# Urdu: Dropping the vaao sound ...



## UrduMedium

Thought of this looking through the _muaafiq/maafiq_ thread. 

While the _vaao _sound is not typically dropped in _muaafiq_, it is indeed dropped in other places. Examples:

_Written > Spoken_
xoaab > xaab
xoaahish > xaahish
tanxoaah > tanxaah
xoaajah > xaaja
xosh > xush
xorshiid > xurshiid

Question: Is this omission of _vaao _sound specific to _xo _combination, or used elsewhere also? Any examples?


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> Thought of this looking through the _muaafiq/maafiq_ thread.
> 
> While the _vaao _sound is not typically dropped in _muaafiq_, it is indeed dropped in other places. Examples:
> 
> _Written > Spoken_
> xoaab > xaab
> xoaahish > xaahish
> tanxoaah > tanxaah
> xoaajah > xaaja
> xosh > xush
> xorshiid > xurshiid
> 
> Question: Is this omission of _vaao _sound specific to _xo _combination, or used elsewhere also? Any examples?



UM SaaHib, your transliteration needs to be "fine tuned". The words are written with a vaa'o as in xvaab/xwaab and mostly pronounced "xaab". This vaa'o is called vaav-i-ma3duulah (quiescent). Essentially, Classical Persian had a consonant xv. Words like "xush" were originally pronounced as "xvash". So, to answer your question, this omission of vaa'o is only applicable to xv.

There are still people who pronounce the word xvaab as xvaab and I am one of them, just like the late Talalat Mahmood.


----------



## UrduMedium

^Thanks for the answer and the transliteration "fine-tuning". In addition to _xwaab (vs. xaab)_, _xwaaja _is probably more common than _xaaja _too_. _I too sometimes switch between the xwaa and xaa.


----------



## greatbear

I do pronounce "xvaab", "xvaahish" and "xvaajaa", so I don't think it is as much dropped as you are thinking!


----------



## Alfaaz

Interesting question and replies! Pronouncing the waao in the above examples is usually considered wrong.

Example of both pronunciations: Tu meri zindagi hai by Mehdi Hassan: tu hi meri pehli khaahish; Later on Kumar Sanu sang it as khwaahish.


----------



## lcfatima

I was taught not to pronounce the vow in these words but noticed that for many of these sample words, many people with whom I speak pronounce the vow. Pronunciation of the /v/ ranges from v to va (some people say xvaab but I have also observed that the word becomes two syllables like xovaab). One exception is tanxoaah. I have only every heard people say tanxaah (and tankhaah in Hindi) for that for whatever reason. 

If you agree with my observation about tanxoaah, do you have an idea why tanxoaah would be widely pronounced as tanxaah but the other words are frequently pronounced retaining the vow? 

There may be other words like this but I can't think of any off of the top of my head right now.


----------



## UrduMedium

^ I think because saying tanxwaa requires more effort than tanxaa.


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I am not sure if this true. The number of newtons utilised for the force (effort) required in uttering xv is likely to be equivalent to x, I would say. In Devanagri script, there are many "conjunct" letters amongst which is "ksh" which is made up of "k and sh (retroflex)). Think of xv in the same way. In English we have the letter "x" which appears to be made up of "k and s".


----------



## greatbear

UrduMedium said:


> ^ I think because saying tanxwaa requires more effort than tanxaa.



I also think so.


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> ^ I am not sure if this true. The number of newtons utilised for the force (effort) required in uttering xv is likely to be equivalent to x, I would say. In Devanagri script, there are many "conjunct" letters amongst which is "ksh" which is made up of "k and sh (retroflex)). Think of xv in the same way. In English we have the letter "x" which appears to be made up of "k and s".



For me x definitely takes more effort than k, as in, _faxed _is harder to say than _faked _

Your mileage may vary.


----------



## greatbear

Also, as in "tanxwaa", the "x" follows "n", which makes it harder to readjust the tongue. If the same "x" were to follow, say "k", then it would be much easier.


----------



## Qureshpor

Alfaaz said:


> Interesting question and replies! Pronouncing the waao in the above examples is usually considered wrong.



I don't know about being wrong but when Urdu is being taught in the earliest stages, "vaav-i-ma3duulah" is mentioned (usually with a line under the vaa'o) and the idea is that it is NOT pronounced.


----------



## Alfaaz

> I don't know about being wrong but when Urdu is being taught in the earliest stages, "vaav-i-ma3duulah" is mentioned (usually with a line under the vaa'o) and the idea is that it is NOT pronounced.


 So that means that it is wrong if "the idea is that it is NOT pronounced" ? Or maybe wrong is not an appropriate word and one could use "generally not considered acceptable"....?


----------



## marrish

I'd like to bring to discussion a thing that may be should be posted under ''schwa insertion'' thread but one very frequently comes across individuals who choose to spell their name as Khawaja which I consider very strange. But it shows how the ''wa'' is preserved.


----------



## lcfatima

Marrish I have seen that name used as a qabilah/last name for some Arabs. I didn't know if it was from Persian Khwaaja (Lord as a title) or supposed to be like 'foreigner' khawaajah, or perhaps they are one and the same.

I have also seen it as Khoja in English (i.e. Khoja Ismailis).


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> I'd like to bring to discussion a thing that may be should be posted under ''schwa insertion'' thread but one very frequently comes across individuals who choose to spell their name as Khawaja which I consider very strange. But it shows how the ''wa'' is preserved.



I think this "phenomenon" is to avoid, as it seems to them, a consonant cluster. So xva is pronounced xava. Similar occurrence has taken place where "pyaar" is pronounced as "piyaar" by some.


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> I think this "phenomenon" is to avoid, as it seems to them, a consonant cluster. So xva is pronounced xava.



I don't see any consonant cluster: "va" is a diphthong - the "v" in there is not a consonant.


----------



## marrish

greatbear said:


> I don't see any consonant cluster: "va" is a diphthong - the "v" in there is not a consonant.


greatbear, your words seem intriguing but I have difficulty in understanding this simple statement. It may be due to my unexperiencedness in the field of phonetics. Could you shed more light on it?


----------



## hindiurdu

lcfatima said:


> I have also seen it as Khoja in English (i.e. Khoja Ismailis).



I think this may be Turkish influenced. Xvaja → Xoja seems pretty Turkish/Turkic to me (they'll often transcribe it as Hoja btw, but /x/ is meant).



greatbear said:


> I don't see any consonant cluster: "va" is a diphthong - the "v" in there is not a consonant.



Well, /v/ remains /v/ for many non-Dari Persian speakers. So, in that case it would still be a consonant. Like QP said, it is a composite-consonant similar to ksh in Nagri (which has its own deteriorations: ksh → kh / kshetra → khet and ksh → chh / kshetr → chhetr and ksh → sh / kshamaa → 'shamaa). I agree with QP that the /xv/ is complicated for people not used to saying it, including many Modern Persians who also skip the /v/ to simply say /x/ as well as others who make it (as I think you're saying) a glide /v/ → /ʋ/ → /uə/. So /xva:dʒa:/ deteriorates to /xua:dʒa:/, /xo:dʒa:/, /xa:dʒa:/, /xəva:dʒa:/, /xəua:dʒa:/, etc. I think the /xv/ pronunciation is exceedingly rare in the subcontinent. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say it naturally that way. It's usually /xʋ/ or /xuə/, which is correctly romanized as 'khw' rather than 'khv'. 

Self-diagnostic: To check how you're saying it see if your upper teeth touch your lower lip when you say the 'v' in /xv/. If they don't you're likely saying /xʋ/ or /xuə/. HU-types usually say something approximating a /v/ at syllable beginnings if it is followed by a vowel and they say /uə/ in syllable middles. This is allophonic in HU, so they are not usually aware they are doing it. Native English speakers (non-subcontinentals who do not speak HU) see this right away and are conscious of the difference.


----------



## marrish

hindiurdu said:


> I think this may be Turkish influenced. Xvaja → Xoja seems pretty Turkish/Turkic to me (they'll often transcribe it as Hoja btw, but /x/ is meant).
> 
> 
> 
> Well, /v/ remains /v/ for many non-Dari Persian speakers. So, in that case it would still be a consonant. Like QP said, it is a composite-consonant similar to ksh in Nagri (which has its own deteriorations: ksh → kh / kshetra → khet and ksh → chh / kshetr → chhetr and ksh → sh / kshamaa → 'shamaa). I agree with QP that the /xv/ is complicated for people not used to saying it, including many Modern Persians who also skip the /v/ to simply say /x/ as well as others who make it (as I think you're saying) a glide /v/ → /ʋ/ → /uə/. So /xva:dʒa:/ deteriorates to /xua:dʒa:/, /xo:dʒa:/, /xa:dʒa:/, /xəva:dʒa:/, /xəua:dʒa:/, etc. I think the /xv/ pronunciation is exceedingly rare in the subcontinent. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say it naturally that way. It's usually /xʋ/ or /xuə/, which is correctly romanized as 'khw' rather than 'khv'.
> 
> Self-diagnostic: To check how you're saying it see if your upper teeth touch your lower lip when you say the 'v' in /xv/. If they don't you're likely saying /xʋ/ or /xuə/. HU-types usually say something approximating a /v/ at syllable beginnings if it is followed by a vowel and they say /uə/ in syllable middles. This is allophonic in HU, so they are not usually aware they are doing it. Native English speakers (non-subcontinentals who do not speak HU) see this right away and are conscious of the difference.



Thank you for far reaching coverage of many languages; in Turkish it is hoca by the way. I'm rather likely to think that kSh evolution is off topic but kShamaa-> shamaa is something that caught my attention. Is it so that this is something widespread or relatively common?


----------



## greatbear

hindiurdu said:


> Well, /v/ remains /v/ for many non-Dari Persian speakers. So, in that case it would still be a consonant. Like QP said, it is a composite-consonant similar to ksh in Nagri (which has its own deteriorations: ksh → kh / kshetra → khet and ksh → chh / kshetr → chhetr and ksh → sh / kshamaa → 'shamaa). I agree with QP that the /xv/ is complicated for people not used to saying it, including many Modern Persians who also skip the /v/ to simply say /x/ as well as others who make it (as I think you're saying) a glide /v/ → /ʋ/ → /uə/. ...
> 
> Self-diagnostic: To check how you're saying it see if your upper teeth touch your lower lip when you say the 'v' in /xv/. If they don't you're likely saying /xʋ/ or /xuə/.



You're right; I certainly do pronounce it as /uə/, which is why it didn't also look to me as a consonant cluster. However, I am not so well versed in phonetic terms, so maybe it is still called a consonant cluster?

@marrish: Never heard of "shamaa" meaning forgiveness! There are people who do say "chhamaa" when unable to pronounce "kshamaa".


----------



## tonyspeed

QURESHPOR said:


> I don't know about being wrong but when Urdu is being taught in the earliest stages, "vaav-i-ma3duulah" is mentioned (usually with a line under the vaa'o) and the idea is that it is NOT pronounced.



Could we expand on "vaav-i-ma3duulah"? What is that?



hindiurdu said:


> don't think I've ever heard anyone say it  naturally that way. It's usually /xʋ/ or /xuə/, which is correctly  romanized as 'khw' rather than 'khv'.



It's much easier to say khw than khv. I'm not sure the later is even  possible really. Language follows the path of least resistance usually.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> You're right; I certainly do pronounce it as /uə/, which is why it didn't also look to me as a consonant cluster. However, I am not so well versed in phonetic terms, so maybe it is still called a consonant cluster?
> 
> @marrish: Never heard of "shamaa" meaning forgiveness! There are people who do say "chhamaa" when unable to pronounce "kshamaa".



I was once corrected by someone to say shamaa instead of chhamaa. Also after going through all the words on forvo beginning with ksh I am unable to find someone who says chh for ksh.


----------



## greatbear

tonyspeed said:


> I was once corrected by someone to say shamaa instead of chhamaa. Also after going through all the words on forvo beginning with ksh I am unable to find someone who says chh for ksh.




Well, it should be "kshamaa", neither "shamaa" nor "chhamaa", so you should have corrected who was correcting you! Forvo, unfortunately, doesn't define the spoken language: hindiurdu's "chhetr" and my "chhamaa" are highly common pronunciations, and while I recognise that it is not really an ideal situation that no good resources exist on Internet that could give you an idea what is the ground reality, it is quite typical of you that you refuse to hear native speakers' opinions. You are welcome to go by some forvo list.


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> @marrish: Never heard of "shamaa" meaning forgiveness! There are people who do say "chhamaa" when unable to pronounce "kshamaa".



I think hu used the word "shamaa" upon which marrish SaaHib posed his query. I wonder if quick delivery of "kshamaa" gives the listener the perception of "shamaa" being uttered.

Secondly, does n't "chhamaa" fall into a category of words where the Sanskrit "ksh" became the Prakrit "chh" or "kh"; "lachhmii" (lakshmii), "chhamaa" (kshmaa), "khep" (kshep) and "khet" (kshetra) being just a few examples of this? So, I don't believe it is necessarily the inability of the speaker but rather the choice of everyday register or the higher register. I am of course fully aware that in some cases (e.g kshetra), words of higher register have been assigned a different but linked meaning.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> it is quite typical of you that you refuse to hear native speakers' opinions. You are welcome to go by some forvo list.



One of the contributors claims to be located in the Hindi heartland...another claims to be from Hyderabad.
However, I will admit that I can only be 100% for one of the recordings that the person said "sh" instead of "ksh".


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> I think hu used the word "shamaa" upon which marrish SaaHib posed his query. I wonder if quick delivery of "kshamaa" gives the listener the perception of "shamaa" being uttered.



I am not disputing that "shamaa" for "kshamaa" exists - all I said is that I have heard the variant "chhamaa", rather. It's tonyspeed who seems to dispute the existence of "chhamaa" based on some list.



QURESHPOR said:


> Secondly, does n't "chhamaa" fall into a category of words where the Sanskrit "ksh" became the Prakrit "chh" or "kh"; "lachhmii" (lakshmii), "chhamaa" (kshmaa), "khep" (kshep) and "khet" (kshetra) being just a few examples of this? So, I don't believe it is necessarily the inability of the speaker but rather the choice of everyday register or the higher register. I am of course fully aware that in some cases (e.g kshetra), words of higher register have been assigned a different but linked meaning.



Well, I do know it's a case of inability for quite a few, since they have consciously tried to reproduce "ksh" in my experience but are unable to do so. It's a case like that film where the hero says "sor nahiN baabaa, shor, _shor_" and the girl yet again says "sor". As far as I know, there is no situation of registers here: someone who can say "kshamaa" will always say "kshamaa", and won't switch to "chhamaa" in some other register.
According to you, what are these "different but linked" meanings of "kshetr" and "chhetr"?


----------



## Qureshpor

greatbear said:


> Well, I do know it's a case of inability for quite a few, since they have consciously tried to reproduce "ksh" in my experience but are unable to do so. It's a case like that film where the hero says "sor nahiN baabaa, shor, _shor_" and the girl yet again says "sor". As far as I know, there is no situation of registers here: someone who can say "kshamaa" will always say "kshamaa", and won't switch to "chhamaa" in some other register.
> According to you, what are these "different but linked" meanings of "kshetr" and "chhetr"?



Well, I don't believe people saying "lachhmii" instead of "lakshmii" is the same as someone not being able to pronounce "shor" and saying "sor" instead. We know that a lot of people do pronounce "s" for "sh", whereas those who say lachhmii can and do say Lakshmii in the right setting. By the way, it is the hero who wants his heroine to use the word "sor" because she pronounces it as "shor". He can pronounce both as it is *he *who says "are baabaa shor nahiiN sor".

I had "khet" and "kshetr" in mind where the former means the physical field where one plants things and the latter used in an abstract way as in the field of phonetics.


----------



## greatbear

QURESHPOR said:


> Well, I don't believe people saying "lachhmii" instead of "lakshmii" is the same as someone not being able to pronounce "shor" and saying "sor" instead. We know that a lot of people do pronounce "s" for "sh", whereas those who say lachhmii can and do say Lakshmii in the right setting. By the way, it is the hero who wants his heroine to use the word "sor" because she pronounces it as "shor". He can pronounce both as it is *he *who says "are baabaa shor nahiiN sor".
> 
> I had "khet" and "kshetr" in mind where the former means the physical field where one plants things and the latter used in an abstract way as in the field of phonetics.



Note that "kshetr" is not just something abstract: it means "region" as well, synonym of "ilaakaa", and "kshetr" is the word I always use to denote a region.

Coming to "lachhmi/lakshmi", certain people can of course pronounce yet "lakshmi" and yet pronounce "lachhmi" and then there are others who are simply unable to pronounce "lakshmi" and hence pronounce "lachhmi".
Thanks for the "shor/sor" sorting out: you are right, it's the hero who wants that and he can pronounce both.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> I am not disputing that "shamaa" for "kshamaa" exists - all I said is that I have heard the variant "chhamaa", rather. It's tonyspeed who seems to dispute the existence of "chhamaa" based on some list.



Not to belabour the point, but rather defending my comment, I quote what you originally said: 


> @marrish: Never heard of "shamaa" meaning forgiveness!



Now that you have distanced yourself from that, the clarification is complete.


----------



## greatbear

tonyspeed said:


> Now that you have distanced yourself from that, the clarification is complete.



 I still say I haven't ever heard "shamaa" for forgiveness: just because I haven't heard something ever doesn't mean that that thing doesn't exist. My two statements weren't contradictory except in your imagination.


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> Could we expand on "vaav-i-ma3duulah"? What is that?



In simple terms a vaa'o (v/w) that is written but not pronounced.


----------



## UrduMedium

QURESHPOR said:


> UM SaaHib, your transliteration needs to be "fine tuned". The words are written with a vaa'o as in xvaab/xwaab and mostly pronounced "xaab". This vaa'o is called vaav-i-ma3duulah (quiescent). Essentially, Classical Persian had a consonant xv. Words like "xush" were originally pronounced as "xvash". So, to answer your question, this omission of vaa'o is only applicable to xv.
> 
> There are still people who pronounce the word xvaab as xvaab and I am one of them, just like the late Talalat Mahmood.


Just noticed that the vaa'o in  زکوٰۃ is written but not promounced. So it (vaav-i-ma3duulah) may apply to more than _xv_.


----------



## Qureshpor

UrduMedium said:


> Just noticed that the vaa'o in زکوٰۃ is written but not promounced. So it (vaav-i-ma3duulah) may apply to more than _xv_.



This is not vaav-i-ma3duulah, as far as I know. The reasons for this spelling may be out of topic.


----------

