# Hindi: व



## flyinfishjoe

Sometimes when reading Hindi articles, I come across "व" used alone in a sentence. For example:

इस्लामाबाद व काबूल की तुलना नहीं की जा सकती: पाक उच्चायुक्त (islaamabaad va kaabuul kii tulnaa nahiiN kii jaa saktii: paak uccayukt)

Although it doesn't appear in McGregor's dictionary, I presume this word means "and." Is this correct? Is it pronounced _va_, or possibly _o_? I am not familiar at all with Urdu, but isn't the _o_ sound written with the same letter as v?


----------



## greatbear

Yes, "va" (व) and "avam" (एवं) are also used to mean "and", mostly in a more literary register of Hindi.
Pronounced just like you see it: "va" [və].


----------



## Qureshpor

flyinfishjoe said:


> Sometimes when reading Hindi articles, I come across "व" used alone in a sentence. For example:
> 
> इस्लामाबाद व काबूल की तुलना नहीं की जा सकती: पाक उच्चायुक्त (islaamabaad va kaabuul kii tulnaa nahiiN kii jaa saktii: paak uccayukt)
> 
> Although it doesn't appear in McGregor's dictionary, I presume this word means "and." Is this correct? Is it pronounced _va_, or possibly _o_? I am not familiar at all with Urdu, but isn't the _o_ sound written with the same letter as v?



*To place this "va" in its proper perspective, here is a couplet from the immortal Urdu poet, Ghalib.

nahiiN kuchh subHah-o-zunnaar ke phande meN giiraa'ii
vafaa-daarii meN ShaiKh-o-Barhaman kii aazmaa'ish hai

There is no real captivating hold in the rosary nor the cross thread.

Indeed the ShaiKh and the Brahman are under scrutiny for their loyalty.

[Translations rarely do justice to the original!]

This  "va' is part and parcel of Urdu language and it is especially prevalent  in poetry. It is pronounced both as "va" and "-o-", but the "-o-"  pronunciation is the norm when reciting poetry. Along with the  "izaafat"* and this "-o-" known as "vaav-i-rabt or "vaa'o 'aatifah" [the  joing vaa'o/the conjunctive particle], a distinct Persian flavour is  fused into Urdu, for these features are ultimately of Persian origin.

* Here are a couple of examples of "izaafat"

Diivaan-i-Ghalib/Diivaan-e-Ghalib [Ghalib's collection of odes]

dil-i-naadaaN/dil-e-naadaaN [foolish heart]

*


----------



## Faylasoof

QURESHPOR said:


> *
> ...
> This  "va' is part and parcel of Urdu language and it is especially prevalent  in poetry. It is pronounced both as "va" and "-o-", but the "-o-"  pronunciation is the norm when reciting poetry. Along with the  "izaafat"* and this "-o-" known as "vaav-i-rabt or "vaa'o 'aatifah" [the  joing vaa'o/the conjunctive particle], a distinct Persian flavour is  fused into Urdu, for these features are ultimately of Persian origin.
> ...
> *



QP SaHEb,

 Just to add a little more and also mention one important point. 

 The _wa_ is ultimately from Arabic, I think, becasue in Pahlavi '_and_' was '_ud_'_. _Now it is possible that this _ud_ gave to _u / o_ we have now in Farsi and Urdu. But even in Farsi I've heard and read و as _wa_. It is of Semitic origin, I'm fairly sure.
 
 So I feel this _wa_ و  व  came to Persian then Urdu & Hindi from Arabic where it has many meanings. Often it is used to mean _and_ but is also used for contrast, for emphasizing / strengthening what is meant etc., e.g. 

 الفتيان *و*الفتيات al-fatyaan *wa*l fatyaat  = boys *and* girls

 هرج و مرج_ harjun wa marjun_ / _harj wa marj_ (_harj o marj_ in Urdu) = jumble, tumult, intense confusion.

 جن و بشر – pronounced with full endings as _jinnun *wa* basharun_, but normally pronounced _jinn wa bashar_ in Arabic, and* jinn o bashar* in Persian and Urdu, both in poetry and speech. Just like we also say *qalam o kaaghaz* to mean _pen and paper_.

 
 Here is another one from Ghalib:

 گو ہاتھ کو جنبش نہیں ، آنکھوں میں تو دم ہے
 رہنے دو ابھی *ساغر و مینا* میرے آگے

_go haath ko jumbish naiiN, aaNk-hoN meiN to dam hai_ 
_rahne do abhii saaghar o miinaa mere aage_ 

 A somewhat loose translation: 

_Though the hand is weak, the eyes have vim and verve_
_For now let the goblet and the wine remain before me_ 


 We’ll of course read *flyinfishjoe*’s above example in Hindi as:

 इस्लामाबाद व काबूल
_islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_ 

 In Urdu we can read it both as:

 إسلام آباد و كابل
_islaamaabaad *o* kaabul_ 

 and as,

_islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_  – by placing a stress here on *wa*  in our speech we can also _emphasize_ that _both _are involved / are together.

For those who may not know / are getting confused, we usually use the *"-o-" * pronunciation also in normal speech and reading prose, apart from its use in poetry. So for the above example, we'd normally go for the first, i.e.the -o- form.


----------



## tonyspeed

flyinfishjoe said:


> Although it doesn't appear in McGregor's dictionary,




It actually is there. Pass the original व entry. Then pass all the nasalized words that begin with वं, and it will be the first entry after that.

व from Arabic va. 1) and  दिन में व रात में ...



Thank everyone for their explanations. I often wondered what -o- was.


----------



## omlick

Faylasoof said:


> QP SaHEb,
> 
> Just to add a little more and also mention one important point.
> 
> The _wa_ is ultimately from Arabic, I think, becasue in Pahlavi '_and_' was '_ud_'_. _Now it is possible that this _ud_ gave to _u / o_ we have now in Farsi and Urdu. But even in Farsi I've heard and read و as _wa_. It is of Semitic origin, I'm fairly sure.
> 
> So I feel this _wa_ و व came to Persian then Urdu & Hindi from Arabic where it has many meanings. Often it is used to mean _and_ but is also used for contrast, for emphasizing / strengthening what is meant etc., e.g.
> 
> الفتيان *و*الفتيات al-fatyaan *wa*l fatyaat = boys *and* girls
> 
> هرج و مرج_ harjun wa marjun_ / _harj wa marj_ (_harj o marj_ in Urdu) = jumble, tumult, intense confusion.
> 
> جن و بشر – pronounced with full endings as _jinnun *wa* basharun_, but normally pronounced _jinn wa bashar_ in Arabic, and* jinn o bashar* in Persian and Urdu, both in poetry and speech. Just like we also say *qalam o kaaghaz* to mean _pen and paper_.
> 
> 
> Here is another one from Ghalib:
> 
> گو ہاتھ کو جنبش نہیں ، آنکھوں میں تو دم ہے
> رہنے دو ابھی *ساغر و مینا* میرے آگے
> 
> _go haath ko jumbish naiiN, aaNk-hoN meiN to dam hai_
> _rahne do abhii saaghar o miinaa mere aage_
> 
> A somewhat loose translation:
> 
> _Though the hand is weak, the eyes have vim and verve_
> _For now let the goblet and the wine remain before me_
> 
> 
> We’ll of course read *flyinfishjoe*’s above example in Hindi as:
> 
> इस्लामाबाद व काबूल
> _islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_
> 
> In Urdu we can read it both as:
> 
> إسلام آباد و كابل
> _islaamaabaad *o* kaabul_
> 
> and as,
> 
> _islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_ – by placing a stress here on *wa* in our speech we can also _emphasize_ that _both _are involved / are together.
> 
> For those who may not know / are getting confused, we usually use the *"-o-" *pronunciation also in normal speech and reading prose, apart from its use in poetry. So for the above example, we'd normally go for the first, i.e.the -o- form.


  I knew it was Arabic because I knew it from Hebrew ( It is the same word used in Hebrew as well. The letter vav "ו" in Hebrew means "and.") and was surprised when I first encountered it in Hindi writing. I think it is just and alternative to "aur" for most Hindi speakers.


----------



## Faylasoof

omlick said:


> I knew it was Arabic because I knew it from Hebrew ( It is the same word used in Hebrew as well. The letter vav "ו" in Hebrew means "and.") and was surprised when I first encountered it in Hindi writing. I think it is just and alternative to "aur" for most Hindi speakers.


 After posting I too had a look at my Hebrew dictionary and there it was, the letter *vav*, for *and* ! So it obviously is Semitic! I had wondered if the Middle Persian _*ud*_ -> the Modern Persian _*u*_ / _*o*_, which we then adopted in Urdu. But apprently not as in Persian grammar textbooks too you see it as _*va*_ and _*-o-*_, depending, and the former is a give away.    

Of course! But that is how it came to be used originally  in Urdu:و_*  va / -o*_- = اور_*  aur*_ = _*and*_, finding its way into everyday Hindi: व_* va / -o*_- = और _*aur*_.

We use the _*-o-*_ from fairly often as it makes speaking / reading smoother compared to the use of _*aur*_.


----------



## flyinfishjoe

Thanks everyone, it makes sense now.


----------



## Faylasoof

You are welcome!


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> 1) and  दिन में व रात में ...
> 
> *din meN va raat meN...
> 
> Interesting "innovation" of the use of Persian (Arabic?) va. In Urdu, rarely, is this "va" used with Indic words (e.g chiiKh-va-/-o-pukaar). But I don't ever remember reading **din meN va raat meN...type of sentence. Not even 'din va raat meN".*


----------



## tonyspeed

^^ It was taken directly from Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary, McGregor.


----------



## Qureshpor

Faylasoof said:


> QP SaHEb,
> 
> Just to add a little more and also mention one important point.
> 
> The _wa_ is ultimately from Arabic, I think, becasue in Pahlavi '_and_' was '_ud_'_. _Now it is possible that this _ud_ gave to _u / o_ we have now in Farsi and Urdu. But even in Farsi I've heard and read و as _wa_. It is of Semitic origin, I'm fairly sure.
> 
> So I feel this _wa_ و  व  came to Persian then Urdu & Hindi from Arabic where it has many meanings. Often it is used to mean _and_ but is also used for contrast, for emphasizing / strengthening what is meant etc., e.g.
> 
> الفتيان *و*الفتيات al-fatyaan *wa*l fatyaat  = boys *and* girls
> 
> هرج و مرج_ harjun wa marjun_ / _harj wa marj_ (_harj o marj_ in Urdu) = jumble, tumult, intense confusion.
> 
> جن و بشر – pronounced with full endings as _jinnun *wa* basharun_, but normally pronounced _jinn wa bashar_ in Arabic, and* jinn o bashar* in Persian and Urdu, both in poetry and speech. Just like we also say *qalam o kaaghaz* to mean _pen and paper_.
> 
> 
> Here is another one from Ghalib:
> 
> گو ہاتھ کو جنبش نہیں ، آنکھوں میں تو دم ہے
> رہنے دو ابھی *ساغر و مینا* میرے آگے
> 
> _go haath ko jumbish naiiN, aaNk-hoN meiN to dam hai_
> _rahne do abhii saaghar o miinaa mere aage_
> 
> A somewhat loose translation:
> 
> _Though the hand is weak, the eyes have vim and verve_
> _For now let the goblet and the wine remain before me_
> 
> 
> We’ll of course read *flyinfishjoe*’s above example in Hindi as:
> 
> इस्लामाबाद व काबूल
> _islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_
> 
> In Urdu we can read it both as:
> 
> إسلام آباد و كابل
> _islaamaabaad *o* kaabul_
> 
> and as,
> 
> _islaamaabaad *wa* kaabul_  – by placing a stress here on *wa*  in our speech we can also _emphasize_ that _both _are involved / are together.
> 
> For those who may not know / are getting confused, we usually use the *"-o-" * pronunciation also in normal speech and reading prose, apart from its use in poetry. So for the above example, we'd normally go for the first, i.e.the -o- form.



*The "va" in Persian being of Arabic origins is a possibility but I have my doubts.

Steingass provides the Classical Persian vowel system pretty accurately. As you have indicated, the word for "and" in Persian was -u- (equivalent to a pesh). When the Persian language began to be written in the Arabic alphabet which normally showed no short vowels, there was no real problem when a word like "gul" was simply written as "gl". But to indicate -u- for and, the next best thing was to use an Arabic letter which was connected to -u-, namely "waaw".

So, aab-u-havaa was written as *آب و ھوا 

*du (two) as *دو

*tu (thou) as *تو

*chu (like) as *چو

*In all such words the -u- had a "pesh" sound, just like the pesh vowel in "gul". Even today, in Dari, the word for "two" is NOT "do" but, "du" and for "thou", it is "tu" and NOT "tuu" (as we pronounce the Persian *تو* nor "to" as the Iranians pronounce the *تو*).This -u- sound over a period of time became a majhuul -o-sound, as in "aab-o-havaa" and the Iranian "to" and "do". (Our Persian "tuu" could be influenced by our Urdu "tuu". Same goes for "do"). So, apart from the Dari "du" and "tu", the-u- sound on the whole has become-o-, just like the izaafat-i-, has become the majhuul -e- in Indo-Persian, Dari and Iranian Persian.

What is all this leading to. It is this representation of the original -u- with the Arabic Waaw, that could be a "polluting" factor in our thinking that the Persian '-u-' is of Arabic origins. It is quite possible that the letter waaw representing the sound -u-in the written documents began to be read as one would read an Arabic "waaw", ie. "wa". This then fluctuated between wa and va.

I don't have any scholarly proof for this. Just think of it as Qurehpor's hunch!!

*


----------



## Faylasoof

tonyspeed said:


> ....
> व from Arabic va. 1) and  दिन में व रात में ...
> 
> Thank everyone for their explanations. I often wondered what -o- was.


An interesting construction indeed!

I would agree with with QP SaHEb that in Urdu we _don't_ use _din wa raat_. We always say _*din raat*_ / _*raat din = day and night* /* night and day*_. Of course have _*shab o roz = raat aur din*_, which mean the same thing as the earlier forms. So we normally say:

_usne raat din kaam kiyaa = __unse raat aur din kaam kiyaa_
_ = __unse shab o roz kaam kiyaa__ =  __He / She worked night and day._


----------



## eskandar

QURESHPOR said:


> *It is this representation of the original -u- with the Arabic Waaw, that could be a "polluting" factor in our thinking that the Persian '-u-' is of Arabic origins. It is quite possible that the letter waaw representing the sound -u-in the written documents began to be read as one would read an Arabic "waaw", ie. "wa". This then fluctuated between wa and va.
> 
> I don't have any scholarly proof for this. Just think of it as Qurehpor's hunch!!*


I believe your hunch is quite right! In Middle Persian, logograms (huzvarishn) were often used where words were written according to their Aramaic meaning but pronounced according to Middle Persian. For example, shaah (king) was written MLK (Aramaic 'malka', cognate to Arabic ملك 'malik') but read as 'shaah'. (See more examples here). As far as I know the Persian use of و (or its Aramaic equivalent) began as a logogram for 'u' and continued in New Persian written in the Arabic alphabet, with و primarily representing 'u' (later 'o') and then later it began to be read as 'wa' (later 'va') as well.


----------



## Qureshpor

eskandar said:


> I believe your hunch is quite right! In Middle Persian, logograms (huzvarishn) were often used where words were written according to their Aramaic meaning but pronounced according to Middle Persian. For example, shaah (king) was written MLK (Aramaic 'malka', cognate to Arabic ملك 'malik') but read as 'shaah'. (See more examples here). As far as I know the Persian use of و (or its Aramaic equivalent) began as a logogram for 'u' and continued in New Persian written in the Arabic alphabet, with و primarily representing 'u' (later 'o') and then later it began to be read as 'wa' (later 'va') as well.



aaGhaa-ye-Eskandar,

baraa-ye-afkaar-i-shumaa tashakkur miikunam. 

yek su'aal. agar shumaa az kaampiyuutar-i-Khuditaan duur hastiid, che taur miitavaaniid baa maa suHbat kuniid? iin karishamah ast yaa nah?


----------



## eskandar

!قریشپور صاحب، خواهش می‌کنم. من دیگر از کامپوتر دور نیستم اما یادم رفته بود پیغام زیر را پاک کنم. از اینکه بهم تذکره دادید تشکر می‌کنم و از اینکه بی‌دقتی خودم باعث آشفتگی بود معذرت می‌خواهم


----------



## rahulbemba

flyinfishjoe said:


> Sometimes when reading Hindi articles, I come across "व" used alone in a sentence. For example:
> 
> इस्लामाबाद व काबूल की तुलना नहीं की जा सकती: पाक उच्चायुक्त (islaamabaad va kaabuul kii tulnaa nahiiN kii jaa saktii: paak uccayukt)
> 
> Although it doesn't appear in McGregor's dictionary, I presume this word means "and." Is this correct? Is it pronounced _va_, or possibly _o_?



You are right. It means "and". And it is pronounced as "va" and not as "o".


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> You are right. It means "and". And it is pronounced as "va" and not as "o".



As a matter of interest, can you provide any literary examples of this usage in Hindi? How does this "va" differ from "aur" and "tatha"?


----------



## rahulbemba

Its use is similar to "aur" and "tatha". It depends on which we want to use. I have seen it used more in written Hindi literature than spoken. Here is an example from the recent times: 

बच्चों के दिलों में खास पहचान बना चुके छोटा भीम और कृष्ण-बलराम अब विदेश  में धूम मचाने की तैयारी में हैं। कृष्ण और बलराम जहां इंडोनेशिया जा रहे  हैं, वहीं छोटा भीम मलेशिया व ईरान में दस्तक देगा।


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> Its use is similar to "aur" and "tatha". It depends on which we want to use. I have seen it used more in written Hindi literature than spoken. Here is an example from the recent times:
> 
> बच्चों के दिलों में खास पहचान बना चुके छोटा भीम और कृष्ण-बलराम अब विदेश  में धूम मचाने की तैयारी में हैं। कृष्ण और बलराम जहां इंडोनेशिया जा रहे  हैं, वहीं छोटा भीम मलेशिया व ईरान में दस्तक देगा।



Thank you for the quote. You said "va", "aur" and "tatha" are similar. If they are similar, then they are not the same. So, what is the difference between them?


----------



## greatbear

"tatha" is hardly used, except in mythological TV serials! People would look at you askance if you were to use it.
"va" and "aivam" are thought to be more "literary"; hence, people sometimes use it, especially in print, to sound more refined. They are much less rare than "tatha" and used in all contexts, and at times spoken too ("aivam" seems to me spoken more than "va", but "va" written more - that is just my impression, I might be wrong).
"aur" is the commonly used word for "and". Some of the speakers who mix Hindi and English a lot might also use "and" itself.


----------



## rahulbemba

greatbear said:


> "tatha" is hardly used, except in mythological TV serials! People would look at you askance if you were to use it.
> "va" and "aivam" are thought to be more "literary"; hence, people sometimes use it, especially in print, to sound more refined. They are much less rare than "tatha" and used in all contexts, and at times spoken too ("aivam" seems to me spoken more than "va", but "va" written more - that is just my impression, I might be wrong).
> "aur" is the commonly used word for "and". Some of the speakers who mix Hindi and English a lot might also use "and" itself.



Even I agree with this...


----------



## rahulbemba

QURESHPOR said:


> Thank you for the quote. You said "va", "aur" and "tatha" are similar. If they are similar, then they are not the same. So, what is the difference between them?



I said originally, < Its use is similar to "aur" and "tatha". >


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> "tatha" is hardly used, except in mythological TV serials! People would look at you askance if you were to use it.
> "va" and "aivam" are thought to be more "literary"; hence, people sometimes use it, especially in print, to sound more refined. They are much less rare than "tatha" and used in all contexts, and at times spoken too ("aivam" seems to me spoken more than "va", but "va" written more - that is just my impression, I might be wrong).
> "aur" is the commonly used word for "and". Some of the speakers who mix Hindi and English a lot might also use "and" itself.




Thank you very much indeed Greatbear Jii for a very informative reply. I am quite surprised at the use of "va", and that too in spoken Hindi! In Urdu, "va" is used only in Persian type constructions. Would you say sentences like ,"maiN va Qureshpor aaj kal "va" par baHs kar rahe haiN"? "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii va juute Khariide"?


----------



## greatbear

More "maiN aivam Qureshpor aaj kal "va" par baHs kar rahe haiN"? but yes, very much "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii va juute Khariide"?


----------



## Faylasoof

greatbear said:


> More "maiN aivam Qureshpor aaj kal "va" par baHs kar rahe haiN"? but yes, very much "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii va juute Khariide"?


 It is very interesting to see that you use this: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *va* juute Khariide".
We, and now I mean not just Urduphones from UP and Bihar but also the Hindiphone circles from the same area I happen to move in, do not use *va* like this, esp. in speech. We stick to the earleir grammatical rule of using it with words of Persian-Arabic origin. So your sentence for the likes of us would most commonly be: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *aur* juute xariide". However, in rapid-fire speech it can also _sound_ like: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *o* juute xariide"(!). I've always understood this *o* as a truncation of *aur*.


----------



## greatbear

Yes, I hardly think that people start wondering about from where do words originate before speaking, and so of course "va" is used for "and" regardless of word origins. I have never heard the "o" form though.


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> You are right. It means "and". And it is pronounced as "va" and not as "o".




It appears that you did n't read the whole of "Madhushaalaa"!

मुसलमान *औ'* हिन्दू है दो, एक, मगर, उनका प्याला,
		एक, मगर, उनका मदिरालय, एक, मगर, उनकी हाला,
		दोनों रहते एक न जब तक मस्जिद मन्दिर में जाते,
		बैर बढ़ाते मस्जिद मन्दिर मेल कराती मधुशाला!।५०।


----------



## rahulbemba

QURESHPOR said:


> It appears that you did n't read the whole of "Madhushaalaa"!
> 
> मुसलमान *औ'* हिन्दू है दो, एक, मगर, उनका प्याला,
> एक, मगर, उनका मदिरालय, एक, मगर, उनकी हाला,



Well, this औ' which you are quoting from the eminent Hindi poet Harivansh Rai Bachchan's poetry, is not "va" व. It is a form of "aur", as used at times, many a time in poetry.  

It is not व, which is used differently, and I have given examples too. Please refer to those.


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> Well, this औ' which you are quoting from the eminent Hindi poet Harivansh Rai Bachchan's poetry, is not "va" व. It is a form of "aur", as used at times, many a time in poetry.
> 
> It is not व, which is used differently, and I have given examples too. Please refer to those.





Let me quote someone who knows a little more than both you and me and by doing so close this chapter once and for all. This is from R.S.McGregor's Outline of Hindi Grammar, Third Edition , Oxford University Press (page 200) and I quote verbatim.

"Note also the Persian forms -ओ--o-, व va, used in expressions of a more or less stereotyped nature, the first very largely in expressions of specifically Urdu character, the second more widely.

दिलोजान से dilojaan se, with heart and soul
आबोहवा aabohavaa, climate (water and air)
नाम व पता naam va pataa, name and address

ये जानवर दिन में व रात में शिकार करते हैं ye jaanvar din meN va raat meN shikaar karte haiN, These animals hunt (both) by day and by night".

So, you can see that the "va" whether pronounced "o" or "va" is linked to Hindi via Urdu.

As for Shri Harivansh Rai Bachchan, he was very much influenced by Omar Khayyam's Rubaa3iyaat (Quatrains) and translated them from Farsi to Hindi. "Madushaalaa" is also in the form of quatrains. The existence of Urdu words like "mai", "saaqii" and others and expressions such as मुसलमान *औ'* हिन्दू in the poem is therefore of no surprise. By the way he learnt his Urdu (at least the writing) from his mother. I believe his son Amitabh might also know Urdu. In "kyaa bhulaa'uuN kyaa yaad karuuN", he talks about his learning to read Urdu and Amit 's preoccupation with the same.

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00urduhindilinks/shacklesnell/321bachchan.pdf


----------



## flyinfishjoe

In case anyone cares, here is another example of _va_ I spotted today in a BBC comment:

ये सिर्फ़ उच्च वर्ग का घमंड है. ये लोग मानते हैं कि वे सबसे बुद्धिमान हैं और जो अंग्रेज़ी में लिखना व बोलना नहीं जानते वो उनसे कम अक़्ल रखते हैं.
_ye sirf ucc varg kaa ghamaND hai. ye log maante haiM ki ve sabse buddhimaan haiM aur jo aNgrezii meM likhnaa va bolnaa nahiiM jaante vo unse kam aql rakhte haiM._


----------



## rahulbemba

flyinfishjoe said:


> In case anyone cares, here is another example of _va_ I spotted today in a BBC comment:
> 
> ये सिर्फ़ उच्च वर्ग का घमंड है. ये लोग मानते हैं कि वे सबसे बुद्धिमान हैं और जो अंग्रेज़ी में लिखना व बोलना नहीं जानते वो उनसे कम अक़्ल रखते हैं.
> _ye sirf ucc varg kaa ghamaND hai. ye log maante haiM ki ve sabse buddhimaan haiM aur jo aNgrezii meM likhnaa va bolnaa nahiiM jaante vo unse kam aql rakhte haiM._



Very good example flyinfishjoe. 

I have Hindi as mother tongue and I know the examples are too many... Many of my friends who speak pure Hindi (with fewer insertions of English and foreign words which are so common now in cities), they use व/ "va". Even I use it when I write in Hindi, but almost none in spoken Hindi, personally. 



> E.g. on this single page [Link] there are too many usage:
> 
> लेखनी  			 					                     - शैल अग्रवाल द्वारा प्रति मास प्रकाशित जाल पत्रिका। सम्पादकीय, साहित्य *व* स्थायी स्तम्भ।
> दैनिक भास्‍कर  			 					                     - यह हिन्‍दी का प्रमुख समाचार पत्र है और उत्‍तर *व* मध्‍य भारत में सर्वाधिक पाठक संख्‍या है ।
> जन विकल्प  			 					                     - पटना से प्रकाशित मासिक पत्रिका का जाल संस्करण।  इसका उद्देश्य समाज को न्याय, स्वतन्त्रता *व* समानता की ओर अग्रसर रखना है।
> 
> Some other examples of application:
> 
> एंब्रोस* व* बेलिंडा हाल आफ फेम में [Link]
> 
> दाल को कुकर मे 5 मिनट तक पका लें अच्छी तरह हिला लें कडाही मे तेल गरम करें और सारे  					मसाले डाल कर तड्का लगा लें फिर इस मे थोडा सा पानी *व* दाल डाल कर उबाल लें । गुजराती  					दाल तैयार है। [Link]
> 
> सीबीएससी* व* माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड के सीनियर हायर सैकंडरी के परिणाम घोषित हो चुके हैं। [Link]
> 
> अगर परिवार में हो कलह* व* अशांति..तो अमावस्या पर करें ऐसी पूजा [Link]
> 
> पाठ्यसामग्री *व* जानकारी [Link]


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> Very good example flyinfishjoe.
> 
> I have Hindi as mother tongue and I know the examples are too many... Many of my friends who speak pure Hindi (with fewer insertions of English and foreign words which are so common now in cities), they use व/ "va". Even I use it when I write in Hindi, but almost none in spoken Hindi, personally.




At what point would "pure Hindi" cease being "pure Hindi"? How would you define "foreign words"? Is "fewer" quantifiable? 

Would you care to elaborate on this please?


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> "tatha" is hardly used, except in mythological TV serials! People would look at you askance if you were to use it.
> "va" and "aivam" are thought to be more "literary"; hence, people sometimes use it, especially in print, to sound more refined. They are much less rare than "tatha" and used in all contexts, and at times spoken too ("aivam" seems to me spoken more than "va", but "va" written more - that is just my impression, I might be wrong).
> "aur" is the commonly used word for "and". Some of the speakers who mix Hindi and English a lot might also use "and" itself.



In the small amount of Hindi literature that I have encountered, I have come across "aur" and "tatha" much more than "va". I have n't yet seen "evam" but no doubt this would be used in literature too. The point I am making is that "aur" and "tatha" appear to be much more common.


----------



## greatbear

"aur" is certainly very common. Otherwise, in Hindi media, "va" is also very common. I have found "tatha" to be used the least, unless one is reading a novel like Chanakya.


----------



## flyinfishjoe

I've only seen _va _in the news-media: newspapers, BBC Hindi, TV tickers, etc. I've yet to see it in books or speech.


----------



## greatbear

Yes; also quite common in Hindi magazines. Hardly used in speech though.


----------



## Faylasoof

flyinfishjoe said:


> I've only seen _va _in the news-media: newspapers, BBC Hindi, TV tickers, etc. I've yet to see it in books or speech.


 I agree about the lack of _va_ in Hindi speech! This has been my experience too! As I said earlier:  



Faylasoof said:


> It is very interesting to see that you use this: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *va* juute Khariide".
> We, and now I mean not just Urduphones from UP and Bihar but also the Hindiphone circles from the same area I happen to move in, do not use *va* like this, esp. in speech. We stick to the earleir grammatical rule of using it with words of Persian-Arabic origin. So your sentence for the likes of us would most commonly be: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *aur* juute xariide". However, in rapid-fire speech it can also _sound_ like: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *o* juute xariide"(!). I've always understood this *o* as a truncation of *aur*.


Also agree that it seems to be used in Hindi media  rather than books so it is not literary usage in the end! May be more like journalese!


----------



## marrish

Faylasoof said:


> It is very interesting to see that you use this: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *va* juute Khariide".
> We, and now I mean not just Urduphones from UP and Bihar but also the Hindiphone circles from the same area I happen to move in, do not use *va* like this, esp. in speech. We stick to the earleir grammatical rule of using it with words of Persian-Arabic origin. So your sentence for the likes of us would most commonly be: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *aur* juute xariide". However, in rapid-fire speech it can also _sound_ like: "ham ne baazaar se ghaRii *o* juute xariide"(!). I've always understood this *o* as a truncation of *aur*.


I've just spotted the similar construction in the Urdu text on the label of a well-known 'sharbat' that has been discussed on the forum before. 
The text reads as follows: فرحت بخش پھلوں و پھولوں سے تیار کردہ -

I'd like to know how would you all read it out, o/u or -va-?


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> I've just spotted the similar construction in the Urdu text on the label of a well-known 'sharbat' that has been discussed on the forum before.
> The text reads as follows: فرحت بخش پھلوں و پھولوں سے تیار کردہ -
> 
> I'd like to know how would you all read it out, o/u or -va-?



I think in this case we would have no choice but to use "va".


----------



## marrish

QURESHPOR said:


> I think in this case we would have no choice but to use "va".


I don't see other possibility either, it is of course -va-. Thank you for your assistance!

Please accept my apologies for not having provided the transcription of Urdu text in this thread which is open for Hindi but there had been much reference to Urdu, Persian, Arabic and other Semitic languages (by the way, is it still the current name for those languages?) that I thought Urdu reference wouldn't have been uncalled for. 

The text reads as follows: farHat-baxsh phaloN va (o, u, o~u*) phuuloN se taiyaar kardah.

*As it does appear, in Urdu only the -va- possibility is applicable. This follows of course the Persian rules and may hint to the questions of its usage in Hindi, somehow related.


----------



## hindiurdu

I think some of this discussion is a bit off. 'व' is usually usually used with Sanskritized modes of writing in Hindi, and occurs heavily in religious literature -
- Ramayan - "सिद्धाश्रम के तपस्वियों ने राम व लक्ष्मण का प्रेमपूर्वक स्वागत किया"
- Gita -"संशुद्दी ज्ञान व योग को सुस्थिति"

And it appears to occur in languages other than HU - सातपुड्याच्या कुशीतलं -सरदार सरोवर धरणाची निर्मितीही अशीच महाराष्ट्र व गुजरात यांच्या (Marathi). You can often see it in excessively Sanskritized Government of India usage. Plus I see examples of the वा form in Sanskrit, where it means "also/or/like" -
- Upanishads - "व्याघ्रो वा सिंहो वा वृको वा वराहो वा कीटो वा पतंगों (vyaghro va simho va vriko va kiiTo va patango - tiger also lion also wolf also boar also insect also moth)"

This seems like it might be a genuine proto-Indo-Iranian word, which would explain how it can be regarded as excessively Persian and excessively Sanskrit at the same time.


----------



## Qureshpor

hindiurdu said:


> I think some of this discussion is a bit off. 'व' is usually usually used with Sanskritized modes of writing in Hindi, and occurs heavily in religious literature -
> - Ramayan - "सिद्धाश्रम के तपस्वियों ने राम व लक्ष्मण का प्रेमपूर्वक स्वागत किया"
> - Gita -"संशुद्दी ज्ञान व योग को सुस्थिति"
> 
> And it appears to occur in languages other than HU - सातपुड्याच्या कुशीतलं -सरदार सरोवर धरणाची निर्मितीही अशीच महाराष्ट्र व गुजरात यांच्या (Marathi). You can often see it in excessively Sanskritized Government of India usage. Plus I see examples of the वा form in Sanskrit, where it means "also/or/like" -
> - Upanishads - "व्याघ्रो वा सिंहो वा वृको वा वराहो वा कीटो वा पतंगों (vyaghro va simho va vriko va kiiTo va patango - tiger also lion also wolf also boar also insect also moth)"
> 
> This seems like it might be a genuine proto-Indo-Iranian word, which would explain how it can be regarded as excessively Persian and excessively Sanskrit at the same time.


The question posed here could easily be answered if one can quote occurrences of "va" व from Sanskrit literature. The existence ofو in Persian and Urdu is beyond question and examples can be provided at the drop of a hat!


----------



## hindiurdu

QURESHPOR said:


> The question posed here could easily be answered if one can quote occurrences of "va" व from Sanskrit literature. The existence ofو in Persian and Urdu is beyond question and examples can be provided at the drop of a hat!



Well considering the facts:
a) वा is pretty rampant in Sanskrit and means something broader that includes 'and'. [Note that the Persian و is also usually pronounced वा - somewhat distinct from the व diction used in "shuddh" Hindi].
b) व is used much more frequently and freely in "pure register" Hindi as in "pure register" Urdu.
c) व is preferentially seen at a much higher frequency in Sanskritized religious literature.
d) In artificially Sanskritized speeches from government officials/politicians, व has a pretty large frequency.

All these indicate, at least to me, a likely tadbhavization process (वा → व) at play. Obviously this is not a direct reference precisely demonstrating such descent. Also, it doesn't rule out this being an instance of the "Persianization was re-Sanskritization" hypothesis. In other words Sanskrit forms that were lost in Prakrits which were restored due to Persian influence. श (sh) had earlier been given as a possible example of this. One cannot help but wonder if Pashto had-had the same influence that Persian did, would we today be pronouncing ष (x-sh mix) perfectly and then debating whether it came from Pashto or Sanskrit? How could this possibly ever be settled? I suspect it can't. Maybe by showing that it disappeared in an interim period and then reappeared, which is totally possible. People using 'व' that consider it highly Sanskritic are correct. It is. People who consider this highly Persian are also correct. It is. Even if श was reintroduced by Persian and then retroactively began to be applied to Sanskrit-descent words again, is pronouncing आकाश as "aakaash" instead of "aakaas" a Persianized thing to do? I can see how two people can legitimately have differing viewpoints on this even based on the same set of agreed-upon facts.


----------



## fdb

There are two words for “and” in Persian, which, confusingly, are both written as و.

There is the inherited Persian word _u_, from Middle Persian _ud_, from Old Persian _uta. _This is purely Indo-European. In modern Persian this is normally only used if the two words connected by it are in close junction.

Then there is the Arabic word _wa_. This is pure Semitic.

It is true that in Middle Persian (Pahlavi) the conjunction _ud_ is written with the Aramaeogram W. Aramaic _w-, wa- _ is indeed cognate with Arabic _wa_, but this has no bearing on New Persian or Hindi/Urdu. The Muslims in Persia and India could not read Pahlavi and were not affected by the vagrancies of Pahlavi spelling.

None of this has anything to do with Sanskrit _v__ā_, which is an enclitic and means “or”.


----------



## marrish

*I have not found any ''va'' in Sanskrit that would mean ''and''. Instead, I remember the most common ''and'' in Sanskrit is ''cha''. Neither ''vaa'' nor ''va'' has the meaning of ''and'' among so numerous meanings.

Apte's Dictionary

**व  *_a. Powerful, strong. *-वः 1 Air, wind. -2 The arm. -3 N. of Varuṇa. -4 Conciliation. -5 Ad- dressing. -6 Auspiciousness. -7 Residence, dwelling. -8 The ocean. -9 A tiger. -1 Cloth. -11 Reverence. -12 N. of Rāhu. -13 The residence of Varuṇa. -14 the esculent root of the water lily. -वम् N. of Varuṇa (Medinī). -ind. Like, as; as in मणी बोष्ट्रस्य लम्बेते प्रियौ वत्सतरौ मम Sk. (where the word may be व or वा); Mb.12.177.12 (com. वाशब्द इवार्थे).
*_
*
Monier Williams Dictionary*


*व 2*_m._ (only L. ) air , windthe armN. of वरुणthe ocean , wateraddressingreverenceconciliationauspiciousnessa dwellinga tigercloththe esculent root of the water-*वा 2*_f._ going*वा 2*_f._ hurting*वा 2*_f._ an arrow*वा 2*_f._ weaving*व 2*_n._ a weaver (?). a sort of incantation or मन्त्र (of which the object is the deity वरुण)*व 2*_n._ = प्र-चतस्*व 2*_mfn._ strong , powerful.*व 3*_ind._ = इव , like , as MBh. Ka1v. &c (in some more or less doubtful cases).






*वा 1*_ind._ or (excluded , like the Lat. ve , from the first place in a sentence , and generally immediately following , rarely and only m.c. preceding , the word to which it refers) RV. &c &c (often used in disjunctive sentences ; वा-वा , " either " -- " or " , " on the one side " -- " on the other " ; न वा -- वा or न -- वा , " neither " -- " nor " ; वा न-वा , " either not " -- " or " ; यदि वा-वा , " whether " -- " or " ; in a sentence containing more than two members वा is nearly always repeated , although if a negative is in the first clause it need not be so repeated ; वा is sometimes interchangeable with च and अपि , and is frequently combined with other particles , esp. with अथ , अथो* , उत , किम् , यद् , यदि q.v. [e.g. अथ वा , " or else "] ; it is also sometimes used as an expletive)either-or not , optionally Ka1tyS3r. Mn. &c (in gram. वा is used in a rule to denote its being optional e.g. Pa1n2. 1-2 , 13 ; 35 &c )as , like (= इव) Pa1rGr2. MBh. &cjust , even , indeed , very (= एव , laying stress on the preceding word) Ka1tyS3r. Ka1v.but even if , even supposing (followed by a future) Pan5c. v , 36÷37however , nevertheless Ba1dar. Ba1lar.(after a rel. or interr.) possibly , perhaps , I dare say MBh. Ka1v. &c (e.g. किं वा शकुन्तले*त्य् अस्य मातुर् आख्या , " is his mother's name perhaps शकुन्तला? " S3ak. vii , 20÷21 ; को वा or के वा followed by a negative may in such cases be translated by " every one , all " e.g. के वा न स्युः परिभव-पदं निष्फला*रम्-भ-यत्नाः , " everybody whose efforts are fruitless is an object of contempt " Megh. 55) .*वा 2*_cl.2 P._ ( Dha1tup. xxiv , 42) व/आति (pf. ववौ Br. MBh. &c ; aor. अवासीत् Br. ; fut. वास्यति Megh. ; inf. वातुम् Hariv. ) , to blow (as the wind) RV. &c*[...]*


----------



## hindiurdu

^But doesn't this indicate a word of many connotations, including or, even, also, however, etc? On top of that you see many constructions in Sanskrit that use the form "A va B va C va D va E" when many objects are being presented in a connected way as alternatives or complements. Why couldn't this become an 'and' form? Otherwise, think about what you're saying - a Persian word which is rarely used in everyday organic ways in high-register Urdu is being used massively in high-Sanskrit register Hindi and Marathi, especially for religious purposes. Anything is possible, of course, but seems counter-intuitive. Why would this happen? Look at सुभाषित रत्न (hundreds of occurrences in this alone). Think of any two even loosely connected things and stick a व in between and run an exact search. More often than not I get hits. "तुलसी+व+सूरदास", "हिन्दी+व+संस्कृत", "मोटा+व+पतला", "लम्बा+व+छोटा", "लाहौर+व+अमृतसर", "फ़ारसी+व+संस्कृत", "कुत्ता+व+बिल्ली", "रूई+व+ऊन". And, since ओ/औ and व and very distinct in Devnagari, what would account for this? The only Persian route I can think of is that Persian influence made the word stick with a specific interpretation in HU/Marathi where it once had a broader meaning. च is of course common in Sanskrit for 'and', especially in Classical Sanskrit.

Update: This was also too good to pass up - a nineteenth century Marathi version of what seems to be a Jewish holy text!


----------



## hindiurdu

fdb said:


> None of this has anything to do with Sanskrit _v__ā_, which is an enclitic and means “or”.



fdb ji, interesting and useful. I looked at http://books.google.com/books?id=cWDhKTj1SBYC&pg=PA268 and it seemed to be delving into how Indo-Iranian (Avestan and Vedic) diverged from other IE in their treatment of va. Perhaps you can take a look and comment. It talks about "yuvaam" ("you two") and "enclitic forms of the dual".


----------



## fdb

Burrow is discussing a different word: Avestan _v__ā_ “the two of us” (Vedic _v__ā__m_).


----------



## hindiurdu

fdb said:


> Burrow is discussing a different word: Avestan _v__ā_ “the two of us” (Vedic _v__ā__m_).



Interesting. The more I think about it, the more the original hypothesis seems to be true: this is indeed a Persian borrowing into "pure" Hindi which has somehow made a place for itself and been massively adopted, especially for highly Sanskritized and/or religious purposes. Very interesting!


----------



## fdb

That is a very plausible idea.


----------



## marrish

hindiurdu said:


> ^But doesn't this indicate a word of many connotations, including or, even, also, however, etc? On top of that you see many constructions in Sanskrit that use the form "A va B va C va D va E" when many objects are being presented in a connected way as alternatives or complements. Why couldn't this become an 'and' form? Otherwise, think about what you're saying - a Persian word which is rarely used in everyday organic ways in high-register Urdu is being used massively in high-Sanskrit register Hindi and Marathi, especially for religious purposes. Anything is possible, of course, but seems counter-intuitive. Why would this happen? Look at सुभाषित रत्न (hundreds of occurrences in this alone). Think of any two even loosely connected things and stick a व in between and run an exact search. More often than not I get hits. "तुलसी+व+सूरदास", "हिन्दी+व+संस्कृत", "मोटा+व+पतला", "लम्बा+व+छोटा", "लाहौर+व+अमृतसर", "फ़ारसी+व+संस्कृत", "कुत्ता+व+बिल्ली", "रूई+व+ऊन". And, since ओ/औ and व and very distinct in Devnagari, what would account for this? The only Persian route I can think of is that Persian influence made the word stick with a specific interpretation in HU/Marathi where it once had a broader meaning. च is of course common in Sanskrit for 'and', especially in Classical Sanskrit.
> 
> Update: This was also too good to pass up - a nineteenth century Marathi version of what seems to be a Jewish holy text!



I can follow your train of thought but I tend to differ on this point. I wouldn't say the construction of A va B is numerous and I haven't come across any up to date. I believe it is important to note that the dictionary entries provided above are very extensive and precise and it seems easy to be accepted that they would have surely mentioned the purported meaning of Sanskrit 'va' being 'and', had it been the case even once.

I can't find any way to concede as if -va- were not common in Urdu, especially in the higher register. This feature has been extremely common in Urdu, that I tried to illustrate through the quotation of the text which I found on the product sold on a massive scale. 

The examples which you have kindly researched and provided us with reference material, had it not been the question of the script, would have been so perfectly Urdu! That is why the ubiquitousness of ''va'' in Hindi doesn't impress me a lot.

I am not surprised by the existence of ''va'' in Marathi but I'd like to take a couple of days time before I elaborate further.


----------



## hindiurdu

marrish said:


> I can follow your train of thought but I tend to differ on this point. I wouldn't say the construction of A va B is numerous and I haven't come across any up to date. I believe it is important to note that the dictionary entries provided above are very extensive and precise and it seems easy to be accepted that they would have surely mentioned the purported meaning of Sanskrit 'va' being 'and', had it been the case even once.



Hmmm, well, va certainly seems to be in vastly greater use in Sanskritized Hindi than in anything else. People who tend to use everyday Persianized Hindi tend not to use it. While I accept the likelihood of the Persian route (see my other post), do you see why that's is a bit surprising? It is as though 'aum' were suddenly revealed to be a Persian word  Your experience might differ but if I were to hear something on radio like "Sardiyon va garmiyon meiN ...." I would almost certainly expect what follows to be Sanskritized Hindi, and definitely not Persianized Urdu. Something like this is pretty common, I'd say - "main apne mata-pita va parivar ke sahyog, varishthon ke maargdarshan, sahkarmiyon ke protsaahan va prerna tatha deshvasiyon ke prem tatha vishvaas ke prati abhaar vyakt karti hoon parantu main sabse pehle us sarshaktimaan ki kripa ke liye dhanyavaad deti hoon." Or this from Manas Roopantar - "Nath! nagar yeh Lakshman hai dekhna chahta, par sankoch va prabhu bhayvash spasht na kehta ... Anupam bahu kaamon ki tanchhavi, gun gaate siddh muneendra va kavi ... janranjan, shok va bhay bhanjan, prabhu krodh vigat, nit bodh sadan ... tab hriday mein kiya tha main ne vichaar, yog, yagya va daan vrat jis hetu hoN".

In short, this is in large scale usage *especially* in highly Sanskritized registers, sometimes Sanskritized to the point where even people that have learnt Sanskritized Hindi in schools have trouble following what's being said. Marathi is an interesting indicator because normal Marathi tends to be much more Sanskritized than daily HU/Hindi.


----------



## marrish

hindiurdu said:


> Hmmm, well, va certainly seems to be in vastly greater use in Sanskritized Hindi than in anything else. People who tend to use everyday Persianized Hindi tend not to use it. While I accept the likelihood of the Persian route (see my other post), do you see why that's is a bit surprising? It is as though 'aum' were suddenly revealed to be a Persian word  Your experience might differ but if I were to hear something on radio like "Sardiyon va garmiyon meiN ...." I would almost certainly expect what follows to be Sanskritized Hindi, and definitely not Persianized Urdu. Something like this is pretty common, I'd say - "main apne mata-pita va parivar ke sahyog, varishthon ke maargdarshan, sahkarmiyon ke protsaahan va prerna tatha deshvasiyon ke prem tatha vishvaas ke prati abhaar vyakt karti hoon parantu main sabse pehle us sarshaktimaan ki kripa ke liye dhanyavaad deti hoon." Or this from Manas Roopantar - "Nath! nagar yeh Lakshman hai dekhna chahta, par sankoch va prabhu bhayvash spasht na kehta ... Anupam bahu kaamon ki tanchhavi, gun gaate siddh muneendra va kavi ... janranjan, shok va bhay bhanjan, prabhu krodh vigat, nit bodh sadan ... tab hriday mein kiya tha main ne vichaar, yog, yagya va daan vrat jis hetu hoN".
> 
> In short, this is in large scale usage *especially* in highly Sanskritized registers, sometimes Sanskritized to the point where even people that have learnt Sanskritized Hindi in schools have trouble following what's being said. Marathi is an interesting indicator because normal Marathi tends to be much more Sanskritized than daily HU/Hindi.



Let me be concise since it is not the moment I can respond at length, as I already have mentioned above. Your detailed posts deserve an equally detailed reply, that's why this 'disclaimer'.

As I have said before, I can follow your train of thoughts regarding the occurence of ''va'' in Sanskritized Hindi. I can say I'm lucky to have you quote so many instances from Sanskritized Hindi because sadly my exposure to this register of Hindi leaves room for improvement. I assume that ''va'' (and) is found in Persian/Urdu/Hindi/Marathi/Sanskrit and I welcome your taking the Persian factor under consideration.

I can imagine one can be surprised and what you said about ''aum'' illustrates this in a manner that cannot be done better! But from my perspective, it is difficult to share those feelings because the surprise element is not there in my case.

I'd maybe expected Urdu in case of sardiyoN va garmiyoN meN and after these superb excerpts from High Hindi texts, also Hindi, but perhaps you wouldn't mind my taking advantage of this occasion and ask you for a little more on the classification and acronyms used by you, because in the above post, I found Sanskritized Hindi, Persianized Hindi, Persianized Urdu, HU, Hindi. Thank you.


----------



## hindiurdu

marrish said:


> perhaps you wouldn't mind my taking advantage of this occasion and ask you for a little more on the classification and acronyms used by you, because in the above post, I found Sanskritized Hindi, Persianized Hindi, Persianized Urdu, HU, Hindi. Thank you.



Not at all sir! Firstly, these are just impromptu monickers I made up as I wrote this thing. If anything offends, disregard it! Here is kind of what I meant:
A = "Daily HU/Hindi" = Persianized Hindi = Everyday Hindi being spoken in, say, Delhi streets, which is peppered with Persian words (more or less cinema Hindi)
B = Sanskritized Hindi = The artificial Hindi register purged of Persian words and infused with non-current Sanskrit words that is promoted by the government or in religious discourse
C = Persianized Urdu = The Urdu of, say, PTV News or religious discourse

My surprise here is that I see the most massive use of 'va' in B. It is entirely absent in A.



marrish said:


> But from my perspective, it is difficult to share those feelings because the surprise element is not there in my case.



Actually, you do share the surprise in some sense, because you wouldn't have expected this massive usage in B either, correct? The only reason I can think of is that 'va' is very Sanskrit sounding and probably the vast majority of people using it in B think it's a highly Sanskritized word.


----------



## marrish

hindiurdu SaaHib. Your explanation of the ABC is very useful. One remark about C: I don't think the Urdu of PTV News is Persianized. It is probably only not Anglicized. The lanuguage of a religious discourse is mostly Arabized, as per my perception. But I understand what you mean, so please forgive me the nitpicking. Coming back to my previous post, I'd like to say that up to not so long before Persian and then Urdu was the language of the official documents in North Hindustan. This register of language has been densely spotted with ''va's. It was such bureaucratic language that the official Hindi is based upon. _va_ is such a practical and undetrimental word that it got included in the Hindi language. I strongly believe it was the  Marathi munshiis that enriched Marathi with this ''word''.


----------



## hindiurdu

marrish said:


> I'd like to say that up to not so long before Persian and then Urdu was the language of the official documents in North Hindustan. This register of language has been densely spotted with ''va's. It was such bureaucratic language that the official Hindi is based upon.



Yes, marrish sahab, I can definitely attest to this myself. Even in my family virtually all old land deeds and official documents are in Persian and Urdu, and they *do* use va a lot. This explanation seems very plausible to me.


----------



## marrish

marrish said:


> Coming back to my previous post, I'd like to say that up to not so long before Persian and then Urdu was the language of the official documents in North Hindustan. This register of language has been densely spotted with ''va's. It was such bureaucratic language that the official Hindi is based upon. _va_ is such a practical and undetrimental word that it got included in the Hindi language. *I strongly believe it was the  Marathi munshiis that enriched Marathi with this ''word''*.


For the sake of completeness:
 
"The major coordinator is _aṇi_ 'and', with variants such as _ən_ / _n_ / _aṇik_ / _aṇkhi_ and _wə. _The last one has its origin in Urdu."
*Marathi (grammar), Ramesh Vaman Dhongde, Kashi Wali, London Oriental and African Language Library, 2009*​


----------



## Qureshpor

eskandar said:


> I believe your hunch is quite right! In Middle Persian, logograms (huzvarishn) were often used where words were written according to their Aramaic meaning but pronounced according to Middle Persian. For example, shaah (king) was written MLK (Aramaic 'malka', cognate to Arabic ملك 'malik') but read as 'shaah'. (See more examples here). As far as I know the Persian use of و (or its Aramaic equivalent) began as a logogram for 'u' and continued in New Persian written in the Arabic alphabet, with و primarily representing 'u' (later 'o') and then later it began to be read as 'wa' (later 'va') as well.


OmidTavana's reply in another thread lends support to u > o, too I believe.


OmidTavana said:


> *In Iranian Persian, there is a short o like in To=you or Do=2. *There is a longer o like in Nó=new or Dó=present stem of to run. Ó is pronounced as in "no” or "go" in English, specially in compound words like "nóruz" and "Róhāni" vs ”dorāhi”=fork in a road, or "do bār”=two times. There is no au sound in modern Iranian as far as I know. Also Qom=قم a city near Tehran and Qóm=قوم


----------

