# Hindi, Urdu: spelling of hans



## mundiya

In proper Hindi spelling, "hans" with nasalised vowel meaning "laugh, laughing" is हँस, and "hans" with half nasal consonant meaning "goose, swan" is हंस.  How would these two words be differentiated in Urdu spelling?  Is it the usual practice in Urdu to differentiate them?  Please use a large font size for Urdu characters if possible.

Thank you.


----------



## HZKhan

Urdu doesn't differentiate between them, hence they are pronounced and written identically.


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I am sorry, I'll have to disagree with you Pakistani Khan SaaHib. They are pronounced distinctly by Urdu speakers. As for the written forms, they are usually not differentiated but they can be by adding the appropriate diacritical mark. "haNs!" (laugh!) can have a small nuun-i-Ghunnah sign on top of the dotted nuun whereas "hans" (swan) will just have the normal dotted nuun. I hope either you, marrish SaaHib or Alfaz SaaHib can type the two to show this difference. Unfortunately, I don't know how to type the "haNs" form.


----------



## mundiya

Thanks, I will await the typed forms of "haNs" and "hans".  On a side note, I noticed Platts uses the same Urdu spelling for "haNs" and "hans".  Similarly he uses the same spelling for other pairs of word too (such as "haaN" and "haan").  So, is nuun-i-Ghunnah usually omitted from writing in general, or only in certain cases?


----------



## Qureshpor

mundiya said:


> Thanks, I will await the typed forms of "haNs" and "hans".  On a side note, I noticed Platts uses the same Urdu spelling for "haNs" and "hans".  Similarly he uses the same spelling for other pairs of word too (such as "haaN" and "haan").  So, is nuun-i-Ghunnah usually omitted from writing in general, or only in certain cases?


As you may be aware, the diacritical marks are usually omitted in Urdu unless the material is for learners (and this includes children's books) or if a writer is making it clear which word s/he has in mind, e.g muntaxib vs muntaxab (choosing, chooser vs chosen). You may term this as "Proper Urdu Spelling" or "Full Urdu Spelling".

Platts in his dictionary only differentiates the normal nuun from the nasal nuun when the latter is in the final position but he clearly differentiates the nasal nuun in both the final and medial positions in his "A Grammar of the Hindustani or Urdu Language" published in 1874. Examples of these words are:-

aNtRii, phaNsnaa, muNh

aaNdhii, saaNp, iiNT, uuNT  

barsoN, sauNpnaa

In summary, in normal everyday writings, the nasal is always indicated in the final position, e.g maaN, haaN etc but not in the non-final position. It goes without saying that anyone familiar with Urdu will realise from the context if a beautiful smile/laughter of a human is being described or a beautiful bird.


----------



## HZKhan

Qureshpor said:


> They are pronounced distinctly by Urdu speakers.



Qureshpor saahib, mujhe in do alfaaz ke talaffuz ke darmiyaan farq mahsuus nahiiN hotaa.


----------



## Qureshpor

Pakistani Khan said:


> Qureshpor saahib, mujhe in do alfaaz ke talaffuz ke darmiyaan farq mahsuus nahiiN hotaa.


Pakistani Khan SaaHib, I have not a shread of doubt that "haNs" and "hans" are not pronounced the same. Let us wait for input from our other Urdu speaking friends.

mujhe aur kahiiN le chal Wasii
jahaaN nafrat dil meN *bas* nah sake
jahaaN ko'ii kisii ko *Das* nah sake
jahaaN ko'ii kisii pih *haNs* nah sake
mujhe aur kahiiN le chal Wasii

Would "hans" rhyme with "haNs", "Das" and "bas"?


----------



## HZKhan

Qureshpor said:


> Pakistani Khan SaaHib, I have not a shread of doubt that "haNs" and "hans" are not pronounced the same.



Platts ki lughat ke mutaabiq donoN lafzoN ka talaffuz yaksaaN hai: *haṅs*
http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.9:1:3871.platts
http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.9:1:3872.platts


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I don't know if you can read Devanagri script Pakistani Khan SaaHib but Platts gives the same spelling for these two words in Devanagri too. But the reality is that as OP has mentioned, the word for laughing has a nasal n after the short a (zabar) हँस  whereas for the bird, it is not the nasal nuun. It can (and perhaps should) be written as हन्स. You will be able to see that the two words are not the same.

saabit hu'aa kih kushtah-i-dandaan-i-yaar huuN
*hans* aa ke merii qabr pih motii ugal chale

Aatash

I don't know about the intricacies of vazn in Urdu poetry. But if this word was "haNs" here, it would throw it off meter, I believe. This is because in Urdu poetry, the nuun-i-Ghunnah does not count.

vuh haNsaa (He laughed) is not the same as..

vuh hansaa (That swan)


----------



## HZKhan

Qureshpor said:


> saabit hu'aa kih kushtah-i-dandaan-i-yaar huuN
> *hans* aa ke merii qabr pih motii ugal chale
> 
> Aatash
> 
> I don't know about the intricacies of vazn in Urdu poetry. But if this word was "haNs" here, it would throw it off meter, I believe. This is because in Urdu poetry, the nuun-i-Ghunnah does not count.



mujhe yeh she'r nuun e ghunnah ke saath bhi mauzooN lag rahaa hai. 

maf'uulu faa'ilaatu mafaa'iilu faa'ilun

haNs = maf
aa = 'uu
ke = lu
haNs aa ke = maf'uulu


----------



## mundiya

Qureshpor said:


> As you may be aware, the diacritical marks are usually admitted in Urdu...



Sorry to be nitpicky, but did you mean the word "omitted"?



Qureshpor said:


> ...It can (and perhaps should) be written as हन्स. ...



No, it is always with anusvara as हंस because the nasal consonant in this case is not dental.


----------



## Qureshpor

mundiya said:


> Sorry to be nitpicky, but did you mean the word "omitted"? No, it is always with anusvara as हंस because the nasal consonant in this case is not dental.


Indeed I did. Thanks for the correction.

OK. Fair enough.


----------



## marrish

Re. Hindi, is there a difference in pronunciation between both of these words?


----------



## HZKhan

Qureshpor said:


> "haNs!" (laugh!) can have a small nuun-i-Ghunnah sign on top of the dotted nuun...



I don't know either how to type this rarely used diacritic mark, but this may help. 




Qureshpor saahib, kyaa maiN ne yeh 'alaamat durust likhi hai?


----------



## marrish

کوّا چلا ہنس کی چال اور اپنی بھی بھول گیا

یہ گفتگو ذرا نہ ہوئی ماں پہ کارگر
ہنْس کر وفور یاس سے لڑکے پہ کی نظر 
چہرے پہ یوں ہنْسی کا نمایاں ہوا اثر
پنہاں جو بے کسی تھی وہ چہرے پہ چھا گئی
جو دل کی مردنی تھی نگاہوں میں آ گئی​پنڈت برج نارائن چکبست ۔ رامائن کا ایک سین

_paNDit Brij Naaraayan Chakbast - Raamaayan kaa ek siin._​


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> I hope either you, marrish SaaHib or Alfaz SaaHib can type the two to show this difference.


 I am not sure if the diacritic mark will show up properly (due to the limited font options currently available in the forum), but two attempts are given below.

ہنس
ہن٘س


----------



## mundiya

marrish said:


> Re. Hindi, is there a difference in pronunciation between both of these words?



Yes, there is.  If it helps, "hans" हंस has the same nasal consonant as "Sanskrit" संस्कृत.


----------



## Qureshpor

mundiya said:


> Yes, there is.  If it helps, "hans" हंस has the same nasal consonant as "Sanskrit" संस्कृत.


It does n't help me I am afraid. When I listen to the following two songs (one a film song and the other a bhajan), I don't perceive anything else but a normal n.

do ha*n*soN kaa joRaa bichhaR gayaa re
gajab hoyaa raam, julam hoyaa re

........................................................

ha*n*saa gagan biich ro'e


----------



## Qureshpor

Pakistani Khan said:


> [...] Qureshpor saahib, kyaa maiN ne yeh 'alaamat durust likhi hai?


Pakistani Khan SaaHib, perfect! This is exactly what I had in mind.


----------



## Qureshpor

mundiya said:


> Thanks, I will await the typed forms of "haNs" and "hans".  [..]


Hopefully, you've got your answer. Pakistani Khan SaaHib in his post #14 has typed "haNsnaa" showing a nasal nuun diacritical mark. Alfaaz SaaHib in post # 16 has typed ہنس for "hans" and ہن٘س for "haNs". marrish SaaHib's "version" of "haNs" diacritical mark is a variation on the theme.


----------



## mundiya

Qureshpor said:


> It does n't help me I am afraid. When I listen  to the following two songs (one a film song and the other a bhajan), I  don't perceive anything else but a normal n.
> 
> do ha*n*soN kaa joRaa bichhaR gayaa re
> gajab hoyaa raam, julam hoyaa re
> 
> ........................................................
> 
> ha*n*saa gagan biich ro'e



There is a slight difference in the pronunciation of nasal  consonants depending on the type of consonant that follows it.  Hence,  the n of "hans" is the same as that of "Sanskrit" and slightly different  than the n of "pankh" or the n of "gandh", for example.  But the point I  was making to marrish saahib is that "hans" is not the same in  pronunciation as "haNs".


----------



## mundiya

Qureshpor said:


> Hopefully, you've got your answer. Pakistani Khan SaaHib in his post #14 has typed "haNsnaa" showing a nasal nuun diacritical mark. Alfaaz SaaHib in post # 16 has typed ہنس for "hans" and ہن٘س for "haNs". marrish SaaHib's "version" of "haNs" diacritical mark is a variation on the theme.



Yes, thank you all for your contributions.


----------

