eyebrows or including a word like 'to' in the sentence or your sentence should convey what you had thought. 

Aap to aaj nahin ane vale thhe? This is complete by itself.
Kya hua- aap to aaj nahin aane vale thhe?
Oh! aap to aaj nahin aane vale thhe?
Or the second part of your sentence should state what you had thought. 
"Maine socha thha ki aaj aap nahin aaoge".


----------



## Illuminatus

BP said:
			
		

> _sochna _appears to be transitive here, since you were thinking _about their not coming_. _sochna_ could be intransitive e.g. _miaa.n apni zehni sakat sai ziaada sochna chhoR do_



A verb does not need to be used transitively for the -ne thing. Eg.

_Maine bahut sochaa. _There is no object, but we still use -ne.

_Maine khaya_. Ditto


----------



## Faylasoof

bakshink said:


> ...There are two parts of this sentence. First part is an assumption. "Maine socha thha". The second part should therefore convey what I had thought.





bakshink said:


> "Aap to nahin aane wale thhe" is just stating what you had learnt from your friend.In this statement what you had thought has no place to be.
> So either you should say what you had learnt from your friend with an element of surprise, like raised eyebrows or including a word like 'to' in the sentence or your sentence should convey what you had thought.


 
Bakshi saheb, bahut ma'aazarat khwaah _(<w> is silent!)_ hoo.n magar aap kii baalaa baHith se mujhe 'ittifaaq nahi.n hai!


<I thought you were not going to come today>

maine sochaa thaa keh* aap aaj nahi.n aane vaale the
maine sochaa thaa keh* aaj aap nahi.n aane vaale the

This is a perfectly normal, idiomatic way in which we express ourselves. I mean we Luckhnavis. 





> Aap to aaj nahin ane vale thhe? This is complete by itself.


 
Yes, one can use this by itself but that does NOT exclude the use of the first <maine sochaa thaa keh*>.

An element of surprise may be involved but equally it could be satire. Therefore, one may or may not include <raised eyebrows> or <'to' >, as you put it.  

Also, one may add to the effect by the use of one’s tone and intonation. Or just give a plain, dead-pan delivery or just normal delivery.  It all depends. 

 I'm afraid your argument above is something I cannot agree with! (Which is what the Urdu remark above means.)





> "Maine socha thha ki aaj aap nahin aaoge".


 
This would be regarded as ungrammatical KhaRii Bolii / Hindustani! Perhaps acceptable present-day Hindi – a certain kind of Hindi, that is. Sounds “rustic” to my ears but then Luckhnavis took to KhaRii Bolii and its established grammatical forms as ducks to water.


----------



## bakshink

Dear Faylasoof

So, once again it is Cross Swords for us. 

I will leave it on others to resolve the issue.

But maine socha thha, aap nahin aane wale thhe (is wrong).


----------



## Faylasoof

bakshink said:


> Dear Faylasoof
> 
> So, once again it is Cross Swords for us.
> 
> I will leave it on others to resolve the issue.
> 
> But maine socha thha, aap nahin aane wale thhe (is wrong).



Well, cross swords or crosswords or whatever . 

Bhai saheb, I know that expression (maine socha thha keh aap nahin aane vaale thhe ) is not wrong.


----------

