# Urdu: maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa/mujhe shahr nahiiN jaanaa hai



## Qureshpor

maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa

mujhe shahr nahiiN jaanaa hai

What's the difference?


----------



## Maham

You can't use the first sentence alone. There is something missing ...

"Kuch bhi hojaae .. Main sheher nahi jaane ka"

Or

Whereas the secoand one is complete.


----------



## BP.

The second is proper and correct.

The first reminds me of the use of _waalaa _instead of _kaa _that I often hear from people. Both represent some dialects nonetheless that I have difficulty placing. I wouldn't use either.


----------



## panjabigator

I think a translation of these two sentences depends not only on the context in which they were articulated but also by the speaker's linguistic community. I've heard the first one many a time in Bombay and by L2 speakers of Hindi (which is not to say that they didn't _know_ Hindi), whereas the first option I've never heard by my family.

For me, the first one sounds emphatic, but I can't place why exactly.


----------



## lcfatima

I hesitated answering as a non-native, but as to the first sentence, the pidginized Hindustani dialect in Dubai is characterized by these jaane ka, karne ka constructions.


----------



## Qureshpor

Maham said:


> You can't use the first sentence alone. There is something missing ...
> 
> "Kuch bhi hojaae .. Main sheher nahi jaane ka"
> 
> Or
> 
> Whereas the secoand one is complete.



I agree but you have n't answered my question

As you are aware, it is not always possible to bring out the subtleties in translating from one language to another. To my mind the first one could be translated as follows. 

maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa

I am not one for going to town (?)

The sentence that I have provided is perhaps not a good example.

maiN aasaanii se nahiiN bhuulne kaa 

I am not one for forgetting things easily. (?)

mujhe shahr nahiiN jaanaa hai

I don't intend to go to town.
I don't want to go to town
I don't need to go to town


----------



## Stranger_

I have some questions concerning the first sentence. First, is it a correct and complete sentence? if yes, then what does it exactly mean? This is how I understand it after reading post #6:



> maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa


I am not a person who goes to town ~ I am not that kind of a person who goes to town ~ من کسی نیستم که به شهر بروم ~ من اهل شهر رفتن نیستم




> maiN aasaanii se nahiiN bhuulne kaa



I am not a person who easily forgets ~ من کسی نیستم که زود/به آسانی فراموش کنم 

Is that what it really means?


----------



## marrish

It's Qureshpor SaaHib's thread so I hope he can help you and me out. My understanding من نیستم کہ شہر بروم۔ من نیستم کہ با آسانی فراموش کنم۔


----------



## Stranger_

Thiik hai marrsih Saahib, let us wait for him to clear it up.

Guys, I prefer that you reply in Urdu using Latin letters because I understand much of what is written now.


----------



## Qureshpor

Stranger_ said:


> Thiik hai marrsih Saahib, let us wait for him to clear it up. [...]Guys, I prefer that you reply in Urdu using Latin letters because I understand much of what is written now.


  معاف کیجئے اجنبی صاحب۔ یہ لڑی اردو زبان سے متعلقہ ہے، فارسی سے نہیں۔ اِس لئے آپ کے فارسی جملے یہاں بےجا ہیں۔


----------



## Stranger_

I understand QP Saahib but in post #7 I just asked whether the Persian sentences I mentioned were corresponding to your original Urdu sentences or not, that is all. But if you are talking about what I wrote in post#9, then you are right.

I removed the unrelated parts anyway.


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor SaaHib, what type of thread/question was this supposed to be?

There is one type where you ask a question, collect answers, and then reveal your detailed research on the topic.
There is another type, which you usually refer to as a _genuine question_.
If this was meant to be the first kind of thread, it would be interesting to read your comprehensive answer.


This form seems to be characteristic of older Urdu (as discussed in other threads for words like_ aave, jaave, etc._), but is still used in modern language for emphasis. 

Example from poetry:

جان سے تا وہ مجھے مار نہیں جانے کا
 جان جاوے گی ولے یار نہیں جانے کا

رحم کر ضعف پر اُس کے کہ چمن تک صیاد
 نالہء مرغِ گرفتار نہیں جانے کا

غلام ہمدانی مصحفی

In some cases, this usage (نہیں _____ــنے کا/کی/کے) can probably be compared to using _ain't_ in English (often slang) for similar emphasis:





> The word is also used for emphasis: _That just ain't so!_ It does not appear in formal writing except for deliberate (often humorous) effect or to represent speech.


----------



## Qureshpor

الفاظ صاحب، غلام ہمدانی مصحفی کے اشعار پیش کرنے کے لئے بہت بہت شکریہ۔

آپ کے سوال کا جواب۔ 

لگتا ہے آپ  ہر چیز کو شاید شک کی نظر سے دیکھتے ہیں۔ اِس لڑی کے سلسلے میں میرے پاس کوئی پُر اسرار مواد نہیں ہے جسے میں سب کی نظروں سے چھپائے ہؤے ہوں۔ میں واقعی یہ جاننا چاہتا ہوں کہ کیا 

میں شہر نہیں جانے کا

مجھے شہر نہیں جانا ہے

میں شہر جانے والا نہں ہوں۔۔۔۔وغیرہ

۔۔۔۔۔۔میں کوئی فرق ہے یا نہیں۔ اب تک کوئی اطمئنان بخش جواب نہیں ملا۔


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> آپ کے سوال کا جواب۔
> 
> لگتا ہے آپ ہر چیز کو شاید شک کی نظر سے دیکھتے ہیں۔ اِس لڑی کے سلسلے میں میرے پاس کوئی پُر اسرار مواد نہیں ہے جسے میں سب کی نظروں سے چھپائے ہؤے ہوں۔ میں واقعی یہ جاننا چاہتا ہوں کہ کیا۔۔۔
> 
> ۔۔۔میں کوئی فرق ہے یا نہیں۔


 Thanks for replying Qureshpor SaaHib. It is not that I doubt everything or that I was doubting your intentions while posting in this thread. You will more likely remember that you made many threads around the time this one was posted, which basically seemed to be quizzing members and then providing very useful research/explanations. 

A few examples: 
Urdu-Hindi: vahaaN kaun kaun thaa/the?
Urdu-Hindi: paRe paRe vs paRii paRii
Urdu: Mixed gender subjects and verb agreement 

Taking this into consideration, anyone regularly reading your threads in the forum could have thought that this might have been one of such threads. I (along with other readers) was curious about this topic just as you have now stated that you are curious to know about the difference between the sentences. Approximately 42 months had passed since this thread was first created and mere curiosity was the reason for requesting your comments.


----------



## marrish

It's very plausible QP happens to create threads in order to discuss things rather than ask for explanations in ignorance but I have to confess I do it too. The only reason in my case is to examine what I think against the views of the learned members here.

Secondly, I like that you went out to express your opinion about the general spirit of some threads but along with my appreciation let me tell you that at least in my case it's in the most occurrences that I am bothered with a particular question and I pose it in the forum but I don't lay asleep and investigate matters on my own, often inspired by the answers. Then comes a "xulaasah" - please don't use it in Urdu in this sense, as it is not a "revelation" or "summing up". It's just out of gratitude to those who care to venture into research that I share mine. Many a times it happened that mine was updated later by others!

I believe QP SaaHib's intention behind this thread has been the same. I know for sure there have been threads where QP SaaHib instead of revealing his research joined forces with all of us to come to a conclusion. I think those 42 months are witness to all of us being not capable of answering in the capacity of something which can be called as sufficient. 

I am following this thread with utmost interest and look out to other inputs so that we can form an idea about this phenomenon which is very aptly signalized by QP.

Perhaps opening this thread to Hindi input would be beneficial?


----------



## Alfaaz

^ I hope my comment was not seen in a negative light. 

I was just trying to emphasize the fact that whether it be _research_ or _xulaasahs_ formed by answers/views of learned members (such as Qureshpor, marrish, Faylasoof SaaHibaan and sapnachaandni SaaHibah), they are always very interesting, informative, and a pleasure to read! The threads quoted above in post # 14 seemed to be good examples of this!


----------



## marrish

No negative light from my part, I just shared a bit about my own understanding . Sorry it's not essential to the topic at hand! Alfaaz SaaHib, your contributions must be listed in your post. Not only answers can be enlightening, most of the times the ability to spot something interesting makes the forum move on.


----------



## Qureshpor

Platts explains the first type of sentence (maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa) in the following words...

"The genitive of the infinitive is commonly used in connection with the verbal negative "نہیں" to express a strong negative Future: e.g.

وہ نہیں کرنے کا "he'll not do it or he is not likely to do it."

میں نہیں رہنے کا "I shall not (am not likely to) remain."

My personal perception, as indicated earlier, is something like...

He is not one for doing it/ He is not going to do it.

I am not one for staying (here)/ I am not going to stay (here)

As for the second sentence

mujhe shahr nahiiN jaanaa hai = I don't intend/want/need to go to town.

Any further views please?


----------



## marrish

Thank you for finding and sharing Platts' remarks and translations, let me pay you back with one Phillott: 

*"*The inflected infinitive with _kā, kē, kī_ expressing intention is used only in the negative. The substantive verb “I am, he is,” etc., is understood after it, as : _wuh nahīN likhne kā (hai)_ 'he has no intention whatever of writing'.*"*

I could find these sentences, too: 

_mere samjhaa’e [se] wuh kisii tarah nahiiN samajhne kaa _
'However much I reason with him he won’t listen to reason'.
_
ghoRaa us ko khiiNch nahiiN sakne kaa (no English translation provided)
-------------------
_
So the first difference between a) _maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa _b) _mujhe shahr nahiiN jaanaa hai _is that :
-construction a) is reserved for expressions of the lack/absence of intention, while
-construction b) can be turned into a positive statement, albeit with a different meaning(s) "_mujhe shahr jaanaa hai_" 'I want/need/am/have to go to town'.

The emphasis expressed by 'nahiiN V-e kaa' seems to be connected to the fact that it's exclusively used with negative particle 'nahiiN'.

-----
maiN shahr jaa'uuN gaa hii nahiiN. (I won't go to town, let there be no doubt about it).


----------



## Qureshpor

Thank you marrish SaaHib. Did you mean to write for a) that it conveys intention and not lack of intention?

Would you believe that a grammar on Urdu language was composed in Persian by no other than Insha Allah Khan Insha called daryaa-i-lataafat written in 1808 and published in 1851 (according to Baba-i-Urdu) and he mentions this construction in it. However, although he mentions that it is used only in the negative future, he does not comment if it imparts a different meaning to the usual negative future. In other words, he is saying that most Urdu speakers, instead of saying "maiN nahiiN karuuN gaa" say "maiN nahiiN karne kaa"!

(Do you remember the thread/threads where one of us quoted his famous remark when he said words to the effect of..."Any word from another language, whether Arabic or Persian or another language, once it is used in Urdu whether wrong according to the original language, is correct in Urdu?)


----------



## marrish

QP SaaHib, I meant to say that example a) _maiN shahr nahiiN jaane kaa, _ is a negative statement and doesn't have an affirmative counterpart_. _Given it cannot affirmatively express intention to undertake something positively (like "I'm going to town in the evening"), this construction is used only in situation when one does clearly not intend to do something at all (=lack/absence of intention).

Let me read something first before I can say anything more than that. Your find deserves some research in return.
(The threads must have been linked to discussions about fasaaHat and Ghalatul3aam!).
Do you remember the topic of the uses of past tense in future sense? I happened to come across this one:

Two Preterites coupled by ‹and› express simultaneity, past, present, or future, as : tum khaRe hu’e aur gire, “as soon as you will stand up you will fall;’ ko’ii bachchah sote meN royaa aur tum bedaar hu’iiN ‹(O women) the moment a child cries in its sleep you are awake› (i.e. this is your habit): gaalii muNh se niklii aur maiN ne maaraa, ‹the abuse was no sooner out of his mouth than I hit him› (or ‹will no sooner be out of his mouth than I’ll hit him›).

It [the preterite] is also used for an immediate Future (the Perfect cannot be used as a Future) in anticipation of its completion, as: maiN ne yih kaam abhii kiyaa, ‹I am just going to do it›. Similarly, a servant says laayaa saaHib, ‹I am just bringing it;› aayaa, ‹I am just coming.›.

Remark.– The Preterite with chuknaa is used ironically and indicates a negative future, as: maiN wahaaN jaa chukaa= ‹catch me going› (lit. ‹oh yes, I’ve gone there›, ironical).


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> (Do you remember the thread/threads where one of us quoted his famous remark when he said words to the effect of..."Any word from another language, whether Arabic or Persian or another language, once it is used in Urdu whether wrong according to the original language, is correct in Urdu?)


 Urdu: girved گروید ?


			
				Qureshpor said:
			
		

> Faylasoof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... As the Urdu poet and writer Insha alluded to in one of his works we don't have to follow, in fact, we don't always follow the original pronunciation of all borrowed words. ...
> 
> 
> 
> ہر لفظ جو اردو میں مشہور ہو گیا، عربی ہو یا فارسی، ترکی ہو یا سریانی، پنجابی ہو یا پوربی، از روئے اصل غلط ہو یا صحیح، وہ لفظ اردو کا لفظ ہے۔
Click to expand...

 I would once again like to apologize if you found any of the comments in post #12 offensive. As previously stated, the questions were asked out of genuine interest/curiosity, after observation of your previous threads, and with immense appreciation for your scholarly posts.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz SaaHib, thank you for tracing the (partial) quote, which I too found eventually. I just had a feeling there might have been a fuller citation of Insha's "ruling". Regarding your second part, as the saying goes, please "chill out"! I shall, for posterity, post the full Persian and Urdu translation of it in perhaps the "mustanad" thread.


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> Regarding your second part, as the saying goes, please "chill out"!


 In that case, here are my English translation attempts for the three sentences you had mentioned in post #13. (marrish SaaHib and you have already successfully differentiated between them, so the following might be somewhat repetitive.)  

میں شہر نہیں جانے کا - _I'm not going to go to town whatsoever/under any circumstances!_
مجھے شہر نہیں جانا ہے -_ I don't have to go to town. _
میں شہر جانے والا نہیں ہوں -_ I am not about* to go to town. - _or _- I am not a town-goer._
* Note: Such usage may be often (formally) considered incorrect in English.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> In that case, here are my English translation attempts for the three sentences you had mentioned in post #13. (marrish SaaHib and you have already successfully differentiated between them, so the following might be somewhat repetitive.)
> 
> میں شہر نہیں جانے کا - _I'm not going to go to town whatsoever/under any circumstances!_
> مجھے شہر نہیں جانا ہے -_ I don't have to go to town. _
> میں شہر جانے والا نہیں ہوں -_ I am not about* to go to town. - _or _- I am not a town-goer._
> * Note: Such usage may be often (formally) considered incorrect in English.


Thank you Alfaaz SaaHib. Here is my prospective. For the first one, I will go along with your understanding.

 For the second one, even though I have quoted میں شہر جانے والا نہیں ہوں, the relevant sentence ought perhaps have been 
.(میں شہر نہیں جانے والا ( ہوں

.میں شہر جانے والا نہیں ہوں This could imply "I am not one who goes to a town/towns....but I in fact I go to a village/villages."

Let us look at some real examples from the net, which are the same type of sentence but in the positive. 

کیا میں ہمیشہ کے لئے جیل جانے والا ہوں۔ سلمان خان Am I going to go to jail for good? 

وہ بہت آگے جانے والا تھا۔ He was going to go a long way (ahead) 

So, my take for (میں شہر نہیں جانے والا( ہوں is "I am not going to go to town".

Inflected infinitive + vaalaa offers a wide array of meanings. I will just copy-paste from another thread to illustrate this point. 

terii muHabbat kaa da3vaa *karne vaalaa*, bi_lkul jhuuTaa hai

One who *makes claims*/*is making claims* for your love, is a liar. 

maiN bhalaa in Hazaraat kii parvaa *karne vaalaa* huuN?

Am I *one who* really *cares* about these gentlemen?

Am I *going to *really* care* about these gentlemen?

vaise aaj ek aur qaafiyah Haazir *hone vaalaa* hai. intizaar kiijiye gaa.

In fact, Today yet another rhyme scheme is *going to be* available. Please wait.

maiN yih kaam *karne hii vaalaa* huuN. thoRaa sabr kiijiye!

I am *just about to do* this task. Please be patient.

*marne vaale* marte haiN fanaa hote nahiiN
vuh Haqiiqat meN ham se judaa hote nahiiN

Iqbal

*Those who die*, do die but do not ever perish
The reality is they never part company from us

Iqbal

*marne vaaloN* kii jabiiN raushan hai is zulumaat meN
jis tarah taare chamakte haiN aNdherii raat meN

Iqbal

Brow of *those who have died* is bright in this bleakness
In the manner that stars shine on a dark and gloomy night

( Inflected verb + vaalaa therefore imparts past, present and future meanings, depending on context)


----------



## Qureshpor

BP. said:


> The second is proper and correct.
> 
> The first reminds me of the use of _waalaa _instead of _kaa _that I often hear from people. Both represent some dialects nonetheless that I have difficulty placing. I wouldn't use either.


Just heard Javed Akhtar saying in a Youtube video entitled "Rafi Saab - Javed Akhtar", "aur vahaaN K.L. Saigal Saahab gaanaa sunaane vaale the...". Javed Akhtar is hardly a speaker of some "dialect".

"And there, K.L.Saigal was going to sing a song."


----------

