# Hindi: Representation of English present and past participle



## Qureshpor

I have been meaning to post this observation for quite sometime now but have not got round to it. However, marrish SaaHib''s "goliibaarii" thread has acted as a catalyst for me to start this thread.

I know that an on going action or an action that is perceived to be on going is represented in both Urdu and Hindi with the verb "rahnaa", e.g.

Asha Bhosle Colors Channel ke sur-kshetr show meN bataur judge hissaa le rahii hai.

This sentence, I hope you will agree, is perfectly fine apart from possible "hai" being changed to "haiN" for respect. Now, take a look at the sentence below taken from the net.

राज ठाकरे ने सितंबर में कलर्स और सहारा वन पर एक साथ शुरू होने वाले शो सुर क्षेत्र में बतौर जज हिस्सा ले रही आशा भोसले से कहा है कि

Raj Thakre ne sitambar meN Colors aur Sahara One par ek saath shuruu hone vaale show "sur kshetra" meN bataur judge hissaa le rahii Asha Bhosle se kahaa hai kih

Here, hissah le rahii appears to be performing an adjectival role.

hissaa le rahii hai = is participating

hissaa le rahii Asha Bhosle.. ​= participating Asha Bhosle.. 

An example of the same type of sentence but, in the passive voice is given below.

बंगलौर में खेले जा रहे भारत-न्यूजीलैंड टेस्ट के दौरान सचिन के लगातार बोल्ड होने और उनकी उम्र पर सुनील गावस्कर की टिप्पणी से विवाद छिड़ गया है. 

Bangalore meN khele jaa rahe Bharat-New Zealand test ke dauraan Sachin ke lagaataar balled hone aur unkii umr par Sunil Gavaskar kii TippaNRii se vivaad chhiR gayaa hai.

khele jaa rahe Bharat-New Zealand test = being played India-New Zealand test

Past participle "-ed" containing sentence was quoted by marrish SaaHib in his "golii-baarii" thread. I shall just copy/paste his sentence with his transliteration.

अमरीका के न्यू जर्सी राज्य के एक सुपरमार्केट में हुई गोलीबारी में तीन लोग मारे गए हैं

amriikaa ke nyuu jarsii raajya ke ek suparmaarkeT meN huii goliibaarii meN tiin log maare gae haiN.

सुपरमार्केट में हुई गोलीबारी = in supermarket occurred firing

Both of these kinds of structures, as far as I know, do not occur in Urdu. Faylasoof SaaHib commented on the sentence above in these words.



> Apart from all this, the sentence itself sounds odd to me! Seems unidiomatic the way _huii is used here. I’d change the sentence to:
> 
> amriikaa ke nyuu jarsii raajya ke ek suparmaarkeT meN golii chalne se tiin log maare gae._



I would like to ask Hindi speakers on the forum.

Are these kinds of sentences "journalese" or are they part of the normal spoken and written Hindi?

This question is for those Hindi speakers, wherever they might be in the whole wide world, who read quality Hindi literature.

Have you come across these kinds of constructions in the works of respectable Hindi prose and poetry writers?


----------



## marrish

I hope I'll qualify as a Hindi speaker! I'll be surprised to learn that these kinds of sentences exists in Hindi. This was my reason for selecting that sentence. It feels strange, to you, me and Faylasoof SaaHib, and this only with regard to Urdu. We can learn something new, so practical in Hindi.


----------



## flyinfishjoe

It definitely sounds like a journalistic construction to my ears. Perhaps a native speaker like greatbear could weigh in further.


----------



## tonyspeed

This is not in any book I have, even those usually covering colloquial variations. Have you ever heard this in colloquial speech? I have not. 

  The point of the present participle is to replace raha.  

vah us gaaRii meN se giraa jo chal rahii hai  

vah us chaltii huii gaaRii se giraa.


----------



## hindiurdu

QURESHPOR said:


> Are these kinds of sentences "journalese" or are they part of the normal spoken and written Hindi?



I think this is a journalistic construct and a fairly new one at that. But I don't think it's really restricted to Hindi either -



انگلینڈ نے جنوبی افریقہ کے خلاف لارڈز میں کھیلے جا رہے تیسرے ٹیسٹ میچ کے دوسرے دن کھیل کے اختتام پر ...
دیر شام سواری نہ ملنے کے سبب پیدل گھر جا رہے ایک شخص کو کچھ اسلحہ بند بدمعاشوں نے ...
ایسی منزل پر پہونچے ہوئے عاشقوں کے ساتھ معمولی ہمدردی

It seems to create a dramatic effect. "Ye tasveer dekhiye! Rote bachchhe, bilakhti maaeN, dukhte dil, cheextii avaazeN insaaf maang rahiiN haiN!" → "Ye tasveer dekhiye! Rote hue bachche, bilakhti hui maaeN, dukhte hue dil, cheextii hui avaazeN insaaf maang rahiiN haiN!" In saying it to myself, I don't think this is normal speech.


----------



## Qureshpor

hindiurdu said:


> I think this is a journalistic construct and a fairly new one at that. But I don't think it's really restricted to Hindi either -
> 
> 
> 
> انگلینڈ نے جنوبی افریقہ کے خلاف لارڈز میں کھیلے جا رہے تیسرے ٹیسٹ میچ کے دوسرے دن کھیل کے اختتام پر ...
> دیر شام سواری نہ ملنے کے سبب پیدل گھر جا رہے ایک شخص کو کچھ اسلحہ بند بدمعاشوں نے ...
> ایسی منزل پر پہونچے ہوئے عاشقوں کے ساتھ معمولی ہمدردی
> 
> It seems to create a dramatic effect. "Ye tasveer dekhiye! Rote bachchhe, bilakhti maaeN, dukhte dil, cheextii avaazeN insaaf maang rahii*N* haiN!" → "Ye tasveer dekhiye! Rote hue bachche, bilakhti hui maaeN, dukhte hue dil, cheextii hui avaazeN insaaf maang rahiiN haiN!" In saying it to myself, I don't think this is normal speech.



Thank you for your response, hindiurdu SaaHib. And is "rahii*N* haiN" deliberate, to please UrduMedium SaaHib or just a typo?

I shall transliterate the Urdu examples you have provided so that everyone is able to read them.

1) iNglaiND [England] ne junuubii afriiqah (South Africa] ke xilaaf laarDz* (Lords) meN khele jaa rahe tiisre test match ke duusre din khel ke ixtitaam par..

2) ..der shaam savaarii ke nah milne ke sabab paidal jaa rahe ek shaxs ko kuchh asliHah-band bad-ma3aashoN ne ..

3) aisii manzil par pahuNche hu'e 3aashiqoN ke saath ma3muulii hamdardii..

I think we can safely discard the third example because it is quite normal and grammatically correct. It is just like "gire hu'e makaan", "mare hu'e log" etc. It is not the same as "suparmaarkeT meN huii goliibaari". The second one is from a newspaper in India. Could it be influence of Hindi journalism style? I have not seen these kinds of constructions before in Urdu print. Mind you, I have not read every piece of Urdu print!!

The second example is from BBC Urdu. Again I wonder if just like a restaurant which serves Subcontinental food where there are a set number of basic recipes to which a variety of bits and pieces can be added to give dishes with all sorts of exotic titles. Similarly BBC will have a number of Urdu Hindi writers and there must be free exchange of ideas both ways. In short, whilst not denying the existence of at least the first type of construction in Urdu print, as you have given it in black and white, I am not convinced they are samples of genuine Urdu. On the other hand, they could be the beginnings of a trend I was not aware of until now.

Once again, thank for your response.

* Alfaaz SaaHib, do you see what I mean?


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> This is not in any book I have, even those usually covering colloquial variations. Have you ever heard this in colloquial speech? I have not.
> 
> The point of the present participle is to replace raha.
> 
> vah us gaaRii meN se giraa jo chal rahii hai
> 
> vah us chaltii huii gaaRii se giraa.



This is one way to look at all. But in the type of constructions under discussion I think the "verb + vaalaa" construction would be more appropriate.

Raj Thakre ne sitambar meN Colors aur Sahara One par ek saath shuruu hone vaale show "sur kshetra" meN bataur judge hissaa le rahii/*hissaa lene vaalii* Asha Bhosle se kahaa hai kih

Bangalore meN khele jaa rahe/*khele jaane vaale* Bharat-New Zealand test ke dauraan Sachin ke lagaataar balled hone aur unkii umr par Sunil Gavaskar kii TippaNRii se vivaad chhiR gayaa hai.

iNglaiND [England] ne junuubii afriiqah (South Africa] ke xilaaf laarDz (Lords) meN khele jaa rahe/*khele jaane vaale* tiisre test match ke duusre din khel ke ixtitaam par..

..der shaam savaarii ke nah milne ke sabab paidal jaa rahe/*paidal jaane vaale* ek shaxs ko kuchh asliHah-band bad-ma3aashoN ne ..

amriikaa ke nyuu jarsii raajya ke ek suparmaarkeT meN huii goliibaarii/*hone vaalii goliibaarii *meN tiin log maare gae haiN.


----------



## hindiurdu

QURESHPOR said:


> And is "rahii*N* haiN" deliberate, to please UrduMedium SaaHib or just a typo?



Just a typo  In saying it to myself rahiiN feels ... incorrect but natural. I was conflicted on this earlier too which is why I didn't weigh in on that earlier thread. When I write it out in Urdu or Nagri, rahiiN looks incorrect to me.



QURESHPOR said:


> Could it be influence of Hindi journalism style?



Qureshpor sahab, it is entirely possible. Some of the constructions on Hindi News TV are really irritating and involve dramatization for no reason. "Haar ki kaagaar par khaRa Bhaarat!" (some spinning flashy image), "Zulm sehta gaaoon!" (next flashy image), "Pattharon se ugalta tel!" (strobed images of some random rock). I am sure this is bad for epileptics (not kidding). A friend on mine once joked that there was some Yoda effect at work - "Difficult this task is." I don't know if you've ever experienced this, but it is really annoying and they can do this over-and-over for 2-3 minutes at a stretch. I definitely see much less of this on, say, GeoTV.

This is conjecture, but it may be a cross-over from some other language. Often Marathi is behind stuff like this because of the media prominence of Bombay. It's how things like "MaiN meri kitaab laayaa huuN" have shown up, which are totally grammatically incorrect in HU, but are noticeable in many non-natives speaking Hindi who otherwise have close-to-native command of the language.


----------



## Alfaaz

QURESHPOR said:
			
		

> In short, whilst not denying the existence of at least the first type of construction in Urdu print, as you have given it in black and white, I am not convinced they are samples of genuine Urdu. On the other hand, they could be the beginnings of a trend I was not aware of until now.
> ...
> * Alfaaz SaaHib, do you see what I mean?





> Bangalore meN khele jaa rahe/*khele jaane vaale* Bharat-New Zealand test ke dauraan Sachin ke lagaataar balled hone aur unkii umr par Sunil Gavaskar kii TippaNRii se vivaad chhiR gayaa hai.


Observations: The constructions and examples mentioned/provided seem to be very common in Hind media and even in some speakers' speech. 

Khele jaa rahe seems to be used sometimes even in Urdu media: example:_ 
_____________ meiN khele jaa rahe Cricket match mein ____(mulk)____ jeet gaya hai........
......aur hum aik baar phir/dobara batate chaleN _____________ meiN *jaari *Cricket match meiN ____(mulk)____ faatiH qaraar paaya.....
....aur naazireen ab aap ____(mulk)____ mein khele jaa rahe match ke manaazir dekhh sakte hain; batate cheleN keh yeh abhi khela jaa raha tha, yeh manaazir *baraah-e-raast *haiN 
_
In such a case, it seems (in simple terms) that khela jaa raha/khele jaa rahe conveys a sense/feeling of the (recent) present, where as khele jaane vaale sounds like the past



> ..der shaam savaarii ke nah milne ke sabab paidal jaa rahe/*paidal jaane vaale* ek shaxs ko kuchh asliHah-band bad-ma3aashoN ne ..


paidal jaa rahe ----> paidal jaate/raah chalte (hue)...?

_tumhe naheeN ma'aloom, meiN ne tamaam u'mr mushkilaat aur maHroomiyoN ka saamna kiya hai... tapte registaan mein safar-o-qiyaam kiyaa hai ; tumhara wuruud aik jhilmilaati/e lehlahaati/e jheel/daryaa ki/ke maanand hai aur us saHraa mein *paidal chal rahe*/paidal chalte shakhs ko shadeed pyaas ke ba-wujuud yeh khauf hai keh yeh jheel/daryaa faqat uske takhaiyyul ka taiyaar-kardah saraab nah ho!
_
This (and other usages, apart from khele jaa rahe) is a bit confusing...on one hand it sounds fine (perhaps due to having heard it being used), but on the other it sounds a bit awkward (as Faylasoof, you and other Urdu speakers have already commented)...!


----------



## marrish

In my opinion *paidal jaane vaale* feels like the proper way to say it in Urdu and unlike Alfaaz SaaHib, I don't perceive any feeling of the past.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> _batate cheleN keh yeh abhi khela jaa raha tha, yeh manaazir *baraah-e-raast *haiN _



This is not the same as the type of sentence under consideration!


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> I would like to ask Hindi speakers on the forum.
> 
> Are these kinds of sentences "journalese" or are they part of the normal spoken and written Hindi?
> 
> This question is for those Hindi speakers, wherever they might be in the whole wide world, who read quality Hindi literature.
> 
> Have you come across these kinds of constructions in the works of respectable Hindi prose and poetry writers?



I would like you to clarify your question, first, then only I can answer, as right now your question has quite a big contradiction. You first say is it a part of "normal spoken ... Hindi", and then you go on to say that this question is for those Hindi speakers who read "quality Hindi literature". Now, maybe you think only quality Hindi literature readers speak Hindi, that is not my concern: however, as long as it is not clear as to what you are asking, it will be impossible to answer your question correctly.


----------



## Faylasoof

Just to be brief in answering the original observations in both Hindi and Urdu above, we’d always say: 
_hissaa lene waalii Asha Bhosle_
_khele jaane waale…_
_ghar jaane waale shaxs…_ – as also mentioned by marrish Saahib. Of course one can also say _ghar jaate hue shaxs_ …, depending.

Hence, the constructs under discussion (_hissa le rahii_ _Asha Bhosle_ / _khele jaa rahe ../_ _ghar jaa rahe…_) can be described as “journalese” Urdu and Hindi. 

I’ve expressed my reservation about journalese Urdu usage at the BBC site before.


----------



## tonyspeed

Faylasoof said:


> can be described as “journalese” Urdu and Hindi.
> 
> .



Is this acceptable in any language? Is it not just wrong Hindi/Urdu?


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> Is this acceptable in any language? Is it not just wrong Hindi/Urdu?



I would say, it is but I don't mind "innovations" in the language and I think this, if used carefully, is not such a bad thing.


----------



## Faylasoof

tonyspeed said:


> Originally Posted by *Faylasoof
> 
> *can be described as “journalese” Urdu and Hindi.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this acceptable in any language? Is it not just wrong Hindi/Urdu?
Click to expand...

 Not really acceptable but all the same we all know that we are now drowning in it! Which is why I said this:


Faylasoof said:


> .....
> Hence, the constructs under discussion (_hissa le rahii_ _Asha Bhosle_ / _khele jaa rahe ../_ _ghar jaa rahe…_) can be described as “journalese” Urdu and Hindi.
> 
> *I’ve expressed my reservation about journalese Urdu usage at the BBC site before.
> *


 ... and I'm not great fan of 'SMSese' / 'Text-speak' either, outside the medium it is meant to be used.

My teachers (and elders) always cautioned me about journalese as a great way to wreck one's language and here is what Joe Grimm, once of the _Detroit Free Press_, said: "We write journalese out of habit, sometimes from misguided training, and to sound urgent, authoritative and, well, journalistic. But it doesn't do any of that."

The examples above are a perfect illustration of what Grimm said, esp. the point about misguided training!


----------



## tonyspeed

Ran across another example of this this week. "duur rah rahe X" where X is a person(s). Examples:

duur rah rahe sasuraalvaaloN par ghareluu hinsaa kaa kes nahiiN bantaa

duur rah rahe apne buzurg maataa-pitaa


----------



## souminwé

I'm confused as to what you meant by "is it acceptable in any language" - well yes these type of constructions are the only way to express similar meanings in Japanese.

Hmm, anyway that aside, I've grown up hearing this type of Hindi on TV. I agree with the impression that forms with vaalaa sound more natural, but these "new" Hindi forms don't sound wrong to me, merely technical. My guess is that they're an extrapolation of already existing forms (kiya hua X, karta X etc.) and possibly also calqued off of English models. I think anyone born after a certain era considers them normative; they seem to have limited usage in speech but are definitely something I would write or say in a speech.


They're definitely space/time efficient. Journalistic English has these kinds of participle constructions that you'd rarely hear in real life. Rather than ruining Hindi I think they give it more breadth.


----------



## marrish

^ "any language" which Tonyspeed referred to are just two of them or maybe a couple more but most probably the two under discussion here that is Hindi and Urdu, not Japanese or Russian (applicable). 

I don't have any misgivings about this construction in Hindi, why should I, I can understand it and it is efficient and in vogue in media so there is nothing to do about it than for the grammarians to include it in their books but I have never spotted anything like this in Hindi grammar books. Apart from the (I suppose) odd examples of Urdu usage provided by hindiurdu, I really have never ever come across this phenomenon in Urdu and I've been quite sensitive to it since a couple of years because I noticed it then in Hindi news as something I couldn't place. Well, by now I have become more used to it ;-)


----------

