# Urdu, Hindi: conjugation pattern



## marrish

This question is about "conjugation pattern" with relation to grammar.

Sapnachaandni jii has asked several questions on the forum about these "patterns" and used the word _DhaaNchaa_ for Urdu and Hindi alike.

In some way I am feeling uncomfortable with this word and would like to request all to share their suggestions or perhaps observations about how these "patterns" are referred or should or could be referred to in works about grammar.

By "conjugation pattern" I mean a list of verb forms as ascribed to personal pronouns, e.g.:

I go, you go, he/she/it goes etc.
maiN jaa'uuN gii tuu jaa'e gii wuh jaa'e gii ham jaa'eN ge etc.


----------



## Qureshpor

I wish you had nt asked this question! I was going to ask sc SaaHibah about her usage of the word DhaaNchaa, which for me can mean a structure but also a skeleton.

I would have gone for gardaaneN or af3aal kii taraakiib.


----------



## marrish

Thank you for your response. It doesn't matter who asked the question as all the answers are available to all, I hope we can have a discussion here about it. sc SaaHibah is most welcome to contribute because she seems to have the biggest experience with Urdu and Hindi grammar terms. So a thread is here and we can go on but I hope you were not of the intention of dealing through PMs! If you were, it would have only benefit you two but not others, me included.

This question is not to say _DhaaNchaa_ is not okay but to ask what is. Grammar terminology in Urdu is not so familiar to me. 

_DhaaNchaa_ is the same in usage as I perceive, just as you wrote, although I can imagine (perhaps it is used or not, I don't know) that it employed in a metaphoric sense like in "_samjhaute kaa DhaaNchaa ban gayaa hae_".

_gardaaneN_ feels very comfortable but it is not specific. It is conjugation or conjugations but not those patterns.


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

marrish Sb., I remember having also been surprized by the use of DhaNchaa in that thread too.

Wouldn't patterns simply be awzaan *اوزان* in Urdu, plural of vazan *وزن *.

For the conjugated form of a verb we also speak of Siighah *صیغہ*> pl. Siighe *صیغے*

I however think that the discussion was about 'verbal constructions'.


----------



## marrish

Thanks, it is reassuring one is not alone! I don't know about wazn, in my mind it is reserved for the syllable qualities as regards poetry, SiiGhah on its part is for me the ending a verb or a noun or an adjective etc. gets in different positions. I believe the discussion was about verbal constructions (karte rahte haiN, kiye jaate haiN etc.) but the most important was the attempt to produce patterns and this is the question I have.


----------



## Chhaatr

Please correct me if I am off-topic, but as a Hindi speaker _DhaaNchaa_ also conveys me the meaning of framework.


----------



## marrish

As I indicated, I'm not sure, so your contribution is more than welcome. To repeat, I said _DhaaNchaa is the same in usage as I perceive, just as you wrote, although I can imagine (perhaps it is used or not, I don't know) that it employed in a metaphoric sense like in "samjhaute kaa DhaaNchaa ban gayaa hae".
_
That would equate to a framework.

But I am asking for a term in grammar.


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

marrish said:


> Thanks, it is reassuring one is not alone! I don't know about wazn, in my mind it is reserved for the syllable qualities as regards poetry, SiiGhah on its part is for me the ending a verb or a noun or an adjective etc. gets in different positions. I believe the discussion was about verbal constructions (karte rahte haiN, kiye jaate haiN etc.) but the most important was the attempt to produce patterns and this is the question I have.



I must say neither is _*wazn*_ restricted to poetry nor is *SiiGhah* the ending of a verb or a noun. But this is not the point of the discussion here, I'd try not to go off topic this once.

For this kind of verbal constructions, I'd never use *DhaaNchah*. I guess the few words we have in Urdu are the following :

_*tarkiib*_  ( (c) 2014 - Qureshpor Sb. Post 3 # 2 above)
*saakht *
*murakkab* (I'd go for this one, since _*tarkiib*_ describes a process / an action while *murakkab* describes its result, a thing)


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

I am not an expert of Urdu grammar; this said, the kind of verbs discussed in that thread are called in English *compound verbs*.

The translation of this in Persian is فعل مرکب


----------



## marrish

What about *saaNchaa*? _gardaanii saaNchaa_?


----------



## Cilquiestsuens

marrish said:


> What about *saaNchaa*? _gardaanii saaNchaa_?



I would say it sounds good. I guess *qaalib* does too.


----------



## marrish

Cilquiestsuens said:


> I would say it sounds good. I guess *qaalib* does too.


Oh wow! Thanks!


----------



## sapnachaandni

ye "DhaaNchaa" kavitaa kumaar jii kii "hindii vyaakaran ek naviin drishTikon"(हिंदी व्याकरण एक नवीन दृष्टिकोण) meN aayaa hai. misaal ke taur par is kitaab meN <धातु+ता/ते/ती+रहना+होना>* ko ek DhaaNchaa kahaa gayaa hai. maiN ne aisii baat kisii *urduu grammar* kii kitaab meN dekhii hii nahiiN hai ki kavitaa kumaar jii ke andaaz par fi3loN ke liye koii "DhaaNchaa" yaa "pattern" banaayaa gayaa ho. 

* <धातु+ता/ते/ती+रहना+होना> = i<iہونا+iرہنا+iتی/iتےi/iتاi+iمادہ>

-------------
vaise Faarsii kii baat karnii ho to <धातु+ता/ते/ती+रहना+होना> ko Faarsii meN "saaxtaar" (ساختار) kahte haiN. par lagtaa hai ye lafz (saaxtaar), urduu meN nahiiN miltaa. feroz-ul-luGhaat meN "DhaaNchaa" ke liye "qaalib" bhii bataayaa gayaa hai (jaise ki Cilquiestsuens jii ne bhii is kaa zikr kiyaa). ab pataa nahiiN ki *urduu grammar* meN aise ruup <धातु+ता/ते/ती+रहना+होना> ko kyaa kahte haiN; DhaaNchaa, qaalib, yaa kuchh aur? 

i


----------



## marrish

muHtaramah, yih DhaaNchaa kyaa is tarkiib ko bataayaa gayaa hae (root+ending+rahnaa+honaa) yaa puurii gardaan ko:
maiN, ham, tuu, tum, wa Ghairah?

maiN isii kaa lafz khoj rahaa huuN.


----------



## sapnachaandni

^ (root+ending+rahnaa+honaa) ko DhaaNchaa bataayaa gayaa hai.


----------



## Faylasoof

Many of the above words have more than one usage and, as usual, within a certain context their usage becomes clear. For instance a word like _*SiiGhah*_ can also be used for the set passage recited during _*nikaaH*_, i.e. _*SiiGhah paRhnaa*_. Similarly,  _*wazn*_ (pl.,_auzaan_) not only means weight (weights, pl.) but also used in prosody for verses: _*she3r kaa wazn*_   / _* ash3aar ke auzaan*_. 
But in the grammatical context the terms _*wazn / auzaan*_ can still be used. However, as for the more commonly used terms regarding verb conjugation, we generally go for صیغہ _*SiiGhah*_ and _*gardaan*_, as mentioned above.

Conjugations of past / present / future tense verbs =  صرف ِ صیغہ هاے ا فعال ِ ماضی \ حال \ مستقبل 

 صیغہ _SiiGhah_ :
صرف و نحو كی تدریس میں حروف و حرکات و سکنات کی تعداد و ترتیب کی بنا پر الفاظ کے اشكال جو بنتے ہیں اس کو صیغہ كہتے ہیں. یعنی فعل کی تعریف \ گردان \  صورت، مثلاً  صیغہ واحد، صیغہ متکلم ،صیغہ واحد غائب معملوم  وغیرہ:​
  صیغہ واحد غائب معملوم _   SiiGah-e-waaHid Ghaa’ib ma3luum_ = Conjugation of third person singular active 

لفظ ِ (كرنا) كا حال ِ استمراری واحد متكلم معلوم كا صیغہ ہے ( میں كر رہا ہوں ) اور جمع متكلم معلوم كا صیغہ ہے (ہم كر رہے ہیں

 حال ِ استمراری واحد متكلم معلوم  =  First person singular active present continous indicative. 

Also, قالب _*qaalib*_ can be used in a grammatical context but صیغہ _*SiiGhah*_ seems much more common and here is a very different usage of _*qaalib*_ (literally mould =  سانچہ  saaNchah = template) :

سمجھ میں آتا نہیں كہ اك وقت معین تك
تعلق روح كو رہتا ہے كیوں كر قالب ِگل سے

_samajh meN aataa nahiiN keh waqt-e-mu3ayyan tak
ta3alluq ruuH ko rahtaa hae kyoN kar *qaalib-e-gil *se
_


----------

