# Urdu: zer زیر



## Gope

I am unable to understand the meaning of the word زیر occurring in the following context.
 A fiery opponent of the Maharaja's regime in the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is being tried in jail, and then

 ١٣ جلائى ١٩٣١ء كو مسلمانوں کے ایک جم غفير نے جيل كا محاصره كر کے مطالبہ كيا کہ انہیں ابدلقريد کے زير سماعت مقدمہ كى كارروائى سننے كى اجازت دى جاۓ ۔ (shahaabnaamah, p.331)
I should also be grateful to know if there are izaafats after the word zer and after the word samaa3at in زير سماعت مقدمہ .
Thanks.
(am unable to access smileys, they just aren't there in their usual place!)


----------



## marrish

Gope said:


> I am unable to understand the meaning of the word زیر occurring in the following context.
> A fiery opponent of the Maharaja's regime in the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is being tried in jail, and then
> 
> ١٣ جلائى ١٩٣١ء كو مسلمانوں کے ایک جم غفير نے جيل كا محاصره كر کے مطالبہ كيا کہ انہیں ابدلقريد کے زير سماعت مقدمہ كى كارروائى سننے كى اجازت دى جاۓ ۔ (shahaabnaamah, p.331)
> I should also be grateful to know if there are izaafats after the word zer and after the word samaa3at in زير سماعت مقدمہ .
> Thanks.
> (am unable to access smileys, they just aren't there in their usual place!)


Gope SaaHib, salaam. Would it be sufficient if I only say that it is _zer-e-samaa3at_?


----------



## Gope

marrish said:


> Gope SaaHib, salaam. Would it be sufficient if I only say that it is _zer-e-samaa3at_?


I think yes, marrish SaaHib, thanks.
"They wanted to be in the audience at the _ongoing_ (zer-e-samaa3at='under hearing') trial of Abdulqadiir...."?


----------



## Qureshpor

^ A "hearing" that is "under way".

3abdu_lqadiir


----------



## Gope

Qureshpor said:


> ^ A "hearing" that is "under way".
> 
> 3abdu_lqadiir


Yes, QP SaaHib, that was how I understood it, though I could not express it as elegantly as you have done.
I realise the importance of using a standard system of transliteration, have also noted the underscore, but having seen 'Abdullah' in English press for decades on end my alertness is sometimes not what it should be about ع. I thank you very sincerely for pointing out every slip I make, so I shall tax you with less and less mistakes as I progress.


----------



## marrish

Or perhaps very literally but faithfully, a case that is under hearing/is being heard (by the court). And Gope SaaHib, I can see the smileys are back. Well, I can't say anything about your progress but I envy your learning capacities for sure.


----------



## Qureshpor

Gope said:


> Yes, QP SaaHib, that was how I understood it, though I could not express it as elegantly as you have done.
> I realise the importance of using a standard system of transliteration, have also noted the underscore, but having seen 'Abdullah' in English press for decades on end my alertness is sometimes not what it should be about ع. I thank you very sincerely for pointing out every slip I make, so I shall tax you with less and less mistakes as I progress.


Gope SaaHib, the underscore business is just me! I only meant to point that you had missed the 3ain in 3abdu_lqadiir.


----------



## Gope

Qureshpor said:


> Gope SaaHib, the underscore business is just me! I only meant to point that you had missed the 3ain in 3abdu_lqadiir.


Thanks. I looked up in the meanwhile the transliteration scheme and, not finding any underscore there, meant to tax you with it, but you are too quick!


----------



## marrish

I sometimes use this underscore too, following QP SaaHib who is I have to say quite consistent about transliteration. I hadn't included it in the scheme for transliteration because it does not represent any sound but a lack of sound, let's say a hyphen. It is useful for parsing words or compounds like this one, to indicate that it is not 3abdul but 3abdu_lqadiir that is to say "laam" is with the following word, not the preceding one. Another instance when I follow or should follow QP SaaHib is for example _maan_naa _or even_ k_haanaa. _Just to indicate the separate parts because_ maan_naa _is not written with tashdiid. I reckon Faylasoof SaaHib (the great absentee nowadays) uses it too.


----------



## fdb

I wonder if it is a calque on "sub judice"?


----------



## marrish

I don't think so, fdb SaaHib, since India and then Pakistan didn't have extensive influence of French, rather English, however it is perhaps a coincidence and a perfect synonym. Yes, this is what is being implied.


----------



## fdb

It is a Latin term commonly used in English.


----------



## marrish

Yes, it is, but I mistakenly thought you were approaching it from the perspective of French. I agree it is used in English because I have quite extensive exposure to both Urdu and English "legalese". Here it means that the case has moved on, it is not only lodged in but is under hearing, so, your explanation is perfect (it is being judged). As you might know, I know a bit of broken Latin, as displayed with honesty in a recent thread about 3awaammunnaas. Quite a funny show of indolence, isn't it? But in all honesty, it was from my fallible memory so I don't feel ashamed, nobody is perfect as they said in a film.


----------



## marrish

Since this thread has the meaning of the word "zer" as its title, it should be added that it is the name of the diacritic sign [ــِ] in Urdu. This sign is used to indicate the short vowel i but also, at the end of a word, to show an "izaafat construction". In other words, _zer_ is not the same as _izaafat_, I noticed some confusion about it (not here). So, _*i*mt*i*Haan_ اِمتِحان sports two "_zers_" but they are not "_izaafats_" whereas اِمتِحانِ عہدِ وفا _imtiHaan-*e*-3ahd-*e*-wafaa_ uses two "_izaafat_ joints", which are written by using "_zers_".


----------



## Gope

marrish said:


> Since this thread has the meaning of the word "zer" as its title, it should be added that it is the name of the diacritic sign [ــِ] in Urdu. This sign is used to indicate the short vowel i but also, at the end of a word, to show an "izaafat construction". In other words, _zer_ is not the same as _izaafat_, I noticed some confusion about it (not here). So, _*i*mt*i*Haan_ اِمتِحان sports two "_zers_" but they are not "_izaafats_" whereas اِمتِحانِ عہدِ وفا _imtiHaan-*e*-3ahd-*e*-wafaa_ uses two "_izaafat_ joints", which are written by using "_zers_".



excellent, marrish SaaHib, thanks from a learner who really wanted to know (but didn't know he wanted to know).


----------



## marrish

Hahaha! I hope its clear now .


----------

