# Hindi/Urdu: hotaa aayaa hai



## eskandar

Can anyone explain the meaning of ہوتا آیا ہے _hotaa aayaa hai_ ? What is this grammatical construction and how is it used?


----------



## littlepond

Something has been happening ... for example, "hamaare ghar meN bachchoN ka munDan hotaa aayaa hai" (in our family, children's head-shaving is the practice (i.e., has been happening)).


----------



## Frau Moore

Hi eskandar, from a grammatical point of view that´s a progressive verbal construction.

It´s built by combining an imperfective participle (like hotaa as in your example) with either aanaa, jaanaa, calaa jaanaa or calaa aanaa.

This construction expresses a development, a growing process directed towards the future (with  jaanaa or calaa jaana)  or an ongoing process/action which started in the past (with aanaa/calaa aanaa) as in littlepond´s sentence.


----------



## Alfaaz

Literary examples:

یہ روایت ہے زمانے کی نئی بات نہیں 
*ہوتی آئی ہے* کہ اچھوں کو برا کہتے ہیں 

فرحت ندیم ہمایوں

ازل سے *ہوتی آئی ہے* ابد تک ہوتی جائے گی 
گنہ گار وفا پر جس قدر بھی ہو جفا کم ہے 

میلہ رام وفاؔ

*ہوتا چلا آیا ہے* بے درد زمانے میں
سچائی کی راہوں میں کانٹے سبھی بوتے ہیں

حسرتؔ جے پوری​


----------



## eskandar

Thanks, all of you!


----------



## amiramir

Is the same construction used in the negative? In @littlepond ji's example:



littlepond said:


> hamaare ghar meN bachchoN ka munDan hotaa aayaa hai



is it simply hamaare ghar meiN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa ? Or does that not work? Thanks.


----------



## littlepond

amiramir said:


> is it simply hamaare ghar meiN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa ? Or does that not work? Thanks.


 
"hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa hai": it doesn't take place, it's not the custom
"hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa hai": it has not been going on as a practice, it's not a custom
"hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa": without "hai," it's possible but weird (meaning would be it has not been taking place, but a bit of ambiguity about the present status)
"hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa thaa": it used not to take place


----------



## Pokeflute

What would be the difference between:

maiN french siikhtaa aayaa hooN
maiN french siikhtaa gayaa hooN
maiN french siikhtaa chalaa gayaa hooN 

Or are the last 2 not valid sentences?


----------



## littlepond

Pokeflute said:


> What would be the difference between:
> 
> maiN french siikhtaa aayaa hooN
> maiN french siikhtaa gayaa hooN
> maiN french siikhtaa chalaa gayaa hooN
> 
> Or are the last 2 not valid sentences?



All are valid sentences, but the 3rd sentence wouldn't come naturally to most native speakers. All mean "I've been learning French." Usage of "gayaa" (or basically "siikh jaanaa") gives a little shade of completion/achievement of the thing in question: that the person could learn it (as opposed to just study it but without learning it).

If the tense were different, i.e. "maiN frainch siikh gayaa," that means the person has learnt French (i.e., knows French now).


----------



## Dinraat

Pokeflute said:


> maiN french siikhtaa aayaa hooN
> maiN french siikhtaa gayaa
> maiN french siikhtaa chalaa gayaa


Edited it for you. There's no need for a _hooN_ in the last two sentences.

1) I've been learning French. 
2,3) I kept on learning French. Waqt chalta raha, main French siikhtaa gaya. Mera French mein aesa interest develop hua (dilchaspii pedaa hui) ke main French siikhtaa chala gaya.


----------



## littlepond

Dinraat said:


> Edited it for you. There's no need for a _hooN_ in the last two sentences.
> 
> 1) I've been learning French.
> 2,3) I kept on learning French. Waqt chalta raha, main French siikhtaa gaya. Mera French mein aesa interest develop hua (dilchaspii pedaa hui) ke main French siikhtaa chala gaya.



"maiN frainch siikhtaa gayaa" (without the "hooN") is different from "maiN frainch siikhtaa gayaa hooN" (the latter is a valid sentence: just that not many occasions demand using it).


----------



## amiramir

Dinraat said:


> maiN french siikhtaa aayaa hooN
> maiN french siikhtaa gayaa
> maiN french siikhtaa chalaa gayaa
> Edited it for you. There's no need for a _hooN_ in the last two sentences.
> 
> 1) I've been learning French.
> 2,3) I kept on learning French. Waqt chalta raha, main French siikhtaa gaya. Mera French mein aesa interest develop hua (dilchaspii pedaa hui) ke main French siikhtaa chala gaya.




I found nr 1 above quite interesting, b/c I suppose I don't often have a need to say I've been doing something with no other temporal context, so it's not a construction I've noticed/used.

For example, for: "I've been learning French for 6 years," can both of the following be used?:
- MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huN
- Main 6 saaloN se French sikhtaa aaayaa. 

Thank you.


----------



## littlepond

amiramir said:


> For example, for: "I've been learning French for 6 years," can both of the following be used?:
> - MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huN
> - Main 6 saaloN se French sikhtaa aaayaa.



- maiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa hu*u*N
- main 6 saaloN se French si*i*khtaa aayaa *huuN*


----------



## Dinraat

amiramir said:


> For example, for: "I've been learning French for 6 years," can both of the following be used?:
> - MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huN
> - Main 6 saaloN se French sikhtaa aaayaa.
> 
> Thank you.



The second sentence sounds okay if you add huuN at the end but normally we'd (almost always) say 'MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huuN'.


----------



## littlepond

Dinraat said:


> The second sentence sounds okay if you add huuN at the end but normally we'd (almost always) say 'MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huuN'.


Not at least in Hindi: both sentences are very much used. It depends on the context sometimes that which one is preferred.


----------



## Qureshpor

littlepond said:


> "hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa hai": it doesn't take place, it's not the custom
> "hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa hai": it has not been going on as a practice, it's not a custom
> "hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa aayaa": without "hai," it's possible but weird (meaning would be it has not been taking place, but a bit of ambiguity about the present status)
> "hamaare ghar meN bachchoN kaa munDan nahiiN hotaa thaa": it used not to take place


ٖFrom an Urdu perspective...

2) Sounds odd, to my ears at least.

3) Again, very odd.


----------



## Qureshpor

Dinraat said:


> The second sentence sounds okay if you add huuN at the end but normally we'd (almost always) say 'MaiN 6 saaloN se French siikh rahaa huuN'.


"Main 6 saaloN se French sikhtaa aaayaa." I would agree with you that this would be better with "huuN". I would also add that instead of "saaloN", I would go for "saal". In Urdu, the former is considered "Ghair-fasiiH" and the latter "fasiiH".


----------



## Dinraat

Qureshpor said:


> I would also add that instead of "saaloN", I would go for "saal"


Thanks for pointing that out. While I agree that saal definitely sounds better, saaloN is pretty common in everyday speech too. Colloquially speaking, no one cares about fasiih/ghair-fasiih and most of us don't even know what it means lol. 
(Slightly off-topic) You might have heard terms like 'runzoN kay anbaar' or 'itni runzaiN bana diiN' in our domestic (cricket) circuit. Now that sounds very very wrong, and I personally wouldn't even consider that Urdu.


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> I would agree with you that this would be better with "huuN".


I think everyone here is agreed on this (posts 13, 14 and 17).


----------

