# Urdu: fauran se



## Chhaatr

1. _aap fauran se aa jaa'eN_
2. _app fauran se aisaa/waisaa kar deN_

Do you make sentences like those given above?

I'm used to saying _fauran_ without _se_.

From an Urdu perspective which one is correct?  _fauran_ with _se_ or _fauran_ without  _se, _or both?

Many thanks for your help!


----------



## eskandar

I would say it without _se_, and I believe that is more correct from an Urdu perspective; the tanwiin ending (-_an_) already implies adverbial use.


----------



## sapnachaandni

mujhe bhii lagtaa hai ki "fauran" ke saath "se" laane kii zaruurat nahiiN.


----------



## Alfaaz

I would also agree with eskandar SaaHib and sapnachaandni SaaHibah. It seems _se_ is usually not used with _faur-an_, but you could use تیزی سے - _tezii se_. 

Note: فوراً سے پیش تر - _faur-an se pesh-tar _is used, but this is probably different from the topic of the thread.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> I would also agree with eskandar SaaHib and sapnachaandni SaaHibah. It seems _se_ is usually not used with _faur-an_, but you could use تیزی سے - _tezii se_.
> 
> Note: فوراً سے پیش تر - _faur-an se pesh-tar _is used, but this is probably different from the topic of the thread.



No, not "seems" but it is a fact. Not "usually" but never! 
bi_lfaur/fi_lfaur/3ala_lfaur = "faur se"

faur-an = "faur se"

faur-an se = "faur se" se!

Not "probably" but most definitely!

All this in mi3yaarii Urdu of course!


----------



## Qureshpor

Chhaatr said:


> 1. _aap fauran se aa jaa'eN_
> 2. _app fauran se aisaa/waisaa kar deN_
> 
> Do you make sentences like those given above?
> 
> I'm used to saying _fauran_ without _se_.
> 
> From an Urdu perspective which one is correct?  _fauran_ with _se_ or _fauran_ without  _se, _or both?
> 
> Many thanks for your help!


Is the addition of "se" after "faur-an" Hindi usage?


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> Is the addition of "se" after "faur-an" Hindi usage?



It is in fact an Urdu usage!

As Chhatr jii already said in his first post, Hindi speakers are used to saying "fauran" without "se". On the other hand, I have heard many Urdu speakers saying "fauran se" (yes, many!): I think that is what may have prompted Chhatr jii's question. I'd be interested to know where he heard it.


----------



## Chhaatr

Thanks to all the participants for their help.




Qureshpor said:


> Is the addition of "se" after "faur-an" Hindi usage?



I thought this was an Urdu usage to add _se_ after_ fauran_ as I saw this on YouTube videos concerning Urdu Dramas, Current Affairs programmes, political discussions etc and this prompted me to start this thread to clear my doubts about what is right from an Urdu perspective. 

 It is pretty much like guzashtah/guzishtah, baahar/baahir etc which one keeps hearing and getting confused about the correct form.  I thought who better to ask than Urdu speakers knowledgeable about the language.


----------



## Qureshpor

Chhaatr said:


> Thanks to all the participants for their help.
> 
> I thought this was an Urdu usage to add _se_ after_ fauran_ as I saw this on YouTube videos concerning Urdu Dramas, Current Affairs programmes, political discussions etc and this prompted me to start this thread to clear my doubts about what is right from an Urdu perspective.
> 
> It is pretty much like guzashtah/guzishtah, baahar/baahir etc which one keeps hearing and getting confused about the correct form.  I thought who better to ask than Urdu speakers knowledgeable about the language.


ذرّہ نوازی کے لئے شکریہ۔

اگر ہو سکے تو کسی ڈرامے یا حالاتِ حاضرہ کے پروگرام کا حوالہ دے کر ایک دو مثالیں پیش کر دیں تو عین نوازش ہو گی۔

جہاں تک مجھے علم ہے فوراً کے بعد سے کا استعمال فقط اِن گنے چنے فقروں میں ہوتا ہے۔

فوراً سے پہلے، فوراً سے پیشتر، فوراً سے قبل۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔اور اِن سب کے معنی ایک ہی ہیں یعنی جلدی سے جلدی۔۔۔

میں نے نیٹ پر اِس استعمال کی کھوج کی ہے۔ مجھے صرف ایک مثال ایک ایسے شخص کی شاعری میں ملی ہے جو خود کو شاعر مانتا ہے۔

اسی نے فوراً سے معذرت چاہی
پھر سنا ڈالی سب کی سب سچائی

لیکن یہی شخص ۔۔اچانک سے۔۔۔بھی لکھتا ہے۔ 

مگر میں پھر بھی چپ چپ سا رہا
اچانک سے اس کی آنکھیں برس پڑیں

یقیناً اور بھی مثالیں ہوں گی لیکن کوئی بھی شخص جس نے پرائمری سکول تک تعلیم حاصل کی ہے ایسا استعمال نہیں کر سکتا ہے اور اگر کرتا ہے تو یہ معیاری اردو نہیں اور اِس فورم میں میرے جواب معیاری اُردو تک محدود ہیں۔

اور ہاں میری حقیر رائے میں آپ کے اِس سوال کا تعلق گذشتہ اور باہر وغیرہ سے نہیں ہے۔ وہاں تو صرف زبر زیر کا فرق ہے اور یہاں ایک اضافی لفظ لکھا جا رہا ہے جس کی ضرورت نہیں۔


----------



## Chhaatr

جناب اِتنی گیگا بائٹس میں اِن مثالوں کو ڈهونڈهنے کے لئے وقت در کار ہے . 
فرصت ملی اور قصمت چمکی تو ضرور پیش کر دوں گا.​


----------



## marrish

Post No. 5 is great in all aspects as it dares to state clearly what is proper language by very good comparison with "faur se" and so on. I would like to subscribe to this statement and analysis. On the marge let it be noted that I wouldn't classify it as a grave sin in spoken language for the reason that it happens while speaking that you have something else in mind but switch to other thing. "se" addition is a sort of added emphasis - certainly wrong - but as said in post No. 5 - or later - anyone having done primary school should be at least aware of this partial pleonasm.


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> No, not "seems" but it is a fact. Not "usually" but never!
> ...
> All this in mi3yaarii Urdu of course!


 I would agree with everything you have said Qureshpor SaaHib! The usage of _seems_ and _usually_ was to indicate what you have already indicated by editing your post: that all of the explanations would apply to/be found in "_mi3yaarii Urdu" _(similar to your English example in post #12 of this thread).


----------



## littlepond

To summarize, the expression "fauran se":
(1) is not much found in Hindi, whether written or colloquial
(2) is not considered correct in Urdu as well
(3) is however common in spoken Urdu, as evidenced by lived experiences (contacts with Urdu speakers), Pakistani Urdu programs, etc.

It'd be interesting to figure out why or how this became common in Urdu, given the strong feelings against it by some of the Urdu speakers on this very thread.


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I am not sure if 3) is correct. But others may differ.

As to the reason, people might be equating faur-an with "tezii", "jaldii" and adding "se" to it whereas "faur" alone means "tezii/jaldii". So, just ignorance.

An analagous example would be the use of "sivaa"

If one said "sivaa'e is ke mere paas kuchh nahiiN", one is actually saying "is ke sivaa ke". The correct form is "is ke sivaa", as in the example I gave to Gope Jii. We know "sivaa'e is ke" and "is ke sivaa'e"* are common.

aur bhii dukh haiN zamaane meN muHabbat ke sivaa
raaHateN aur bhii haiN vasl kii raaHat ke sivaa

Faiz Ahmed Faiz

*
 tumheN aur kyaa duuN maiN dil ke sivaa'e
tum ko hamaarii 3umar lag jaa'e

Hasrat Jaipuri


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> As to the reason, people might be equating faur-an with "tezii", "jaldii" and adding "se" to it whereas "faur" alone means "tezii/jaldii". So, just ignorance.



Is "faur" a commonly understood word by itself among Urdu speakers?


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> ^ I am not sure if 3) is correct. But others may differ.



(3) is a fact: your denial of it doesn't make the fact nonexistent.


----------



## Qureshpor

littlepond said:


> (3) is a fact: your denial of it doesn't make the fact nonexistent.


I said, "Others may differ". You obviously disagree. That does n't make (3) a fact.


----------



## Qureshpor

littlepond said:


> Is "faur" a commonly understood word by itself among Urdu speakers?


"faur" is not common as far as I know but "faurii taur pih" is.


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> I said, "Others may differ". You obviously disagree. That does n't make (3) a fact.



What makes it a fact is the numerous TV and radio programs made in Pakistan where "fauran se" is used.


----------



## littlepond

Qureshpor said:


> "faur" is not common as far as I know but "faurii taur pih" is.



If "faur" is not commonly understood otherwise, then one can understand easily the "mistake" made: I don't see why anyone needs to get so much worked up about it in such a case.


----------



## Qureshpor

littlepond said:


> If "faur" is not commonly understood otherwise, then one can understand easily the "mistake" made: I don't see why anyone needs to get so much worked up about it in such a case.


No one is getting "worked up" about anything. In post 5, I was having an intellectual dialogue with a fellow Urdu speaker. He knows what I have in mind as indicated in post 12.


----------



## Chhaatr

Those interested in an example can type the following in YouTube, "Perfume Chowk (Hum Tv) Complete Drama DVDRip Part 2/16 (HQ)" and listen at 51:04

Although I had first encountered this in the drama _baRii aapaa_, I'm not able to cite an example as I don't remember now the episode in which this expression was used.  I will post the link and the timings if I am able to find it.

Will also post link to the current affairs programmes later when I find this expression again.


----------



## marrish

Chhaatr jii, I have seen and heard it. You are of course right. But please take the way of speech (well, paan is an obstacle but it is perhaps not to think apart from the character). You can compare it with _jhaT paT_ which is sufficient to indicate the manner something is done with _jhaT-paT se_ - same thing. I insist that QP SaaHib and I are right to point out to primary school = literacy.


----------



## Chhaatr

marrish SaaHib, I had got my answer in posts 2, 3, 4 and 5.  Thereafter the discussion in this thread went to Hindi and primary education = literacy etc which was not the subject of my thread.

Thanks for your help.  I am clear about the subject now.


----------



## marrish

I am of the opinion that literacy = primary school has been about Urdu. Hindi was only mentioned in one post and I didn't write it. My post (latest) is about Urdu. I am glad to know you can make you mind quickly and correctly too. I just responded to your Urdu reference.


----------



## Chhaatr

marrish said:


> I am of the opinion that literacy = primary school has been about Urdu. Hindi was only mentioned in one post and I didn't write it. My post (latest) is about Urdu. I am glad to know you can make you mind quickly and correctly too. I just responded to your Urdu reference.



Well, your response to my Urdu reference is welcome as are all your other responses to my threads.  I just made a passing reference to the state of affairs here where seemingly innocuous but definitely off-topic and caustic comments spoil the _maaHaul.  _Also, I never said this "literacy = primary school" thing was with regard to Hindi.  I fully understand that it was said in the context of Urdu.


----------

