# Punjabi: infinitive used in a future sense?



## MonsieurGonzalito

The song "Naa Jaa" is about a bachelor pleading his love to a woman of unclear marital status, but who is not appreciated sufficiently at home.
At some point, he is proposing her to elope with him, (or so I think) and he says "If you say no, I won't ask again".
What puzzles me, is that the word used is _puchchaNRaa, _the infinitive, rather than _puchchaaNgaa_, the future.

Is this yet another valid usage of the infinitive, or is he rather saying "it is forbidden to ask again", or some other informal idiomatic thing?

This is the stanza in context, plus my attempted translation. (It is not high literature )

_kuaariie utoN sohNRii e te maiN vii aa kuaaraa  ............  You are charming but single, and  I am single too_
_caRhdii javaanii huNR luTT lai nazaaraa ........................  youth is in full swing, enjoy (profit from the view)!  _
_je naa mainuN kardii nii puchchRNaa dubaaraa ...........  if you say no (to me), I won't ask again_
_pher roTiiaaN pakaaii naal mere gaaNReN gaaii ............ then cook (rotis)  while singing my tunes_

Any idea why _puchchRNaa_ / ਪੁੱਛਣਾ /  پُچھّنڑا  is being used here?. 
Thanks in advance.


----------



## marrish

_نہیں ná_iiN (negation) +_ Inf. is a very frequently used construction for 2nd. pers. sg./pl. as prohibitive, and for general prohibitions as well.
Without negation, infinitive is used for commands etc. See relevant grammar of Urdu for this.
_________________________________
Since I've had a listen, here is the stanza 'as is' for you to analyse, so that you can come up with another attempt. A good beginning would be a transliteration for those who don't know how to read it.

کواریئے تُو سوہݨی ایں تے میں وی آں کوارا
چڑھدی جوانی ہݨے لٹ لئی نظارا
جے نا مَینوں کرتی نہیں پچھّݨا دُبارا
فیر روٹیاں پکائِیں ہر ویلے گانے گائِیں


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Thank you for the transliteration, @marrish!
I will indeed attempt a new translation, but first, to avoid further embarrassment: I notice that you write تُو and کرتی , and that is how I have seen educated Punjabi speakers write those words, and how they seem to be pronounced in the song, and they appear in lots of other songs as well.
Is that some sort of contagion from Hindustani? (Otherwise, I would expect کردی، توں)

And also, if you don't mind sharing the secret  : how did you manage to write the medial NR in سوہݨی? Google Input Urdu doesn't take it, what did you use?


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

OK, several things here.

First, regarding my previous observation about some apparently Urdu spellings: I spoke with two other people, one Indian the other Pakistani, neither with a strong knowledge of grammar but both proficiently bilingual in Hindustani and Punjabi, and the only conclusion I can arrive at, for the moment, is that the "you" familiarity levels is kind of fluid, to say the least.
This, as well as _kartii_ and others, maybe deserve separate threads, and I should not stray from what was asked in the subject.

Also, @marrish-ji kind transliteration, plus the opinion of these extra 2 people I consulted, made me realize that this particular singer is slurring the words and joining syllables like crazy. Without @marrish transliteration, I would have never realized that the guy is saying "nahiiN" instead of "nii", for example, and similarly many others.

Now, onto the promised 2nd attempt:

ਕੁਆਰੀਏ ਤੂੰ ਸੋਹਣੀ ਐਂ ਤੇ ਮੈਂ ਵੀ ਆਂ ਕੁਆਰਾ........... kuārīē tūṃ sōhṇī aiṁ tē maiṁ vī āṁ kuārā..........Miss, you are charming, and I am single too 
ਚੜ੍ਹਦੀ ਜਵਾਨੀ ਹੁਣ ਲੁੱਟ ਲੈ ਨਜ਼ਾਰਾ......................caṛhdī javānī huṇ luṭṭ lai nazārā............................Being in early youth, profit!
ਜੇ ਨਾ ਮੈਨੂੰ ਕਰਤੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਪੁੱਛਣਾ ਦੁਬਾਰਾ.................jē nā mainūṃ kartī nahīṁ puchchṇā dubārā........ _if_ _you don't make me ask twice _
ਫੇਰ ਰੋਟੀਆਂ ਪਕਾਈ ਨਾਲ਼ ਮੇਰੇ ਗਾਣੇਂ ਗਾਈ............phēr rōṭīāṁ pakāī nāl mērē gāṇēṁ gāī................. you kneaded rotis while singing my song.

I think this is more appropriate. @marrish-ji wants to make me think, he gave me the elements to figure it out myself!
Notice that, if this interpretation is correct, then _puchchṇā_ was a legal infinitive all along!


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

(BTW, the female character in the video clip is, in fact, kneading chapatis to his unappreciative husband)


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Short digression: another example of _karatii_  and _tū _in a song I was listening to recently, "Lamborghini":
(I regret not being able to find a more refined example at the moment)

Goddam, million-dollar Lamborghini! Fail _tū karatii laggē us toN vii mahiNgii_
which I interpret as something like_ "fail karnaa" == to fail_

_Goddam, million-dollar Lamborghini, you fail! You (the girl) seem even more expensive (than the car)._


----------



## marrish

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> I think this is more appropriate. @marrish-ji wants to make me think, he gave me the elements to figure it out myself!
> Notice that, if this interpretation is correct, then _puchchṇā_ was a legal infinitive all along!


Limiting myself to the main question: yes, you are right, but it is not a causative. The transcription is off too. (I just tried to answer the original question about پچھّݨا and infinitives, but since neither the context as produced by you nor the attempted translation made it possible because of mistakes, I had to get to the correct text first which I reproduced so that you and everyone else can put my answer in its right context. The new attempt ... has too many mistakes.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

marrish said:


> The new attempt ... has too many mistakes.


Argh ... 
Your clarification of _nahiiN_ being there helps, but I still have not idea of what کرتی means, I can only make wild guesses.


----------



## marrish

A translation into Urdu of that verse can be  اگر تم نے مجھے (ابھی) "نا" کر دی تو دوبارہ مت پوچھنا۔.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Oh, OK

It is _kar dii_
It is _"naa kar denaa"_ (=to give a "no")
The _puchchṇā _is an infinitive, and it is translated in the usual sense of "it is forbidden = you can't"

Now I understand
_"If you give me a "no", asking again is not allowed"_

Thanks, @marrish, for your patience!


----------



## marrish

In Urdu, it is kar dii; _naa karnaa_ is to be found in Platts: 

نا ना nā (p. 1109) H نا ना _nā_ (i.q. _nāṅh_, q.v.), neg. adv. Nay, no; not (cf. next); — emphat. part. (cf. to), e.g. _āʼo nā_, Come, _do_ come (why don't you come?): — _nā-to_, or _nā-tau_, conj. If not, or else, otherwise: — _*nā-karnā*_*, To say no; to deny; to refuse*: — _nā-nukkaṛ_, adv. & s.f. No no: — _nā-nukkaṛ karnā_ = _nā karnā_.

The usual sense of infinitive _pu*chchh*NRaa_/_pu*cch*ṇā_ is "to ask"; with negation: "don't ask".


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

marrish said:


> with negation: "don't ask".



My grammar suggests that the infinitive used as imperative has a "general" nuance, but you clarify that it is still a 2nd person.
(In other words, it is *she* who cannot ask again after a refusal, not him)
This is the opposite of what I see in most translations online of this song, but I trust you, not the Internet 

Thanks again, @marrish


----------



## marrish

In post #2 I said it's 2nd person (not the general type of prohibition) but "[I'm] not going to ask (you) again" is plausible as well.


----------



## littlepond

I read it as "if you say no now, then I am not going to ask you again, and then your life will be just making rotis, remembering me".


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

OK,
Then it is that, _naa_ + infinitive expresses some general prohibition, of an intermediate level of respect, impersonal in nature, that in most cases translates well as a 2nd person. But in this case, a 1st person seems more adequate, at least taking into account the general sense of the song.




littlepond said:


> and then your life will be just making rotis, remembering me


Thanks, @littlepond . I thought the same, but can not wrap my head around the fact that _pakaii_ and _gaii_ are both perfect participles, although there is a general sense of future in the consequences.

Would then be fair to say that there are implicit _"hoii"_ or even better, a _"hoveNgii" _next to those participles?
Some sort of perfect future thing like:

_If you say no, then I won't ask twice
then you (just) will have cooked rotis along with singing my song_


----------



## littlepond

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> Some sort of perfect future thing like:
> 
> _If you say no, then I won't ask twice
> then you (just) will have cooked rotis along with singing my song_



Yes, I would interpret it like this.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Thank you, @marrish, @littlepond!

Even with the more modern, less abstract songs, I get blocked so easily  ...


----------



## marrish

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> Thanks, @littlepond . I thought the same, but can not wrap my head around the fact that _pakaii_ and _gaii_ are both perfect participles, although there is a general sense of future in the consequences.


When you have both words wrong, how can you get the right sense?


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

marrish said:


> When you have both words wrong, how can you get the right sense?


OMG, you are right!
They are subjunctives!
I am sorry, @marrish Sahib, I should have paid more attention to your transcription.
I suck.


----------



## marrish

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> They are subjunctives!


A clue: not in Punjabi.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

marrish said:


> A clue: not in Punjabi.


I ... don't know then


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

I was told by a Punjabi professor that the proper translation for the last verses is as _*imperatives*_

phir roTiiaaN *pakaaiiN* naal mere gaaṇeN *gaaiiN*
_then, *cook* rotis and *sing* my tunes!_

... and then I found, a semi-hidden in my Punjabi grammar, that *-iiN *is a form of (somewhat informal) imperative ending.

Finally! took me only 2 months to figure it out, not bad


----------

