# Urdu: saahab/saahib



## UrduMedium

I understand the proper Urdu pronunciation is _saahib_. However, _saahab _(not saab) is very commonly used by a large number of native speakers, in spoken language. In writing, it is hard to tell because both _saahib _and _saahab _are written the same way in Urdu script. I also noticed a number of instances of _saahab _on this forum (see here, here, and here, there are many more). Platts describes it as a corruption of _saahib_. Not sure if that legitimates it or not. 

My question is, is pronouncing/transcribing _saahab _considered wrong, or acceptable?


----------



## Alfaaz

> My question is, is pronouncing/transcribing _saahab _considered wrong, or acceptable?


If you go by the dictionary (and what older generations have _generally_ been saying), then it seems yes! It would be considered wrong to say SaaHab. 

Two of the three threads you linked to opened, the other wasn't working. It was interesting to note that a _Lakhnawi_ member seems to have used "SaaHab"...this raises the question that was this just a typo or is SaaHab also considered acceptable?! (In the third thread, the member used both saahib and saahab in the same post...)

_In my opinion_, if indeed the correct pronunciation is SaaHib, then it should be pronounced/transcribed as SaaHib. (Of course there are people who think that one shouldn't be very strict in following dictionaries/conventions, languages evolve, and shouldn't be constrained to dictionaries...)

Edit: Also, people don't seem to pronounce SaaHibah as SaaHabah, so then it seems that SaaHib should be the correct form.....?


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> I understand the proper Urdu pronunciation is _saahib_. However, _saahab _(not saab) is very commonly used by a large number of native speakers, in spoken language. In writing, it is hard to tell because both _saahib _and _saahab _are written the same way in Urdu script. I also noticed a number of instances of _saahab _on this forum (see here, here, and here, there are many more). Platts describes it as a corruption of _saahib_. Not sure if that legitimates it or not.
> 
> My question is, is pronouncing/transcribing _saahab _considered wrong, or acceptable?




A good question and posed at an opportune moment as we have been recently discussing other words with a/i vowel change. saaHib/saaHab could be seen as the reverse case of "baahar" changing to "baahir". By the way, some non-natives also pronounce it as "saaHab".

As Alfaaz has indicated, there is a problem with your second link. In the first one, I have two explanations.

a) It is a typo because Faylasoof SaaHib always writes this word as SaaHib. It could be that he writes it in this manner to indicate that the word *is *actually SaaHib so that learners of Urdu pick the word in its true form.

b) It is a "Faylasoofian slip" because he actually pronounces the word as "saaHab". 

The third clip is from BP SaaHib, another native. So, probably he too is writing it as he utters it.

Which one is correct? Linguistically "saaHib" is of course correct just as "qaatil" is correct but "qaatal" is n't. However, in poetry both "kaafir" and "kaafar" are correct if the latter needs to be rhymed with a word such as saaGhar. I am not aware if "saaHab" ia acceptable in poetry. More to the point, if it (saaHab) is spoken by the natives in this manner, then it is correct. It is as simple as that! It is only the non-natives who are between a rock and a hard place!

I think Alfaaz makes a valid point. We don't have "saaHabah" but it still remains "saaHibah". In terms of gender equality, perhaps we should have saaHib/saaHibah.


----------



## UrduMedium

Thank you both Alfaaz and QP saahib, for your thoughts on the subject. 

My starting premise is that the correct pronunciation is indeed _saahib_. However, _saahab _may or may not be _wrong_. From my experience, I hear _saahab _a lot more than _saahib_, in everyday conversation, and _saahib _seems to indicate a level of formality of speech (_takalluf_) to my ears. _saahab _comes naturally to me in most cases. 

There are of course situations where I hear/say _saahib _exclusively used even in everyday speech. For example, _saahib-e-xaanah, saahib-e-haisiyat, saahib-e-3ilm, saahibo_ (vocative), and as both friends identified, in _saahibah_.

Sorry for the broken middle link. Let's try it again here. Also just search for "saahab" and you'll find many more.

PS: I like the construct "Faylasoofian slip". Very funny, QP saahib!


----------



## BP.

QURESHPOR said:


> ...The third clip is from BP SaaHib, another native. So, probably he too is writing it as he utters it. ...


Assumptions sahib e qarshi too many assumptions! "as he uttered it in 2008-09 while he was living along influence that used saab (and seeb among themselves) all the time" would be a more correct statement to make. Normal utterance* resumed as that influence ended and this one from here became stronger! It was both SaaHab and SaaHabah at that time, so Alfaaz sahiba has her bit of info too.

* in fact, the normal orality of the word with us is both SaaHab and SaaHib, and with compound words the latter only.


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> There are of course situations where I hear/say _saahib _exclusively used even in everyday speech. For example, _saahib-e-xaanah, saahib-e-haisiyat, saahib-e-3ilm, *saahibo*_* (vocative)*, and as both friends identified, in _saahibah_.



If I may call you over into a place called "tangent" and ask you this question. What would be the plural vocative for "saaHibah" thinking on same lines as "saaHibo"?


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> If I may call you over into a place called "tangent" and ask you this question. What would be the plural vocative for "saaHibah" thinking on same lines as "saaHibo"?



Interesting. That's a tough one! I suppose it could be _saahibaa'o _or _saahibaa'oN_. But either will sound too artificial. I suspect I would take the easy route and go for _xawatiin_!


----------



## Alfaaz

> Assumptions sahib e qarshi too many assumptions! "as he uttered it in 2008-09 while he was living along influence that used saab (and seeb among themselves) all the time" would be a more correct statement to make. Normal utterance* resumed as that influence ended and this one from here became stronger! It was both SaaHab and SaaHabah at that time, so Alfaaz sahiba has her bit of info too.
> * in fact, the normal orality of the word with us is both SaaHab and SaaHib, and with compound words the latter only.


(SaaHib, but would prefer only Alfaaz as indicated previously) Does this comment mean that both are valid according to you (only) BP..................... or does this mean that both are valid................or does this mean that the SaaHab form was and is considered correct by Urdu speakers overall/in general? 



> I suppose it could be _saahibaa'o _or _saahibaa'oN_. But either will sound too artificial.


Have heard saahibaa'oN once or twice, but not sure if it is correct....

*Question: 
*Are there Arabic plurals? (something like SaaHibeen-o-SaaHibaat......?)


----------



## BP.

Alfaaz said:


> ... Does this comment mean that both are valid according to you (only) BP..................... or does this mean that both are valid................or does this mean that the SaaHab form was and is considered correct by Urdu speakers overall/in general? ...


I think SaaHib is the correct pronunciation but both are fairly common in the oral tradition, the other one I think less so.


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> If I may call you over into a place called "tangent" and ask you this question. What would be the plural vocative for "saaHibah" thinking on same lines as "saaHibo"?



Let me try to answer this tough question (seemingly).

plural voc. of _saaHibah_- _saaHibaat_! Also, I can't recall ever hearing _saaHibo_.


----------



## UrduMedium

Alfaaz said:


> ...
> 
> Have heard saahibaa'oN once or twice, but not sure if it is correct....
> 
> *Question:
> *Are there Arabic plurals? (something like SaaHibeen-o-SaaHibaat......?)



Thanks, Alfaaz. I like _saaHibaat _much better. Never heard _saHibiin_, but _asHaab _is common.


----------



## Alfaaz

> I think SaaHib is the correct pronunciation but both are fairly common in the oral tradition, the other one I think less so.


OK, Thanks for the reply!


----------



## Alfaaz

> Never heard _saHibiin_, but _asHaab _is common.


Thanks for the correction!


----------



## UrduMedium

marrish said:


> Let me try to answer this tough question (seemingly).
> 
> plural voc. of _saaHibah_- _saaHibaat_! Also, I can't recall ever hearing _saaHibo_.



You may have heard of the same pattern, like _aye zaalimo_, _aye kaafiro_, and so on. If not, I'll look for some examples. See also here (under vocative category).


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> You may have heard of the same pattern, like _aye zaalimo_, _aye kaafiro_, and so on. If not, I'll look for some examples. See also here (under vocative category).



Here is one link, after a quick search.

http://urdu.co/islam/Khulfaa-E-Rashideen/hazrat-abubaker-siddique-razi-allha-anha?page=24


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> Here is one link, after a quick search.
> 
> http://urdu.co/islam/Khulfaa-E-Rashideen/hazrat-abubaker-siddique-razi-allha-anha?page=24



Thanks, Qureshpor saahib. Right on!


----------



## marrish

UrduMedium said:


> You may have heard of the same pattern, like _aye zaalimo_, _aye kaafiro_, and so on. If not, I'll look for some examples. See also here (under vocative category).



Yes, _zaalimo_ and _kaafiro (why so negative?)_ I've heard this but it doesn't change the fact that I've never *heard* _saaHibo_. It is a correct form, though, but not _saaHiboN, just in case someone thinks so._ Thank you.


----------



## UrduMedium

marrish said:


> Yes, _zaalimo_ and _kaafiro (why so negative?)_ ...



Haha! Unfortunately, Urdu shaa3irii pages are filled with exhortations to such sinister characters


----------



## marrish

It is past, I hope...


----------



## Abu Talha

UrduMedium said:


> Platts describes it as a corruption of _saahib_. Not sure if that legitimates it or not.


I'm not sure but I think a corruption is a level higher than "_vulg."_


UrduMedium said:


> My question is, is pronouncing/transcribing _saahab _considered wrong, or acceptable?


If speaking about someone to a third person, I try to say _saahib _if I remember. But when addressing someone directly, I actually say something closer to _saahb_. Otherwise it sounds as if there is too much stress on the word, and that this stress is present for some reason, like effect or sarcasm, etc.


----------



## Faylasoof

Alfaaz said:


> If you go by the dictionary (and what older generations have _generally_ been saying), then it seems yes! It would be considered wrong to say SaaHab.
> 
> Two of the three threads you linked to opened, the other wasn't working. It was interesting to note that a _Lakhnawi_ member seems to have used "SaaHab"...this raises the question that was this just a typo or is SaaHab also considered acceptable?! (In the third thread, the member used both saahib and saahab in the same post...)


 In Lucknow both _SaaHab_ and _SaaHib_ were accepted and the former was more common! In fact the latter, _SaaHib_, was often used for _goraa_s (_sufaid faam_) and some used it with sarcasm esp. with the suffix –jii -> _SaaHibjii_!

Also, some (may be most) associated usage of _SaaHib_ with the less well educated / uneducated because of _SaaHibjii_ - often used by servants for their British masters!

This difference of pronunciation never became an issue!


Alfaaz said:


> Edit: Also, people don't seem to pronounce SaaHibah as SaaHabah, so then it seems that SaaHib should be the correct form.....?


 Also, always _SaaH*i*baan_ and _never_ _SaaH*a*baan _! Shows how languages don't always follow a rigid, logical course!!


----------



## Faylasoof

QURESHPOR said:


> A good question and posed at an opportune moment as we have been recently discussing other words with a/i vowel change. saaHib/saaHab could be seen as the reverse case of "baahar" changing to "baahir". By the way, some non-natives also pronounce it as "saaHab".
> 
> As Alfaaz has indicated, there is a problem with your second link. In the first one, I have two explanations.
> 
> a) It is a typo because Faylasoof SaaHib always writes this word as SaaHib. It could be that he writes it in this manner to indicate that the word *is *actually SaaHib so that learners of Urdu pick the word in its true form.
> 
> b) It is a "Faylasoofian slip" because he actually pronounces the word as "saaHab".
> 
> The third clip is from BP SaaHib, another native. So, probably he too is writing it as he utters it.
> ......


 QP SaaHib, as I explain above there was a certain stigma attached to_ SaaHib_! Hence the use of _SaaHab_ by many in Lucknow then. Both came to be used however and now that we no longer have to worry about that stigma some are reverting back to _SaaHib_. So I'd say the QPian explanation (a) above is well founded! But old habits die hard and many are still saying "_saah*a*b_"! Iftikhar Arif SaaHib and his friend Ubaidullah Beg SaaHib also say "_saah*a*b_"! Both native Urdu speakers!


----------



## UrduMedium

Here's a strong evidence from Ghalib in support of _saahab_. The last _misra3 _has _saahab _rhyming with words like _yaa rab, maktab, ab, shab, kaukab, mashrab, and matlab. _

یاد ہے شادی میں بھی ہنگامہ " یارب" مجھے
سبحۂ زاہد ہوا ہے خندہ زیرِ لب مجھے
دل لگا کر آپ بھی، غالبؔ، مجھی سے ہوگئے
عشق سے آتے تھے مانع ، میرزا *صاحب *مجھے

I'm beginning to feel _saahab _is more correct Urdu usage than _saahib _(in standalone form, not compounds). Any comments?


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> Let me try to answer this tough question (seemingly).
> 
> plural voc. of _saaHibah_- _saaHibaat_! Also, I can't recall ever hearing _saaHibo_.



marrish SaaHib, I had in mind, say in a children's story, a group of doves being spoken to by someone like Dr.Dolittle..

ai faaxtaa'o, tumheN "kuu kuu" ke sivaa ko'ii aur bhii ganaa aataa hai? (?)

ai saaHibaa'o, ham saaHiboN kii taraf bas ek nazar! "ham bhii to paRe haiN raahoN meN"!


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> Here's a strong evidence from Ghalib in support of _saahab_. The last _misra3 _has _saahab _rhyming with words like _yaa rab, maktab, ab, shab, kaukab, mashrab, and matlab.
> _
> طبع ہے مشتاقِ لذت ہائےحسرت کیا کروں!
> آرزو سے ہے ، شکستِ آرزو، مطلب مجھے
> دل لگا کر آپ بھی، غالبؔ، مجھی سے ہوگئے
> عشق سے آتے تھے مانع ، میرزا *صاحب *مجھے
> 
> I'm beginning to feel _saahab _is more correct Urdu usage than _saahib _(in standalone form, not compounds). Any comments?



Good find! But this is a "zaruurat-i-shi3rii" just like "kaafir/kaafar". This does not of course mean that "saaHab" was/is not part of the normal speech.


----------



## UrduMedium

Seems like Mirza Ghalib had foreseen recent threads ...

چار سوۓ عشق میں صاحب دکانی مفت ہے
نقد ہے داغِ دل، اور آتش زبانی مفت ہے

He addressed saahib/saahab and aatish/aatash in one shi3r, and rhymed them too 

Since صاحب is used in a compound and not standalone, I assume Mirza Ghalib meant _saahib, and by rhyme, aatish._


----------



## marrish

Yes, of course! It just didn't cross my mind.


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> marrish SaaHib, I had in mind, say in a children's story, a group of doves being spoken to by someone like Dr.Dolittle..
> 
> ai faaxtaa'o, tumheN "kuu kuu" ke sivaa ko'ii aur bhii ganaa aataa hai? (?)
> 
> ai saaHibaa'o, ham saaHiboN kii taraf bas ek nazar! "ham bhii to paRe haiN raahoN meN"!



Given the plural of _faaxtah _is _faaxtaa'oN_, following the general rule of dropping the nasal for vocative, *faaxtaa'o *sounds pretty good to me.


----------



## UrduMedium

Here's some more _unscientific_ evidence in support of _saahab_. Faiz Ahmed Faiz is almost universally remembered by his fans as _Faiz saahab_. I've heard many literary luminaries refer to him with this name and I can only recall hearing Faiz _saahab_. That does not exclude Faiz _saahib_, but it would certainly be an exception, at least to my ears. 

Just tried a few videos on youtube and heard "Faiz _saahab_" by Iftikhar Arif, Mushtaq Ahmed Yousufi, Dileep Kumar, Shabana Azmi, Zehra Nigah, and Zia Mohyeddin. No instance of Faiz _saahib _found.


----------



## Faylasoof

UrduMedium said:


> Here's a strong evidence from Ghalib in support of _saahab_. The last _misra3 _has _saahab _rhyming with words like _yaa rab, maktab, ab, shab, kaukab, mashrab, and matlab. _
> 
> یاد ہے شادی میں بھی ہنگامہ " یارب" مجھے
> سبحۂ زاہد ہوا ہے خندہ زیرِ لب مجھے
> دل لگا کر آپ بھی، غالبؔ، مجھی سے ہوگئے
> عشق سے آتے تھے مانع ، میرزا *صاحب *مجھے
> 
> I'm beginning to feel _saahab _is more correct Urdu usage than _saahib _(in standalone form, not compounds). Any comments?


 As I said above, both _SaaH*a*b_ and _SaaH*i*b _are accepted and although the former in our speech too was more common, as it appears to have been in Ghalib's, in some terms we _always_ use _SaaH*i*b_-, as in _SaaH*i*bah and never SaaH*a*bah_, but you also hear both _SaaH*a*b-zaadah _and _SaaH*i*b-zaadah. 

All these are matters of convention and certain forms becoming accepted which is why we are not allowed to change every zer to a zabar and vice versa! That is the theory. However, quite a few non-native Urdu speakers seem to break this convention often!

For the vast majority of words good lexicons give a reliable guide as to how a word ought to be pronounced and it is best to consult more than one Urdu dictionary for this purpose, preferably both modern and classical.
_


----------



## eskandar

Could shortening /saahib/ or /saahab/ to /saab/ when using the word as a form of address could be considered impolite or overly familiar in Urdu? Or maybe the reverse could be true: could pronouncing the word fully as /saahib/ sound at all stilted or overly formal? In my limited experience with speaking Urdu, my Persian accent has sometimes been perceived as proper, maybe even quaint (I'm guessing), which is partly why I ask.


----------



## UrduMedium

^ Although personal tastes may vary here, for me saahib sounds overly formal indeed, and SaaHib even more so, while addressing someone. saab when said due to speed may represent saahab, and may come out as saahb. But saying it saab explicitly in its own right sounds incorrect to me. Not trying to sound elitist or anything, but many household workers* address their male employers as saab. Many of them speaking Urdu as their second language. 

For me, saahab (with second syllable said quite softly) strikes the perfect balance between formality, informality, and correct usage.

* Observation based in Karachi.


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> ^ Although personal tastes may vary here, for me saahib sounds overly formal indeed, and SaaHib even more so, while addressing someone. saab when said due to speed may represent saahab, and may come out as saahb. But saying it saab explicitly in its own right sounds incorrect to me. Not trying to sound elitist or anything, but many household workers* address their male employers as saab. Many of them speaking Urdu as their second language.
> 
> For me, saahab (with second syllable said quite softly) strikes the perfect balance between formality, informality, and correct usage.
> 
> * Observation based in Karachi.


I did n't know Swedes were in employment in Karachi households!


----------



## Qureshpor

eskandar said:


> Could shortening /saahib/ or /saahab/ to /saab/ when using the word as a form of address could be considered impolite or overly familiar in Urdu? Or maybe the reverse could be true: could pronouncing the word fully as /saahib/ sound at all stilted or overly formal? In my limited experience with speaking Urdu, my Persian accent has sometimes been perceived as proper, maybe even quaint (I'm guessing), which is partly why I ask.


eskandar SaaHib, I have gone through all the posts in this thread so that I am able to absorb the views of all the participants who have taken part. This is how I would answer your query.

1) I think plain "saab" could be taken as "uneducated" or even linked to any one of non-native Urdu speaking ethnicities. However, I can also imagine, even the best of Urdu speakers, in rapid utterence, to say "saab". I don't think it would necessarily be considered as "impolite". After all, someone saying "saab" is being nothing but polite merely by employing "saab".

2) In one of the posts I said the following:



> More to the point, if it (saaHab) is spoken by the natives in this manner, then it is correct. It is as simple as that! It is only the non-natives who are between a rock and a hard place!


In another Faylasoof SaaHib said this:


> _All these are matters of convention and certain forms becoming accepted which is why we are not allowed to change every zer to a zabar and vice versa! That is the theory. However, quite a few non-native Urdu speakers seem to break this convention often!_



I hope you are able to draw your own conclusions. Native speakers often say "baahir", "vaapis" and "aatish".


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> I did n't know Swedes were in employment in Karachi households!



I can see your mind is still running a background job on the wordplay thread


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> I think plain "saab" could be taken as "uneducated" or even linked to any one of non-native Urdu speaking ethnicities. However, I can also imagine, even the best of Urdu speakers, in rapid utterence, to say "saab". I don't think it would necessarily be considered as "impolite". After all, someone saying "saab" is being nothing but polite merely by employing "saab".


''saab'' is quite common among native Urdu speakers as well. May be that it is not as neat as _saaHib_ is, though.


----------



## greatbear

"saahib" in India does have the slight pejorative touch to it as already explained by Faylasoof in posts 21 and 22. Urdu speakers here say "saahab" much more than "saahib"; meanwhile, "saab" is a very well accepted shortened form, used throughout by both native Urdu speakers and non-native speakers. There is nothing impolite or informal about "saab": it is as formal as "saahab", sometimes even more formal!


----------



## eskandar

Thanks all for your helpful responses.


----------



## hindiurdu

greatbear said:


> There is nothing impolite or informal about "saab": it is as formal as "saahab", sometimes even more formal!



I agree there is nothing impolite or unusual about it. It's one example of generic deaspiration in colloquial language, e.g. bohot (a lot) > bo'ot/ba'ot, kehnaa (to say) > ke'naa, aiham (important, that's non-diphthongal 'ai') > ai'm, aahaT (rustling or tiny sound of the presence of someone - no English equivalent) > aa'aT. However, in formal situations, I would say saahab/saaHab (normal) or saahib/saaHib (also normal, but has begun to seem archaic in some circles) is the way to go. My opinion only, your mileage may vary.


----------



## Wolverine9

I don't know if a consensus was reached, but saahib (SaaHib) would be closest to the original Arabic pronunciation, though the other variations are common and well-accepted.


----------



## tonyspeed

hindiurdu said:


> I agree there is nothing impolite or unusual about it. It's one example of generic deaspiration in colloquial language,


  That you said colloquial language is very important in my opinion. Colloquial to me means less formal / more ease in conversation.


----------

