# Hindi/Urdu: 'ke mutaabiq' VS 'ke bamuujib'



## lafz_puchnevala

Can the above two be used interchangeably to mean 'according to'?

Eg. mere mutaabiq/bamuujib, larkiyon ke lie taalim, mulk ko bahut zaruurii hai. 

According to me, education for girls is very important to the country.


----------



## Alfaaz

Not sure...but probably yes! 

Examples from a dictionary: 

"حضرت نوح نے خدا کے حکم کے *بموجب* کشتی میں جانوروں کا ایک ایک جوڑا ----- رکھ لیا تھا۔
Hazrat Nuh ne khuda ke Hukm ke bamuujib kashti mein jaanwaroN ka aik aik joRaa rakh liyaa thaa.

muujib can also be used similarly: 
jo ahkamaat khudaa ke muujib har insaan ka farz hai...

(but also in the sense of wajh, sabab, baais:...jo dunyaa mein tehalkah paida karne ke muujib hote hain!)

Edit: Your sentence could be: "Mere mutaabiq/bamuujib (to), laRkiyoN ke liye ta'aleem mulk ke liye buhut zaruurii hai"


----------



## greatbear

Note that in Hindi only mutaabiq is used out of the two. Yes, it means "according to" but also "as per".


----------



## Alfaaz

> Note that in Hindi only mutaabiq is used out of the two. Yes, it means "according to" but also "as per".



What is the Hindi equivalent? (guessing anusaar/ke anusaar....?) 

Would it be used similarly: _"mere anusaar....."  _?


----------



## greatbear

Alfaaz said:


> What is the Hindi equivalent? (guessing anusaar/ke anusaar....?)
> 
> Would it be used similarly: _"mere anusaar....."  _?



I think you mean to say "what are the _other _Hindi expressions", since "mutaabiq" is very much a part of Hindi.

Yes, "mere anusaar" is one of them; there are also "mere hisaab se ...", "mere khyaal se ..." "mere maddenazar ...", "mere vichaar se", etc.


----------



## Qureshpor

lafz_puchnevala said:


> Can the above two be used interchangeably to mean 'according to'?
> 
> Eg. mere mutaabiq/bamuujib, larkiyon ke lie taalim, mulk ko bahut zaruurii hai.
> 
> According to me, education for girls is very important to the country.




I would say, yes, but in the above context I would use neither.

mere nazdiik, laRkiyoN kaa ta3liim Haasil karnaa mulk kii taraqqii ke liye bahut zauurii hai.

For me (In my opinion), girls being educated is very important for the country's progress.

"muujib" as has already been stated by Alfaaz means "reason (of)", "cause (of)" whilst "ke ba-muujib"  is "according to/in accordance with.."

Here is the renowned Urdu poet "*Jur'at*" using "muujib" in a shi3r

usii ke 3ishq meN paa-band rah dilaa, har dam
kih hove gaa vahii roz-i-jazaa muujib rihaa'ii kaa

Remain tied to her love, oh my heart, today and every day
For* she *will be the cause of your release on judgement day


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> I think you mean to say "what are the _other _Hindi expressions", since "mutaabi*q*" is very much a part of Hindi.
> 
> Yes, "mere anusaar" is one of them; there are also "mere hisaab se ...", "mere khyaal se ..." "mere maddenazar ...", "mere vichaar se", etc.




A couple of clarifications please.

Is it "khyaal" or "kh*a*yaal" in Hindi? Also is it "mutaabi*q*" or "mutaabi*k*"?


----------



## lafz_puchnevala

QURESHPOR said:


> I would say, yes, but in the above context I would use neither.
> 
> mere nazdiik, laRkiyoN kaa ta3liim Haasil karnaa mulk kii taraqqii ke liye bahut zauurii hai.



I take note that there is no 'se' after 'ke nazdiik' unlike 'ke khyaal se' and this is another meaning apart from meaning 'near' as in 'ghar ke nazdiik meraa skul hai'.


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> A couple of clarifications please.
> 
> Is it "khyaal" or "kh*a*yaal" in Hindi? Also is it "mutaabi*q*" or "mutaabi*k*"?



Both "khyaal" and "khayaal" are used in Hindi.
As for q and k, unless you want to derail this thread as well, I think you've got your answers in some other threads as well, not just from me but others: Hindi speakers don't usually distinguish between the two, and whether one writes mutaabiq or mutaabik, it hardly matters.

By the way, never heard of "mere nazdiik" with this meaning; at least most Hindi speakers won't understand this construction.


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> Both "khyaal" and "khayaal" are used in Hindi.
> As for q and k, unless you want to derail this thread as well, I think you've got your answers in some other threads as well, not just from me but others: Hindi speakers don't usually distinguish between the two, and whether one writes mutaabiq or mutaabik, it hardly matters.
> 
> By the way, never heard of "mere nazdiik" with this meaning; at least most Hindi speakers won't understand this construction.




No such intention is there, from me at least. It is more a matter of principle.

You wrote "barkaraar" in another thread and here you are writing "mutaabiq". I think it is not unfair to ask about it. You also quoted a film title "qayaamat se qayaamat tak" elsewhere. Does it matter if it is changed to "kayaamat se kamaat tak"? And if it is a "proper noun", then I wonder why "Hindi" film makers chose to use "qayaamat" and not "kayaamat.

"mere nazdiik" is a common way of saying in Urdu when one is expressing one's opinion. Just like "mere xayaal meN".

ik khel hai aurang-i-SulaimaaN *mere nazdiik*
ik baat hai i3jaaz-i-MasiiHaa *mere aage*

Ghalib

Solomon's throne is just a minor show *in my view*
And the Messiah's miracle is just a word *for me!*

You will notice that "mere nazdiik" is the same as "mere aage" here.


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> No such intention is there, from me at least. It is more a matter of principle.
> 
> You wrote "barkaraar" in another thread and here you are writing "mutaabiq". I think it is not unfair to ask about it. You also quoted a film title "qayaamat se qayaamat tak" elsewhere. Does it matter if it is changed to "kayaamat se kamaat tak"? And if it is a "proper noun", then I wonder why "Hindi" film makers chose to use "qayaamat" and not "kayaamat.



"Kayaamat" also would be fine with me; it's only that since I've seen it mostly written with a Q, I'd write it with a Q.
I guess the filmmakers spelt it out with a Q since the distinction between k and q exists for Urdu speakers, who are very much part of a Bollywood film's audience.


----------



## lafz_puchnevala

QURESHPOR said:


> No such intention is there, from me at least. It is more a matter of principle.
> 
> You wrote "barkaraar" in another thread and here you are writing "mutaabiq". I think it is not unfair to ask about it. You also quoted a film title "qayaamat se qayaamat tak" elsewhere. Does it matter if it is changed to "kayaamat se kamaat tak"? And if it is a "proper noun", then I wonder why "Hindi" film makers chose to use "qayaamat" and not "kayaamat.
> 
> "mere nazdiik" is a common way of saying in Urdu when one is expressing one's opinion. Just like "mere xayaal meN".
> 
> ik khel hai aurang-i-SulaimaaN *mere nazdiik*
> ik baat hai i3jaaz-i-MasiiHaa *mere aage*
> 
> Ghalib
> 
> Solomon's throne is just a minor show *in my view*
> And the Messiah's miracle is just a word *for me!*
> 
> You will notice that "mere nazdiik" is the same as "mere aage" here.



Shouldn't it be 'mere khyaal se' instead of 'mere khyaal mein'...? Not sure if both post positions are grammatically correct


----------



## Qureshpor

lafz_puchnevala said:


> Shouldn't it be 'mere khyaal se' instead of 'mere khyaal mein'...? Not sure if both post positions are grammatically correct



In the context I would go for "mere xayaal meN".


----------



## Alfaaz

> I think you mean to say "what are the _other _Hindi expressions", since "mutaabiq" is very much a part of Hindi.
> 
> Yes, "mere anusaar" is one of them; there are also "mere hisaab se ...", "mere khyaal se ..." "mere maddenazar ...", "mere vichaar se", etc.



Thanks greatbear! When I said _Hindi equivalent_, I was asking for, I guess you could say, the _non-Urdu ones_...._"mere anusaar" _and to some extent _"mere vichaar se"_ (not necessarily though as "_vichaar"_ is used commonly in phrases like _"soch-vichaar kar ke batayegaa"_, etc.); Apart from those, mere Hisaab se, mere khayaal se, mere madd-e-nazar, mere mutaabiq, mere nazdeek, (ba)muujib are all used...


----------



## greatbear

lafz_puchnevala said:


> Shouldn't it be 'mere khyaal se' instead of 'mere khyaal mein'...? Not sure if both post positions are grammatically correct



Both are correct; here, "mere khyaal meiN" is better than "mere khyaal se".


----------



## marrish

Alfaaz said:


> Thanks greatbear! When I said *Hindi equivalent,* I was asking for, I guess you could say, *the non-Urdu ones*...._"mere anusaar" _and *to some extent "mere vichaar se" (not necessarily though as "vichaar" is used commonly in phrases like *_*"soch-vichaar kar ke* batayegaa"_, etc.); Apart from those, mere Hisaab se, mere khayaal se, mere madd-e-nazar, mere mutaabiq, mere nazdeek, (ba)muujib are all used...



For the sake of clarification and as a matter of interest, provided I have understood  correctly what you intended by saying that _mere vichaar se_ is not necessarily "non-Urdu" since "_vichaar_" were to be used commonly (you imply by this Urdu?) in a phrase _"soch-vichaar karnaa",_ let me observe that this is not entirely so. 

"_vichaar se_" and "_soch-vichaar karnaa_" is very much of Hindi  in contrary to Urdu, where this noun is realised as _"*bichaar*", "*soch-bichaar karnaa*"._ 

How come it is important? The point is, and this is the point where we can draw a line and say which expression is non-Urdu and which certainly is Urdu, that the difference of "_soch bichaar karnaa_" versus "_soch vichaar karnaa_" is a fundamental one (of course only when one needs to distinguish between Urdu and non-Urdu! as we have to do here). "_mere vichaar se_" is not Urdu but definitely Hindi, thus it meets your criterion to know an expression used solely in Hindi in order to express one's views.

greatbear SaaHib was very correct!


----------



## marrish

I was thinking that the reason of no reply to my last post was the fact that maybe the difference of one letter without a dot (well, in Hindi) is not interesting according to the latest trend, but I made up my mind to come to a conclusion that the reason is rather the fact that I had remained to the topic. 

Since this thread deals with both of the languages and for the fact that we discuss here several expressions which might be used for referring to one's thoughts or opinions, please be bearful and comment on the issue which is the continuation of my previous statement of the fact that in Urdu we say _bichaar_ and in Hindi which one cannot call Urdu, it is _vichaar_.

For the sake of clarity for any one who might have had any doubt about it, and let me be clear, I don't have here the learned and respected members of this forum in mind, but the silent members who I was since long, in Hindi it is of course both _vichaar_ and _bichaar_, whereas Urdu might be conceived as constrictive or limited as to the gamut of varieties being incorporated into the language with regard to this noun.

One might argue, Hindi is a richer language - since it allows varieties, and to be clear, the popular pronunciations of words besides the learned ones. It is also true!
On the other hand, it is safe to state that Urdu helps itself to words which had always existed in it, that is in khari-boli, or, let's say, which is another important fact to put stress to, using freely Apabhransha/Prakrit words which have there always been according to the evolution of the language. The difference between Hindi _mere vichaar se_ or _mere vichaar meN_ and Urdu _mere bichaar meN_ or _mere bichaar se_ can be brought down to my previous thesis, and put to the contrast with Hindi which borrowed Sanskrit words directly at a certain stage of its development. Here we can see what the real difference is, and we can know for good which expression belongs to the Hindi speech and which doesn't belong to Urdu.


----------



## BP.

Your hypothesis about Hindi borrowing from a wider slew of sources seems compelling. Some counterhypotheses:
. Hindi might have opened to Sanskrit and other-source borrowing through State policy. This should be a recent happening.
. Urdu might have lost its variety because regions within the subcontinent that did not (or no longer) associated with Urdu, moved on to standard Hindi, and Urdu was left with people who traditionally had a certain locution and a narrow gamut of word and sound borrowing.



> ...in Urdu we say _bichaar_ and ... in Hindi it is of course both _vichaar_ and _bichaar..._


I'd be inclined to agree with that in that bichaar is the official spelling in Urdu. However we might be a dying breed, young people these days are incorporating v generously in places where I'd strictly put a b. Think bande maataram, names like binod and bikram etc


----------



## Qureshpor

I don't wish to go off topic but the Urdu/Hindi "bichaar" is, as marrish SaaHib indicated come from the prakrit source. Then Hindi has turned to Sanskrit and gone for the "v" version. One could cite other examples. In Urdu "raat" has crystallised whereas in Hindi, we have "raat" and "raatri". By the way, there are a lot of v/b variations in Punjabi as well (some people would say "vaal" and others "baal").


----------



## marrish

Hypothesis one: I agree. This is what I'm implying, thank you for understanding.
Hypothesis two: I disagree. Urdu apparently remained faithful to the natural evolution of the language, since there was not so much of exposure to another sound of word borrowing (vide: Sanskrit). Before sanskritization it has always remained bichaar in Urdu, and what characterizes Hindi is the abrupt tendence to borrow directly, or to be preciser, substitute existent words with their predecessors.

As to the latter portion of your remarks, I don't know whether you are referring to Urdu, or to Hindi.


----------



## BP.

marrish said:


> ...
> As to the latter portion of your remarks, I don't know whether you are referring to Urdu, or to Hindi.


Added language at the end of the first sentence. Thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## Alfaaz

> For the sake of clarification and as a matter of interest, provided I have understood correctly what you intended by saying that _mere vichaar se_ is not necessarily "non-Urdu" since "_vichaar_" were to be used commonly (you imply by this Urdu?) in a phrase _"soch-vichaar karnaa",_ let me observe that this is not entirely so.
> 
> "_vichaar se_" and "_soch-vichaar karnaa_" is very much of Hindi in contrary to Urdu, where this noun is realised as _"*bichaar*", "*soch-bichaar karnaa*"._
> 
> How come it is important? The point is, and this is the point where we can draw a line and say which expression is non-Urdu and which certainly is Urdu, that the difference of "_soch bichaar karnaa_" versus "_soch vichaar karnaa_" is a fundamental one (of course only when one needs to distinguish between Urdu and non-Urdu! as we have to do here). "_mere vichaar se_" is not Urdu but definitely Hindi, thus it meets your criterion to know an expression used solely in Hindi in order to express one's views.
> 
> greatbear SaaHib was very correct!





> I was thinking that the reason of no reply to my last post



Sorry for the late reply! I wasn't trying to say that greatbear was wrong and he is indeed correct. I almost completely agree with what you have stated above. Yes bichaar is what is usually used in Urdu, but also as BP SaaHib expressed....



> I'd be inclined to agree with that in that bichaar is the official spelling. However we might be a dying breed, young people these days are incorporating v generously in places where I'd strictly put a b.



and it was due to this reason that vichaar was said to be used in Urdu sometimes, especially by some of the younger generation, those perhaps less educated, or from certain ethnic/cultural backgrounds, or because it might have been better suited for certain lines of poetry. The usage of "vichaar" was observed on TV, and therefore included (doesn't mean that it is correct though, as lots of things on TV might not be correct!)...


----------



## marrish

I'd stick to my point and I'd not stamp v-people as being less educated or coming from any backgrounds in case of Urdu, but it may be the case of TV-watchers - especially Indian channels. However, take my words for granted as I've never watched an Indian TV-channel up to date and don't watch Urdu TV, or, maybe to cut it short, I hardly watch TV!

The arena is yours!


----------



## BP.

I think we should rather move this discussion to the Hindi-Urdu divergence mega-thread? These rather important bits won't be found if no one cared to look for 'kee mutaabiq'.


----------



## Alfaaz

> those perhaps less educated, or from certain ethnic/cultural backgrounds





> I'd stick to my point and I'd not stamp v-people as being less educated or coming from any backgrounds in case of Urdu, but it may be the case of TV-watchers - especially Indian channels. However, take my words for granted as I've never watched an Indian TV-channel up to date and don't watch Urdu TV, or, maybe to cut it short, I hardly watch TV!



Sure you have every right to do so! I guess I should have said "less educated in Urdu"-for example English medium students or those born abroad (not necessarily though), certainly didn't mean to say that people who use "v" are or would be considered less educated; by saying this: 




> or from certain ethnic/cultural backgrounds



I was indirectly mentioning these:



> but it may be the case of TV-watchers - _especially Indian channels_



which you have mentioned directly...


----------



## marrish

BelligerentPacifist said:


> I think we should rather move this discussion to the Hindi-Urdu divergence mega-thread? These rather important bits won't be found if no one cared to look for 'kee mutaabiq'.


It would be of much merit. Thank you for your remarks.


----------



## panjabigator

*A reminder to keep the thread limited to the initial query. This thread will have to be split because it has wondered off topic. The v/bichaar posts, though interesting, are off topic. And the perpetual qaaf and kaaf bickering is petty and distracting. For the sake of conversation, please restrain yourselves.

Panjabigator
(moderator)*


----------

