# Hindi: taste, smell



## Jianfeng

How to say in Hindi:
It tastes/ smells good. (as vi.)
and
Please taste/ smell it.(as vt.)

Thanks!


----------



## greatbear

Jianfeng said:


> How to say in Hindi:
> It tastes/ smells good. (as vi.)
> and
> Please taste/ smell it.(as vt.)
> 
> Thanks!



I don't think there is any intransitive verb used for "taste".
One says "(iskaa) achchha swaad hai" for taste.

It smells good again would be rather "is mein se badhiya sugandh aa rahi hai" (even though su + gandh should in itself mean "badhiya gandh", people say "achchhi/badhiya sugandh").

Please taste it = Chakh ke dekhiye!
Please smell it = Ise soongh ke (tau) dekhiye!


----------



## Jianfeng

bahut shukriya~~


----------



## rahulbemba

It tastes good. (as vi.) Yah swadist hai. यह स्वादिस्ट है. 
and
Please taste it.(as vt.) Kripaya ise chakhen. कृपया इसे चखें.

It smells good. (as vi.) Yah sugandhit hai. यह सुगन्धित है.
and
Please smell it.(as vt.) Kripaya ise mahak kar dekhen. कृपया इसे महक कर देखें.


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> Is "mahaknaa" same as "suuNghnaa" here? I have n't come across this usage before.


----------



## rahulbemba

"mahaknaa" महकना is the word (verb) for "sugandh lena" सुगंध लेना (to smell something). [_As such the same word is also means "to give out smell", e.g. "fool mahak rahe the" (the flowers were giving out smell) as well as "usne foolon ko mahak kar dekha" (he smelt the flowers)._]

"soonghna" सूंघना is another similar word but often it is used in the sense of "to sniff". As we know, "sniffing" and "smelling" are different phases of the "smelling process". For example when we say it for a security dog it will only do "soonghna" सूंघना and not "mahakna". The term "mahakna" महकना would indicate that there is some kind of "smell/aroma" in it, while "soonghna" सूंघना may not indicate towards it - one can try to do "soonghnaa" सूंघना for some other purposes than "mahaknaa" महकना, e.g. may be to find out the moisture content. 

Also, "mahaknaa" महकना is indicating towards a "process" , e.g. "to feel or enjoy the smell", while "soonghna" सूंघना is indicating towards "an act" done and ended. 
_
Note: This is my personal view on the same with my own knowledge and experience with Hindi. _


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> "mahaknaa" महकना is the word (verb) for "sugandh lena" सुगंध लेना (to smell something). [_As such the same word is also means "to give out smell", e.g. "fool mahak rahe the" (the flowers were giving out smell) as well as "usne foolon ko mahak kar dekha" (he smelt the flowers)._]
> 
> "soonghna" सूंघना is another similar word but often it is used in the sense of "to sniff". As we know, "sniffing" and "smelling" are different phases of the "smelling process". For example when we say it for a security dog it will only do "soonghna" सूंघना and not "mahakna". The term "mahakna" महकना would indicate that there is some kind of "smell/aroma" in it, while "soonghna" सूंघना may not indicate towards it - one can try to do "soonghnaa" सूंघना for some other purposes than "mahaknaa" महकना, e.g. may be to find out the moisture content.
> 
> Also, "mahaknaa" महकना is indicating towards a "process" , e.g. "to feel or enjoy the smell", while "soonghna" सूंघना is indicating towards "an act" done and ended.
> _
> Note: This is my personal view on the same with my own knowledge and experience with Hindi. _




It would be interesting to hear other members' views on the subject of mahaknaa/suuNghnaa.

"[_As such the same word is also means "to give out smell", e.g. "*fool *mahak rahe the" (the flowers were giving out smell) as well as "usne *foolon* ko mahak kar dekha" (he smelt the flowers)._]"

I know about flowers (phuul/phool) being fragrant but I have to admit it is new for me that "fools" also emit fragrance. I have always thought that the word for flowers in both Urdu and Hindi was "phuul/phool"!


----------



## flyinfishjoe

Yes, _phuul_ is one of those words that are often erroneously pronounced with a "f" sound, like _phir_, _guphaa_, and _phal_​.


----------



## Faylasoof

We do not treat _suuNghnaa_ سونگهنا सूंघना  and _mahakna_ مہکنا महकना  synonymously, for obvious reasons:

H سونگهنا सूंघना _sūṅghnā_ [_sūṅgh˚_ = Prk. समग्घ(इ) or समग्घे(इ)=S. समाघ्रा(ति), rt. सम्+आ+घ्रा], v.t. To* smell*, *sniff*, snuff, *inhale*, scent, nose:—_sūṅgh-lenā_, v.t. intens. of and=_sūṅghnā_:—_sūṅghtā phirnā_ (_sūṅghtā_, imperf. part. of _sūṅghnā_), v.n. To go sniffing about; to prowl about.


H  مہکنا  महकना _mahaknā_ (fr. the trans. _mahkānā_, or fr. _mahak_), v.n. To* exhale* agreeable scent; to diffuse fragrance, to *emit *odour; to smell pleasant; to *be fragrant*:—_mahak-jānā_, v.n. To be scented or perfumed.


Smelling / sniffing by inhalation cannot be the same as emitting and diffusing an odour and being fragrant.



flyinfishjoe said:


> Yes, _phuul_ is one of those words that are often erroneously pronounced with a "f" sound, like _phir_, _guphaa_, and _phal_​.


 Yes these variations are seen in dialects but in the ‘upright speech’ it is meant to be *phool* rather than *fool*. Anyway I’d prefer any day a *phool* to a  *fool*!


----------



## rahulbemba

I didn't expect such a micro-analysis of one word I wrote which was not even part of this topic... 

I think such errors happen with Hindi people because of the following reason:

If we write "phool" in Devnagri script, we will write फूल 
If we write "fool" in Devnagri script, we will write फूल only.

And hence just reversing the sequence it is logical to think that we can write "फूल" for both/either _phool_ or _fool_ without emphasis on their meanings (fool is an English word). Though I agree that we should write "phool" for "Hindi word फूल meaning a flower" as a matter of practice. I wrote it unconsciously.


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> I didn't expect such a micro-analysis of one word I wrote which was not even part of this topic...
> 
> I think such errors happen with Hindi people because of the following reason:
> 
> If we write "phool" in Devnagri script, we will write फूल
> If we write "fool" in Devnagri script, we will write फूल only.
> 
> And hence just reversing the sequence it is logical to think that we can write "फूल" for both/either _phool_ or _fool_ without emphasis on their meanings (fool is an English word). Though I agree that we should write "phool" for "Hindi word फूल meaning a flower" as a matter of practice. I wrote it unconsciously.




Could it be that this has nothing to do with the style of the script? I have come across people who are completely illiterate yet they make a clear distinction between a "ph" as in "phal" (fruit) and "f" as in "farsh" (floor). I would suggest that "phuul/phool, phal, phir etc" being written as "fool, fal, fir etc" is not indicative of the writer's script but more a sign of the manner in which that person/community utters these words. By your logic every word with an inherent "ph" could end up being pronounced as "f" since the same phoneme is (or can be) used for both. I do not believe this kind of "ph"/"f" mix up is something that one would have come across in the speech of the likes of Harivansh Rai Bahchchan.

I thought one could have a "ph" with a subscript dot to convert it into a"f", just like the retroflexs "D" and "Dh" are converted to "R" and "Rh".


----------



## amiramir

How do we indicate the noun 'smell' in a neutral sense? i.e. we have khushbuu and badbuu, but is there just buu? 

i.e. The room smells strange.  Is this: Kamre se ek ajeeb buu aa rahii hai ?  Maybe this isn't the best example, because badboo can fit here.

But what about:

Dogs have a particular smell when they are wet. Is this:

Kutte jab geele hote hain unka ek khaas buu hota hai. 

Is this vaguely correct?


----------



## desi4life

amiramir said:


> How do we indicate the noun 'smell' in a neutral sense? i.e. we have khushbuu and badbuu, but is there just buu?
> 
> i.e. The room smells strange.  Is this: Kamre se ek ajeeb buu aa rahii hai ?  Maybe this isn't the best example, because badboo can fit here.
> 
> But what about:
> 
> Dogs have a particular smell when they are wet. Is this:
> 
> Kutte jab geele hote hain unka ek khaas buu hota hai.
> 
> Is this vaguely correct?



I think you can say _suuNgh, gandh, _or _buu_, and I believe the most common of the three is _suuNgh_.


----------



## Alfaaz

amiramir said:
			
		

> How do we indicate the noun 'smell' in a neutral sense? i.e. we have khushbuu and badbuu, but is there just buu?


_buu _does exist and is actually the most common word in Urdu. (I don't think I have come across the other two words mentioned by desi4life, at least in colloquial Urdu speech.)


> P بو _bū_, or _bo_ [Pehl. _boi_; Zend _baoidhī_, rt. _bud_ = S. _budh_], s.f. Odour, scent, smell; trace, soupçon, small portion, particle (in India, _bo_ commonly signifies a bad smell, _bū_ being used for 'smell' generally): ...





			
				amiramir said:
			
		

> But what about:
> 
> Dogs have a particular smell when they are wet. Is this:
> 
> Kutte jab geele hote hain unka ek khaas buu hota hai.
> 
> Is this vaguely correct?


 _buu _is feminine. Therefore, your translation should be changed to _*unkii* ek xaas buu *hotii* hai_.


----------



## desi4life

@Maharaj Which of the three words (s_uuNgh, gandh, _or _buu) _do you use?


----------



## Maharaj

rahulbemba said:


> Please smell it.(as vt.) Kripaya ise mahak kar dekhen. कृपया इसे महक कर देखें.


There is no such sentence in Hindi or Urdu, 'Mehakna' verb is not used this way.
Please note @Qureshpor @Jianfeng @amiramir 


amiramir said:


> How do we indicate the noun 'smell' in a neutral sense? i.e. we have khushbuu and badbuu, but is there just buu?


Yes Buu is there and it's neutral, I'm not going into a discussion about whether it's Urdu or Hindi. 
There's another word in Hindi गंध 'Gandh'
Though Buu originally is a neutral word, however in India when you use it, it generally suggests 'Bad Smell', 
I don't know how it is used in Pakistan.
It is very much a neutral word originally but I think that context is now confined to only written Hindi/Urdu, 
again here I'm talking in Indian context.
However गंध Gandh has had it's neutral sense intact.


desi4life said:


> I think you can say _suuNgh, gandh, _or _buu_, and I believe the most common of the three is _suuNgh_.


Suungh is not a noun


----------



## desi4life

Maharaj said:


> Suungh is not a noun



It might be uncommon but does exist as a noun:

H سونگهہ सूंघ _sūṅgh_ (v.n. fr. _sūṅgh-nā_), s.f. Smelling, inhaling; smell, odour, scent.

Thanks for confirming the usage of _gandh _for smell.


----------



## desi4life

Alfaaz said:


> _buu _does exist and is actually the most common word in Urdu.



In your experience, is it still the case that _buu _is used for smell generally and _bo _for bad smell as Platts indicated?


----------



## marrish

desi4life said:


> In your experience, is it still the case that _buu _is used for smell generally and _bo _for bad smell as Platts indicated?


In another thread such pairs were discussed for Urdu/Persian, here some quotes:


Qureshpor said:


> Also we say "buu" and not "bo" (as the pronunciation in Punjabi). BUT...


[...]


Qureshpor said:


> Urdu speakers will know that when we are "splitting hairs", we are carrying out "muu-shigaafii" and not "mo-shigaafii". But our Mirza Ghalib has used "mo" (and "bo"!) because it suited the rhyme scheme to employ the older pronunciation.


----------



## Sheikh_14

Never heard it to be bo, always buu so far as Urdu is concerned. Yes, it differs with dialect in Punjabi.


----------



## Dib

There is another word for "smell" (noun) that I have heard with some regularity from Hindi speakers from Bihar, etc. - "baas" of "baasmatii" fame. But it also seems to have come to refer mostly to foul smell in the modern usage.


----------



## Alfaaz

desi4life said:
			
		

> In your experience, is it still the case that _buu _is used for smell generally and _bo _for bad smell as Platts indicated?


 I have heard such usage from some speakers, but the majority generally use _buu_ and _bad-buu_.


			
				Dib said:
			
		

> ... But it also seems to have come to refer mostly to foul smell in the modern usage.


 Along with _baasii (khaanaa)_ referring to _stale (food)_.


----------



## Iman_tauma

Jianfeng said:


> How to say in Hindi:
> It tastes/ smells good. (as vi.)
> and
> Please taste/ smell it.(as vt.)
> 
> Thanks!



Another way to say something smells good that I don’t believe was mentioned is “Sugandhit”. This is the adjective form of the noun “Sugandh”. For Example:
Is kamra mein ek sugandh hai= There is a good smell in this room.
Yeh kamra sugandhit hai= This room is good-smelling (or, simply, “This room smells good”).

The same applies for bad smell. You could use either “durgandh” or “durgandhit”. Example:
Is kamra mein ek durgandh hai= There is a bad smell in this room.
Yeh kamra durghanit hai= This room is bad-smelling/stinky. 

The Urdu variations of these words are
Khushboo (n) and Khushboodar (adj) for a “good smell” and Badboo (n) and Badboodar (adj) for a “bad smell”


----------



## desi4life

Iman_tauma said:


> Another way to say something smells good that I don’t believe was mentioned is “Sugandhit”. This is the adjective form of the noun “Sugandh”.



These were discussed in posts 2 and 4.



> The Urdu variations of these words are
> Khushboo (n) and Khushboodar (adj) for a “good smell” and Badboo (n) and Badboodar (adj) for a “bad smell”



They are also common in Hindi.


----------

