# Urdu: bilaa vajah vs be vajah



## Chhaatr

As a Hindi speaker I use "_binaa vajah_" and less frequently "_be vajah_".

Interested to know what Urdu speakers prefer, _bilaa vajah, be vajah or binaa vajah_?

Requesting participation of Urdu speakers.

Thanks!


----------



## marrish

All the three possibilities can be used in Urdu. Note that the word is_ vaj_h_, it means that there is no _zabar_ on _jiim_. As to preference, I prefer _be-vajh_. _baGhair vajh (ke)_ is also a possiblility which I use. I don't use the remaning _bilaa vajh_ and _binaa vajh_. There may be people who say _bilaa vajh_ and I think it would be more common than _binaa vajh_, although both of them are OK with me. binaa is perhaps the lest used in Urdu but it does not implicate it is wrong. Perhaps you can find it interesting that in Urdu one may say _binaa kaaran ke._The only difference with Hindi would be the pronunciation. kaaran would be with a dental ''n'' not with a retroflex one, NR.


----------



## Faylasoof

Chhaatr said:


> As a Hindi speaker I use "_binaa vajah_" and less frequently "_be vajah_".
> 
> Interested to know what Urdu speakers prefer, _bilaa vajah, be vajah or binaa vajah_?
> 
> Requesting participation of Urdu speakers.
> 
> Thanks!


 Chhaatr Sb., in Urdu, both _*bilaa / be wajh*_ (or _*vajh*_, both pronounced _*wajha*_ / _*vajha*_ [but also by some as _*wajah / vajah*_ ] due to a pronunciation issue that has already been discussed in earlier threads) are used all the time. On the other hand _*binaa wajh / vjah*_ would be rare, I think. It is certainly not found in our speech but _*bilaa / be / binaa sabab*_ are! Matters of convention, I presume.


----------



## Qureshpor

I would instinctively use "bilaa-vajh".

aap bilaa-vajh mujh se naaraaz ho rahe haiN!


----------



## Chhaatr

Thank you very much gentlemen. Much appreciated.


----------



## BP.

Without thinking too much about it, I'd say that bilaa would be from bi-from, laa-no, i.e. the whole thing bilaa waj-h would be from no waj-h literally. waj-h means face, and is taken figuratively to mean what is apparent, or sake.

bee waj-h is having no waj-h.

Same thing for most of us.


----------



## Sheikh_14

Wajh is indeed face in arabic but is that so in urdu?


----------



## Qureshpor

BP. said:


> Without thinking too much about it, I'd say that bilaa would be from bi-from, laa-no, i.e. the whole thing bilaa waj-h would be from no waj-h literally. waj-h means face, and is taken figuratively to mean what is apparent, or sake.
> 
> bee waj-h is having no waj-h.
> 
> Same thing for most of us.


bi-laa x = with no x = without x

bi-laa shak = with no doubt = without doubt


----------



## Chhaatr

Is there any rule about which words take _bilaa_ or _be_?

For example, if I were to use the following:

_bilaa shubah_ or _be shubah_ 

would either of these usages appear awkward to you as an Urdu speaker?

Another question, is it _bilaa_ or _billaa?_  I ask this because in one of the programmes I watched, bilaa was transliterated as billa in English.

Thanks for any help!


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I am not aware of any such rule. It's just a personal choice.

raat* yuuN dil meN terii kho'ii hu'ii yaad aa'ii
 jaise viiraane meN chupke se bahaar aa jaa'e
 jaise saHraa'oN meN haule se chale baad-i-nasiim
 jaise biimaar ko be-vajh qaraar aa jaa'e

 * For "raat ko"

I would go for "bilaa-shubh" but this is my personal choice. Not every "be-x" can be equated with "bilaa-x" or vice versa.

be-sharm is not bilaa-sharm!

bilaa naaGhah (uninterruptedly) is not the same as "be-naaGhah"

billaa is a Tom-cat or a badge!


----------



## eskandar

Chhaatr said:


> Is there any rule about which words take _bilaa_ or _be_?


_Bilaa-_ is from Arabic originally and _be-_ is from Persian. As has been pointed out, many words can take _bilaa-_ or _be-_ interchangeably. These would be words originally of Arabic origin (eg. vajh, shak, shubha). However I don't think you can use _bilaa-_ with words of Persian origin. Therefore you can say either _bilaa-shak_ (Arabic+Arabic) or _be-shak_ (Persian prefix + Arabic noun), but as Qureshpor SaaHib indicated, you must say _be-sharm_ and not_ *__bilaa-sharm_ because _sharm_ is from Persian originally.


----------



## Qureshpor

eskandar said:


> _Bilaa-_ is from Arabic originally and _be-_ is from Persian. As has been pointed out, many words can take _bilaa-_ or _be-_ interchangeably. These would be words originally of Arabic origin (eg. vajh, shak, shubha). However I don't think you can use _bilaa-_ with words of Persian origin. Therefore you can say either _bilaa-shak_ (Arabic+Arabic) or _be-shak_ (Persian prefix + Arabic noun), but as Qureshpor SaaHib indicated, you must say _be-sharm_ and not_ *__bilaa-sharm_ because _sharm_ is from Persian originally.


My understanding is that Persian has "ba" as preposition, e.g roz ba-roz and "bi" a verbal prefix. Both of these in the Modern language (of Iran) are pronounced as "be".

The "bi" in "bi-laa", in my view is the same "bi" as in "bi_smillaah". 

This is true on the whole but there are exceptions, e.g.

ساغر جلوہٗٔ سرشار ہے ہر ذرّہ ٔ خاک
شوق دیدار بلا آئینہ ساماں نکلا

مرزا اسداللہ خان غالب

One also has the possibility of Indic words with "bilaa", as in bilaa-rok~Tok, bilaa-jhijak etc.


----------



## eskandar

Qureshpor said:


> My understanding is that Persian has "ba" as preposition, e.g roz ba-roz and "bi" a verbal prefix. Both of these in the Modern language (of Iran) are pronounced as "be".


In my comment above, it should be clear that when I wrote _be-_ I was referring to the same word under discussion in this thread (بے _be_ in Urdu and classical Persian). No need to confuse the issue with contemporary Iranian pronunciation in a thread about Urdu.


----------



## Qureshpor

eskandar SaaHib, you stated "be" was Persian (in the word بلا). All I am suggesting is that in my understanding, this is not the case. It is of Arabic origins. I may be wrong but I fail to understand how I am adding confusion to the issue. You mentioned Persian and I have tried to indicate that bi- is neither "ba" nor "bi" of Persian. What other "bi" is there in Persian that is of Persian origins? This has nothing to do with Persian/Urdu بے . Perhaps we are talking cross purposes.

There is also بلا توانی and بلا درنگ.


----------



## eskandar

MuHtaram Qureshpor SaaHib, you are still misunderstanding what I have written. Nowhere did I claim that the _bi-_ in the word _bilaa_ (بلا) was of Persian origins. You are of course right that it is the Arabic participle _bi-_ meaning 'with' and has nothing to do with Persian. Let me add Perso-Arabic to my original comment so that my words become more clear.



eskandar said:


> _Bilaa-_ *(بلا)* is from Arabic originally and _be-_ *(بے)* is from Persian. As has been pointed out, many words can take *بلا* or *بے* interchangeably. These would be words originally of Arabic origin (eg. vajh, shak, shubha). However I don't think you can use *بلا* with words of Persian origin. Therefore you can say either *بلا شک* (Arabic+Arabic) or *بے شک* (Persian prefix + Arabic noun), but as Qureshpor SaaHib indicated, you must say *بے شرم* and not_ *_*بلا شرم* because *شرم *is from Persian originally.


----------



## Qureshpor

Apologies eskandar SaaHib. We are talking cross purposes! I took your "be" in your very first sentence to be the one and the same as the "bi" in "bilaa".


----------



## Alfaaz

eskandar said:
			
		

> ...but as Qureshpor SaaHib indicated, you must say _be-sharm_ and not_ *__bilaa-sharm_ because _sharm_ is from Persian originally.


 Could the two impart different meanings?
وہ بے شرم نہیں
جو بھی کہنا ہے بلا شرم کہو


----------



## eskandar

Qureshpor said:


> Apologies eskandar SaaHib. We are talking cross purposes! I took your "be" in your very first senttence to be the one and the same as the "bi" in "bilaa".


No problem QP SaaHib, I figured as much. I do try to use the Urdu/Indo-Persian transliteration scheme in Urdu threads, to avoid confusion.



Alfaaz said:


> Could the two impart different meanings?
> وہ بے شرم نہیں
> جو بھی کہنا ہے بلا شرم کہو


This is a good point. I would understand the first sentence as "s/he is not brazen/shameless (_be-sharm_)" but the second as "whatever you have to say, say it without shame (_bilaa-sharm_)" - the difference is aptly reflected in the English equivalents "shameless" vs. "without shame". I think this speaks to the exceptions that QP SaaHib pointed out above; it seems to me that when saying "without X", _bilaa-_ can be used with most anything, including Persian- or even Indic-origin words. But when forming compounds like "shameless" (_be-sharm_), the prefix _bilaa-_ is generally used only with Arabic words.


----------



## littlepond

And is "bin" used in Urdu? In Hindi, we have "bin painde kaa loTaa", "bin mauqe kii barsaat" and "bin bulaayaa maihmaan". If it is, then can it be interchanged freely with _be-_ and _bilaa__-_?


----------



## Qureshpor

littlepond said:


> And is "bin" used in Urdu? In Hindi, we have "bin painde kaa loTaa", "bin mauqe kii barsaat" and "bin bulaayaa maihmaan". If it is, then can it be interchanged freely with _be-_ and _bilaa__-_?


Yes, "bin" is used in Urdu. See # post 9. All the examples you have quoted are found in Urdu.

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2369375&highlight=binaa

No, "be" and "bilaa" can not be interchanged freely. Just try putting "be" and "bilaa" in the examples I have provided and you'll see why.

bin-bulaayaa > be-bulaayaa/bilaa bulaayaa 

bin-painde kaa loTaa > be-painde kaa loTaa/bilaa painde kaa loTaa 

It's matter of convention and grammar.

tujh-bin > tere binaa > tere baGhair

Hukm-bin >  binaa Hukm ke > Hukm ke baGhair

bin-kaaj > binaa kaaj (ke) > kaaj ke baGhair

maaN ke binaa > maaN ke baGhair

maiN bhulaataa to huuN us ko magar ai jazbah-i-dil
us pih ban jaa'e kuchh aisii kih *bin aa'e* nah bane

Ghalib


----------



## Alfaaz

littlepond said:
			
		

> And is "bin" used in Urdu? ...


The following thread might also be relevant: Hindi/Urdu : binaa/bilaa (also made by Chhaatr SaaHib)


----------



## littlepond

Thanks Quresh jii for your detailed reply; thanks Alfaaz jii for another link.


----------

