# Urdu: پر مہیب



## Gope

Friends, in the following (from shahaabnaamah, p.32), I presume (since short vowels are not indicated), we have to read پر مہیب as *پُر* مہیب :


ایک طرف سنگلاخ چٹانیں ہی چٹانیں تھیں ۔ دوسری طرف پر مہیب گہرائی ہی گہرائی۔

Thanks for your response.


----------



## Qureshpor

Without resorting to a dictionary, I would say "muhiib" means "awesome". Could one read the second part as "duusrii taraf par muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa'ii"?


----------



## Gope

Qureshpor said:


> Without resorting to a dictionary, I would say "muhiib" means "awesome". Could one read the second part as "duusrii taraf par muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa'ii"?


Qureshpor SaaHib, to clear my ignorance of the language, if you could tell me whether 'par' can follow طرف , and whether 'pur' can be prefixed to an adjective like 'muhiib', then it would be easy for me to decide the question. Since the author says ek tarf, I take it he contrasts it with duusrii tarf, so it must be 'duusrii tarf pur muhiib....'. On the other hand I do not know whether 'pur' is prefixed to an adjective. Hence my question. Incidentally, Urdu lughat as well as Feroz ul lughat say it is 'mahiib', but again you must be right in saying it is muhiib. Could you kindly clarify? Thanks.


----------



## Alfaaz

Gope Saahib, the correct pronunciation of مہیب is _mahiib_ as listed in the dictionaries you have consulted, here in Platts, and here in Almaany . You could use پر ہیبت or پر مہابت.


----------



## Gope

Alfaaz said:


> Gope Saahib, the correct pronunciation of مہیب is _mahiib_ as listed in the dictionaries you have consulted, here in Platts, and here in Almaany . You could use پر ہیبت or پر مہابت.


Thank you, Alfaaz SaaHib. I note that muhiib is also given by Platts.


----------



## Gope

Qureshpor said:


> Without resorting to a dictionary, I would say "muhiib" means "awesome". Could one read the second part as "duusrii taraf par muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa'ii"?


So it is "pur muhiib". Thank you QP SaaHib.


----------



## marrish

I think it isn't pur~muhiib/mahiib, the second reading of Mr. QP seems right to me. Anyway very expressive description of nature.


----------



## Alfaaz

Gope said:
			
		

> Thank you, Alfaaz SaaHib. I note that muhiib is also given by Platts.


 Yes it is, but note that it is not listed as an alternate correct pronunciation (Edit: example: _qabuul/qubuul_). It is listed as _vulgar_, similar to _fazuul _instead of _fuzuul_, _zuruur_ instead of _zaruur_, etc.


----------



## marrish

You are right Alfaaz SaaHib, somehow although I learned the correct pronunciation of zaruur, fuzuul, futuur etc. I knew it to be muhiib only. For me and my family and the ladies of the house it's alright. 

Off topic, a close friend of mine sent me a song yesterday which I love but wajuud instead of wujuud is disturbing me. It's Atif Aslam for Bollywood, perhaps he was instructed to sing it this way because I used to know him personally and his Urdu diction was very good.


----------



## Alfaaz

A few examples of _zabar/pesh switching _were also provided in Urdu: فضول (post #6).


----------



## Gope

marrish said:


> I think it isn't pur~muhiib/mahiib, the second reading of Mr. QP seems right to me. Anyway very expressive description of nature.


Are you saying, marrish SaaHib, that it is 'duusrii tarf *par* muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa'ii'? if it is par, then wouldn't 'duusrii tarf muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa 'ii' suffice?  Especially when the first part of the sentence says 'ek tarf' and not 'ek tarf par'? Your answer is important to me.
And what is Qureshpor SaaHib's response to this?
Thanks.


----------



## Qureshpor

Gope SaaHib. My question in post two was a subtle (obviously I failed ) hint to you to read "pur" as "par".

ek taraf (par) saNg-laax chaTaaneN hii chaTaaneN thiiN. duusrii taraf par muhiib gahraa'ii hii gahraa'ii.

On one side there were sheer rocky cliffs. On the other side just frightening depths.

"par" is understood in the first sentence and it could have been missed out in the second. On the other hand, it could have been included in the first sentence. A matter of taste for our respected author.

I can't think of "pur + adjective", "pur + noun" yes, e.g pur-zor, pur-raunaq, pur-asraar etc

Simpler words for "muhiib" could be "bhayaanak" and "haibat-naak". muhiib is the adjective while haibat is the respective noun. 

I hope I have covered all your concerns.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> Gope Saahib, the correct pronunciation of مہیب is _mahiib_ as listed in the dictionaries you have consulted, here in Platts, and here in Almaany . You could use پر ہیبت or پر مہابت.


I believe the word is "muhiib". It is based on pattern IV of the Arabic base verb "haaba" (hayaba). Compare it with "muniir", formed in the same manner.


----------



## Gope

Qureshpor said:


> Gope SaaHib. My question in post two was a subtle (obviously I failed ) hint to you to read "pur" as "par".


It was I who failed you, Qureshpor SaaHib! No doubt about that. But then I learn a great deal, albeit slowly.
Yes, you have fully responded to all my concerns. Thanks to you and to Alfaaz SaaHib and marrish SaaHib, immensely.


----------



## Alfaaz

Qureshpor said:
			
		

> I believe the word is "muhiib". It is based on pattern IV of the Arabic base verb "haaba" (hayaba). Compare it with "muniir", formed in the same manner.


 So it seems this is a case where dictionaries are misleading...!?


----------



## fdb

In Arabic there are two different words: _mahīb_ means ‘dreaded, dreadful’ and _muhīb_ is ‘awe-inspiring, venerable’. I am not sure which one fits this context.


----------



## Qureshpor

fdb said:


> In Arabic there are two different words: _mahīb_ means ‘dreaded, dreadful’ and _muhīb_ is ‘awe-inspiring, venerable’. I am not sure which one fits this context.


Thank you, fdb SaaHib. From the (two sentence) context both the passive participle "mahiib" (dreadful) of form I and the active participle "muhiib" (awesome) of form IV fit the bill. On balance, I would say it is more likely to be the former than the latter. Therefore, Alfaaz SaaHib is right and I am wrong.


----------



## Alfaaz

Thanks for the informative reply fdb SaaHib.


----------

