# Urdu: hai/haiN



## Qureshpor

Friends, the below shi3r is from a Ghazal by the renowned poet Aatash.

سفر ہے شرط، مسافر نواز بہتیرے
ہزارہا شجرِ سایہ دار راہ میں ہے

آتش

safar hai shart, musaafir-navaaz bahutere
hazaar-haa shajar-i-saayah-daar raah meN hai

The question I would like to ask is why we have "hai" and not "haiN"?

NB: aatash is often pronounced as aatish in Urdu.


----------



## marrish

One thing that comes to mind is that it might be caused by the  Persian pluralization system. On the other hand, the phenomenon of "sg. to express multitude" may be at play-- or the word ہزارہا hazaar-haa is the culprit. But I think the following, the very next shi3r from Atash' Ghazal) can be of help too:

مقام تک بھی ہم اپنے پہنچ ہی جائیں گے
خدا تو دوست ہے دشمن ہزار راہ میں ہے 
(آتش)

maqaam tak bhii ham apne pahuNch hii jaa'eN ge
xudaa to dost hae dushman hazaar raah meN *hae*


----------



## Qureshpor

Yes, marrish SaaHib, I was (naturally) aware of this shi3r too. But to be honest with you, I would have expected a plural verb here even more so! I had contemplated the reasons you have put forward but could not come up with a plausible conclusion.

PS: If one were to read "dushman-i-hazaar", then I can see an explanation, at least for this shi3r.


----------



## marrish

The situation might be comparable with English 'There is lots of trees' v. 'There are lots of trees": 'There is an immense number of trees'


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> The situation might be comparable with English 'There is lots of trees' v. 'There are lots of trees": 'There is an immense number of trees'


marrish SaaHib. Thank you but we have Urdu in mind here. Even so, the first English sentence is questionable whilst the second one is correct because "is" goes with "number" which is singular. It's a pity the number of Urdu speakers on this forum is next to nothing.


----------



## marrish

My previous comment doesn’t mean I’ve given up on the issue. To the contrary, I’m almost certain that it’s some grammar point and not a poetic licence.
--------------edit:
اس عشق سے ہے ہزار توبہ
is 3ishq se hae hazaar taubah
توبہ پروردگار توبہ
taubah parwardigaar taubah

ٹوٹی ہے جو بار بار توبہ
TuuTii hae jo baar baar taubah
کیا کیا ہوں شرمسار توبہ
kyaa kyaa huuN sharmsaar taubah

(Saxi Lakhnavi)

Above, "hazaar taubah hae" shows some analogy to the OP example, for the verb is ہے _hae_ (sg.) and ہزار _hazaar_ is there too. I've seen some reliable texts with instances of both ہزار ہے  and ہزار ہیں

This usage of _ہزار_ is also apparent in "hazaar ni3mat hae", "hazaar shukr hae", and _laakh mihrbaanii hae_ for that matter, or _Sad-aafriiN hae_.

Perhaps, the difference between ''hazaar taubah hae'' and ''hazaar-haa shajar-e-saayah-daar hae'' is that توبہ _taubah_ cannot possibly be put in pl. while a plural of شجر _shajar_ can be formed easily.

Yet, I'm exploring the idea that a (longer) izaafat construction with the main noun unmarked for number  (شجر : instead of e.g. شجرہا or اسجار) may result in the verb following the Persian pattern and remaining singular. I think in Persian the sentence would be also singular:
هزارها شجر سایه دار در راہ دارد


----------



## marrish

All speculations aside, Qureshpor SaaHib, let me just copy-paste something I have on my disk. Hopefully this cheers you up, despite the dearth of Urdu speakers around here.

Hold your breath till the last paragraph :

انگریزی و فارسی کے برخلاف اُردو میں خاص عددوں کی بھی جمع ہوتی ہے، جیسے «اُس کے دونوں کان بہرے ہیں»، «آپ کے تینوں بھائی لائق ہیں»، «چاروں عنصر لافانی ہیں»، «ساتوں سیّارے گردش کرتے ہیں»، «آٹھوں نوکر مُلزَم ہیں»۔

اگر زیادہ تاکید یا زور دینا مقصود ہو تو اوپر کے جملوں میں تعدادِ معیّن کو یا اس کی جمع کو دو دفعہ استعمال کرنا چاہئے اور بیچ میں حرف «کے» لانا چاہئے، جیسے «اُس کے دونوں *کے* دونوں کان بہرے ہیں»، «آپ کے تینوں *کے* تینوں بھائی لائق ہیں»، «آٹھوں *کے* آٹھوں نوکر مُلزَم ہیں»۔ لیکن ایسے جملوں میں اکثر بڑے عددوں کی جمع نہیں ہوتی، جیسے «ستّر *کے* ستّر روپے خرچ ہو گئے»، «اسّی کے اسّی سپاہی مارے گئے»۔ 

کچھ خاص عدد ایسے ہیں جو صیغۂ جمع میں غیر معیّن تعداد کے لئے مستعمل ہیں، جیسے «بیسیوں پڑھے لکھے مارے مارے پھرتے ہیں»۔ «سینکڑوں مُسافر زخمی ہوئے»، «ہزاروں گھر تباہ ہو گئے»۔

*تنبیہ*:۔ جس کی جمع بیسیوں غیر معیّن تعداد کو ظاہر کرتی ہے، لیکن لفظ بیسوں خاص تعداد یعنی دس کے دُگنے کو ظاہر کرتا ہے جیسے حضرت امیر خسرو کی ناخون والی پہیلی ہے:۔

بیسوں کا سر کاٹ لیا اور نا مارا نا خون کیا

فصحاء لفظ دسوں بیسوں اور پچاسوں کو لامحدود تعداد کے لئے استعمال نہیں کرتے۔

بیسیوں، سینکڑوں (یا صدہا)، ہزاروں (یا ہزارہا) لاکھوں (یا لکھوکھا) اور کروڑوں (یا کروڑہا) کے بعد اسم اور فعل صیغۂ واحد میں یا جمع میں یعنی دونوں طرح صحیح ہے جیسے:۔ 

چیچک سے سینکڑوں (یا صدہا) بچّہ ضائع ہو گیا۔

چیچک سے سینکڑوں (یا صدہا) بچّے ضائع ہو گئے۔

زلزلے سے ہزارہا عمارت مسمار ہو گئی۔

زلزلے سے ہزاروں عمارتیں مسمار ہو گئیں۔

لڑائی میں لاکھوں (یا لکھوکھا) آدمی مارا گیا۔

لڑائی میں لاکھوں (یا لکھوکھا) آدمی مارے گئے۔

 نواب صاحب نے کروڑوں (یا کروڑہا) روپیہ اُڑا دیا۔

نواب صاحب نے کروڑوں (یا کروڑہا) روپے اُڑا دئے۔​


Spoiler



اوپر کے جملوں کی پہلی صورت بمقابلہ دوسری صورت کے زیادہ بامحاورہ اور فصیح ہے۔


​کسی خاص عدد کے ساتھ بھی اسم اور فعل کو اس طرح استعمال کرنا صحیح ہے جیسے

اس وقت ہمارے کالج میں ایک ہزار لڑکا تعلیم پا رہا ہے یا

 اس وقت ہمارے کالج میں ایک ہزار لڑکے تعلیم پا رہے ہیں۔
​


----------



## Qureshpor

I believe in your post 7, you have solved the enigma! Thank you marrish SaaHib. I feel that the noun the word ہزار or ہزارہا etc qualifies is to be understood in a "generic" sense and is then in the singular. And a singular noun requires a singular verb! There must be a rule in Urdu for this type of construction which I (we) may have been aware of at some stage in the past but  ithas gradually faded away from our memories*.

اُس نے دو ہزار روپیہ خرچ کیا۔

One can also say:

اُس نے دو ہزار روپے خرچ کیے۔

*PS: The "Baba" on page 148 and 149 covers this subject although he does not mention the "generic" aspect. He says both versions of this construction are used and acceptable.

 ہزارہا مکان جل گیا
ہزاروں مکان جل گئے۔

(Looking at this section again, I do remember reading this!)


----------



## marrish

Qureshpor said:


> (Looking at this section again, I do remember reading this!)


The author is a certain Prof. Anand Varma from the Hindu College Dehli.


----------



## marrish

Qureshpor said:


> safar hai shart, musaafir-navaaz bahutere


I suppose the last word should be bahtere or bhatere because of metrical reasons (one short and two long syllables needed).


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> I suppose the last word should be bahtere or bhatere because of metrical reasons (one short and two long syllables needed).


I am afraid, as you know, I have no idea about meter. I just typed "bahutere" because I know how "bahuteraa" is spelt.

H بہتيرا बहुतेरा _bahuterā_ , = H بہتير बहुतेर _bahuter_, [S. बहु+तरं], adj. & adv. Many, very many, most; much, very much, ever so much; abundant; greatly; for the greater part, mostly.


----------



## Alfaaz

Relevant thread: Urdu-Hindi: Singular noun after plural number


----------



## marrish

Qureshpor said:


> I am afraid, as you know, I have no idea about meter. I just typed "bahutere" because I know how "bahuteraa" is spelt.
> 
> H بہتيرا बहुतेरा _bahuterā_ , = H بہتير बहुतेर _bahuter_, [S. बहु+तरं], adj. & adv. Many, very many, most; much, very much, ever so much; abundant; greatly; for the greater part, mostly.


Of course it is spelt as it is and you are correct as to the word itself, but still, the shi3r doesn't scan with the original word. 

I have some rudimentary knowledge about meter and since I knew you didn't, I explained how the word could be read and the reason being the need of one short syllable and two long ones : -==

By the way: An impressive website in Urdu devoted to meter which I was introduced to by no-one else than @MonsieurGonzalito, very practical because you can let the website analyse the meter of a poem etc. is *aruuz.com* which I recommend as a basic aid-kit for meter matters.

But the reason of my "correction" is that I am also not completely certain of the form in which _bahutere_ must be read, while you can easily ask practising poets for opinion.

(forget rekhta.org, because the transcription there has bahutere).

Certain is that ba-hu-te-re doesn't fit the 3-syllable slot, while there are other forms like previously mentioned _bahtere_ and _bhatere_, which do fit. A digression: I'm not sure if this word is part of your Punjabi but _bathere_ is also there in Punjabi, which would suit the _shi3r_.

It would be interesting to know how this word was pronounced in the Purab where Atash lived and how the spelling is in the manuscripts.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> Relevant thread: Urdu-Hindi: Singular noun after plural number


Thank you Alfaaz SaaHib for this. Poor memory is not helpful!

Perhaps, our moderator/s would be kind enough to merge these two threads under the new title of : Urdu: Plural subject with singular verb. (This seems to be only an Urdu phenomenon, hence language should be Urdu only).


----------



## desi4life

Qureshpor said:


> Thank you Alfaaz SaaHib for this. Poor memory is not helpful!
> 
> Perhaps, our moderator/s would be kind enough to merge these two threads under the new title of : Urdu: Plural subject with singular verb. (This seems to be only an Urdu phenomenon, hence language should be Urdu only).



I believe this phenomenon exists in Hindi too based on examples I Googled.


----------



## Qureshpor

desi4life said:


> I believe this phenomenon exists in Hindi too based on examples I Googled.


Thank you for this. In the older thread no Hindi speaker came forward to confirm or deny its existence. I assumed it was not something that was familiar to Hindi speakers. If it does, the merged thread should have Urdu and Hindi in the title.


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> Thank you Alfaaz SaaHib for this. Poor memory is not helpful!


 You're welcome. 

marrish SaaHib's mention of the تقطیع tool brought the following thread to mind: Urdu & Persian: rules for spelling of compounds (except compound verbs)- handwriting and typography. 

Do you happen to remember the other threads where this topic was discussed or would you have any comments now that you are actively participating in the forum again?



			
				Alfaaz said:
			
		

> ... I could have misremembered, but it had seemed that there was a discussion on this topic by the senior members of that time. Faylasoof and Qureshpor SaaHibaan are unfortunately not actively participating in the forum now, but they could have probably provided guidance on this matter. ...


----------

