# Urdu: Jenaab/Janaab جناب to Address Ladies



## colognial

Hi, Urdu-speakers! I notice the form of address 'jenaab' before the name is frequently used in the Urdu posts here. In Persian the word is exclusively used before the name of a male person. Is there such a distinction in Urdu, too? And if so, what's the exclusive honorific for a female? Thanks!


----------



## Faylasoof

colognial said:


> Hi, Urdu-speakers! I notice the form of address 'jenaab' before the name is frequently used in the Urdu posts here. In Persian the word is exclusively used before the name of a male person. Is there such a distinction in Urdu, too? And if so, what's the exclusive honorific for a female? Thanks!


j*a*naab colognial SaaHib / SaaHibah,

In Urdu it is always جناب j*a*naab regardless of the gender of the addressee! We never say جنابہ janaabah when addressing a female!

However, to distinguish males from females you can add other honorifics, e.g. 
محترم muHtaram -- for males
 محترمہ muHtaramah --- for females

Further to this you can add these at the end, following their name:
 صاحب SaaHib*  --- for males
  صاحبہ SaaHibah** --- for females

Example: 
janaab, muHtaram / janaab-e-muHtaram  XYZ SaaHib
janaab, muHtaramah / janaab-e-muHtaramah  ABC SaaHibah

We also use these in combination with janaab:
حضرت haDhrat / قبلہ qiblah 
janaab, HaDhrat .... /  janaab, qiblah .... SaaHib / SaaHIbah

Additionally one can also go for:
جناب عالی janaab-e-3aalii ....   SaaHib ( صاحب)  - -- for males
جناب عالیہ  janaab-e-3aaliyah ....SaaHibah ( صاحبہ) --- for females

Plus, there are other ways too, some compounding with janaab (e.g. janaab-e-aqdas, 3aalii janaab, janaab-e-waalaa,  *here*) and others using various other terms!

* You'll nearly always hear this as SaaHab (even sometimes as Saab!), 
But, 
** This always as above,i.e. SaaHibah.


----------



## colognial

Thank you very much, Faylasoof! I do appreciate the trouble you must have taken to list all of the different forms. 

You may be interested to know that almost all the words sound familiar to my ears; some can even be said to be in common use by Iranian speakers of Persian, e.g. Aali-jenaab, though of course this word is definitely only used in a formal setting and is a sign of great respect towards the person.

The only word not used by us is 'saaHib'. Also, where an honorific is originally Arabic, possessing, as Arabic nouns do, a masculine and a feminine form, it's always the masculine honorific that is used, regardless of the gender of the person being addressed. Persian grammar is just devoid of tools by which gender distinctions may be made.

Are there any gender inflections in Urdu?


----------



## marrish

colognial said:


> Hi, Urdu-speakers! I notice the form of address 'jenaab' before the name is frequently used in the Urdu posts here. In Persian the word is exclusively used before the name of a male person. Is there such a distinction in Urdu, too? And if so, what's the exclusive honorific for a female? Thanks!


Just because *janaab* is suitable for both sexes in Urdu I used this neutral form while addressing you in this thread: Urdu, Persian: و کتاب اینست. If I were to use _SaaHib_, it would be clearly masculine while _SaaHib*ah*_ feminine.

Yes, in Urdu there are two genders: masculine and feminine and there are different patterns for inflection of nouns or adjectives depending on gender. The verb form has to agree with the gender too.


----------



## colognial

Thank you, marrish. In Persian, as I'm sure I've said already, _janaab_ would be used for a man only. But I am not raising the question to make a point about Persian, or about me, for that matter. I just wondered whether the word _janaab_ was unisex in Urdu, which turns out to indeed be the case. 

And I suppose there are two pronouns standing one for 'he' and the other for 'she' in Urdu, are there?

Isn't it curious how 'I' is always, I mean in all languages and under all circumstances, just 'I', regardless of the sex of the person saying it. I wonder why.


----------



## Dib

colognial said:


> And I suppose there are two pronouns standing one for 'he' and the other for 'she' in Urdu, are there?



No, the forms of the pronouns do not express gender in Urdu. However, their associated adjectives and many verb forms (which were historically participles) express the implied gender.



> Isn't it curious how 'I' is always, I mean in all languages and under all circumstances, just 'I', regardless of the sex of the person saying it. I wonder why.



This is a curious statement. Of course, there are some 6000 languages in modern world, and I don't even know 0.5% of them. So, I don't know to what extent this statement is valid. The only exception that comes to my mind is colloquial Japanese, where men and women tend to use different words for some common concepts, including "I". Young women may say "atashi" (among other things) where men may say "boku" (among other things). There exist a lot of choices depending on formality, respectfulness, etc. (e.g. formal unisex "watashi", etc.) But there the informal language tends to have distinct feminine and masculine patterns (like atashi/boku above). Breaking this barrier would make you sound effeminate or tom-boyish.

EDIT: I should mention that I don't know Japanese. This is what I have read - so, second hand knowledge.


----------



## colognial

Dib said:


> No, the forms of the pronouns do not express gender in Urdu. However, their associated adjectives and many verb forms (which were historically participles) express the implied gender.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a curious statement. Of course, there are some 6000 languages in modern world, and I don't even know 0.5% of them. So, I don't know to what extent this statement is valid. The only exception that comes to my mind is colloquial Japanese, where men and women tend to use different words for some common concepts, including "I". Young women may say "atashi" (among other things) where men may say "boku" (among other things). There exist a lot of choices depending on formality, respectfulness, etc. (e.g. formal unisex "watashi", etc.) But there the informal language tends to have distinct feminine and masculine patterns (like atashi/boku above). Breaking this barrier would make you sound effeminate or tom-boyish.
> 
> EDIT: I should mention that I don't know Japanese. This is what I have read - so, second hand knowledge.



This is interesting, Dib. I'd heard of 'watashi', but not the other, gender-sensitive, words. Now, this will probably sound entirely ignorant on my part, but I'd always taken 'watashi' to somehow shift the person into the 3rd, and can't help feeling the other pronouns you mention may be so, too. But I couldn't be sure.

In any case, your point is valid since even in English one may introduce oneself as "I, Catherine, hereby solemnly declare ..., and thereby make mention of one's gender.


----------



## eskandar

In Persian, was کنیز ever used as a formal first person pronoun the way بنده is by men? That could be one example. Also, while Vietnamese has a standard, gender-neutral first person pronoun that can be used generically (tôi), most often a different pronoun is used instead which varies not only on gender but on the speaker's relationship to their interlocutor (age/status/etc).

Even if the personal pronoun 'I' doesn't change based on gender, the rest of the sentence (eg. "I went to the store" or "I am tall") often inflects the verb and/or adjective to indicate gender, at least in some of the languages that come to mind (Hindi/Urdu, Arabic, Spanish and most Romance languages).


----------



## colognial

Hello, eskandar. The answer to your first question, assuming it is a question, is a no, I believe. We don't hear, for instance, a girl say "kaniz be saraaparde dar aamad*am*". As for _bandeh_, again, it is uttered equally by men and women to refer to the "I".

I don't wish to insist on the "I" not being gender-sensitive in all the 6,000 or so languages around the world. I simply don't know that for a fact. But it would still be safe to assume that "I', "me", "mine" and all their 6,000 exact equivalents tend to remain un-inflected more often than the third-person pronouns. Even with so weak an argument to go on with, I feel I may still ask the question why, why this should be so, and wonder if perhaps there is a psychological aspect there to be explored.


----------



## Faylasoof

_janaab HaDhraat_! Can we stay on the topic of _janaab  _since we are now drifting into something completely different!


colognial said:


> Thank you very much, Faylasoof! I do appreciate the trouble you must have taken to list all of the different forms.
> 
> You may be interested to know that almost all the words sound familiar to my ears; some can even be said to be in common use by Iranian speakers of Persian, e.g. Aali-jenaab, though of course this word is definitely only used in a formal setting and is a sign of great respect towards the person.
> 
> The only word not used by us is 'saaHib'. Also, where an honorific is originally Arabic, possessing, as Arabic nouns do, a masculine and a feminine form, it's always the masculine honorific that is used, regardless of the gender of the person being addressed. Persian grammar is just devoid of tools by which gender distinctions may be made.
> 
> Are there any gender inflections in Urdu?


 No it didn't take much time - just as long as it took to type them! Well colognial, we share a large vocabulary! 
marrish SaaHib, has already answered the gender question in Urdu, which reminds me that _janaab_ itself we treat as a feminine! So we say:

_kisii *kii* *janaab* meN honaa_  (and _not_, _kisii *ke* janaab meN honaa_).


----------



## Maharaj

Never have I ever heard a lady being addressed as جناب


----------



## marrish

Iٖt is still used, but I have some old pieces to share:

E.g. in a book title from Bhopal:

حیات قدسی : یعنی سوانح عمری جناب نواب گوہر بیگم صاحبہ المعروف بہ نواب بیگم صاحبہ قدسیہ تاج ہند
Title Transcription : Ḥayāt-i qudsī : yaʿnī savāneh-e ʿumrī *janāb Nawwāb Gohar Begam ṣāḥibah* al-maʿrūf bah Nawwāb Begam ṣāḥibah Qudsiyah tāj-e-hind

or this: عالی جناب قیصرہ ہند ملکہ معظمہ
*3aalii janaab qaisara*-e-hind *malika*-e-mu3azzam*ah* (about Queen Victoria).


----------



## Maharaj

Is it confined to writing only?


----------



## marrish

No, not really, actually it is more said than written. It's sometimes used even colloquially.


----------



## Sheikh_14

What do Perso-phones use for females in lieu of Janaab then,
 I would be interested to know??


----------



## Sheikh_14

colognial said:


> Hi, Urdu-speakers! I notice the form of address 'jenaab' before the name is frequently used in the Urdu posts here. In Persian the word is exclusively used before the name of a male person. Is there such a distinction in Urdu, too? And if so, what's the exclusive honorific for a female? Thanks!



Which honorific do Perso-phones use then for females I would be interested to find out? I quite like the thought of janaabah if that is indeed the Persian offering. However, to most janaabah would sound like janaabaa which in Urdu, Punjabi and Pashto would merely be seen as a gender-neutral means to call out someone.


----------



## amiramir

Sheikh_14 said:


> Which honorific do Perso-phones use then for females I would be interested to find out? I quite like the thought of janaabah if that is indeed the Persian offering. However, to most janaabah would sound like janaabaa which in Urdu, Punjabi and Pashto would merely be seen as a gender-neutral means to call out someone.




I presume xanoom?


----------



## iskander e azam

I watched a Pakistani comedy drama recently in which a man referred to his wife as جناب in a non-humorous context.


----------



## Sheikh_14

amiramir said:


> I presume xanoom?


That would make perfect sense, in Turkish they use Hanım, which is a term of Turkic origins. Khanam is also used in Urdu, however less frequently.

Janaabaa is used to call someone out akin to say sardaaraa, yaaraa, etc.

I've always wondered if janaaba for a female of rank and jawaana for a youthful woman could be acceptable alternatives. I am aware that neither are used but if a feminine were to be coined where would it lead? Or would something like jawaanan/janaaban make more sense or be more palatable?

Lastly is there any means to pluralise janaab? I've once read janaabaan in the transcript of a speech. Could several janaabs be Janaaban E aa'laa? Which begs the question that will then the ladies be janaabaat E 'aaliyah?


----------



## Alfaaz

Sheikh_14 said:
			
		

> I've always wondered if janaaba for a female of rank and jawaana for a youthful woman could be acceptable alternatives.


Relevant quotes: 

لغاتِ روزمرّہ - Dr. Faruqi - جنابہ



> اردو تحریر کی زبان زد عام غلطیاں
> 
> فرہاد احمد فگارؔ
> 
> جناب پرنسپل صاحب: اکثر دیکھا گیا ہے کہ جناب کے ساتھ صاحب کا استعمال لازمی قرار دیا جاتا ہے۔اردو کے اساتذہ بھی یہ غلطی اپنا فرضِ عین سمجھتے ہوئے کرتے ہیں۔ایک طرف ہم آبِ زم زم کا پانی بولنا اس وجہ سے غلط مانتے ہیں کہ آب اور پانی ہم معنی ہیں۔دوسری جانب جناب اور صاحب کو ہم معنی ہوتے ہوئے بھی ساتھ ملا کر لکھنا غلطی تصور نہیں کرتے۔اردو لغات کے بہ موجب دونوں کلماتِ تخاطب ہیں اور احترام کے لیے استعمال ہوتے ہیں۔ اس لیے جناب پرنسپل یا پرنسپل صاحب کہ دینا کافی ہو گا۔کچھ لوگ یہاں ایک مزید غلطی کرتے ہوئے بھی پائے گئے ہیں کہ خاتون کے لیے ’’جنابہ‘‘ کر دیتے ہیں جو صریحاً غلط ہے۔جنابہ کا مطلب ایسی حالت ہے جس میں غسل واجب ہو جاتا ہے جنابہ گندگی اور ناپاکی کو کہتے ہیں۔ایسے ہی خاتون کے لیے بھی جناب لکھنا درست ہے۔ جیسے جناب زینب یا جناب فاطمہ ۔​





			
				Sheikh_14 said:
			
		

> Lastly is there any means to pluralise janaab? I've once read janaabaan ...​


جنابان would be the Persian plural. If I'm not mistaken, the Arabic plural is اجنبہ. (However, as mentioned above in post #10, جناب has other usages as well and isn't only limited to use as a title.) 

Other forum members will hopefully provide further information.


----------

