# Urdu/Hindi: Terrorism and Terrorist



## Faylasoof

panjabigator said:


> This thread has been opened so we can discuss the formations and implications of these words in Hindi and Urdu.





panjabigator said:


> From this thread.
> As a side note, let's all try and be mindful of tangential points and dilly dallying. Any peripheral questions should be voiced in a separate thread. I'm guilty of this too...


 

I don’t think Urdu is unique in facing the problem of handling technical terms. This is a universal issue. The interesting thing for me is how different languages are trying to cope with the mass of new technological, scientific, political, sociological and even philosophical terms and ideas. 

Personally I feel there is nothing wrong _per se_ about neologisms. Many languages the world-over are doing this and it only adds to their vocabulary, which I feel is a good thing, as long as these neologisms make sense. Below are examples of neologisms for Hindi-Urdu - some newer than others. I have chosen these because this is an important current issue. I sincerely hope no body feels that I’m being a killjoy!

*Urdu*

_‘askariyyat pasand_ = insurgents / armed militants
_dahshat gard_ = terrorist
_dahshat gardee_ = terrorism

*Modern Hindi*

_aatash baaz_ = terrorist 
_aatash baa_zee = terrorism

(In Urdu, the above two they have a completely different meaning!! ) 

*Important note*: The term _aatash baaz_ is originally from Farsi ( _aatash_ = fire and _baaz_ = player) and for perhaps more than a century it meant in Urdu = performer of fire works! Similarly, _aatash baazee_ (in Urdu) = fire works. _These two were and still are standard Urdu terms with the meanings above_. Quite when and how in modern Hindi they acquired a different terminology, I haven’t so far bothered to find out. 


Urdu, as I have said before, has always borrowed and, at least in the past, attempted to “Urduise” loan words; everything from full words like _botal_ and _gilaas_ to part words like _tinginee_ / _tinginnee ka_ _naatch_! These were once all neologisms but became part of the language. So what is the problem with continuing the process if it means broadening and widening the lexicon? Of course the process needs to be regulated.


----------



## BP.

Hindi has come to use 'pyrotechnics' for 'terrorism'! Good lord, I would already have said to some Hindiphone _New year peh aatish-baazi daykhnay chaltay hai.n_!


----------



## panjabigator

How about a <aata.nkvaad> (अातंकवाद) for terrorism in Hindi?


----------



## Faylasoof

What is the lexical definition? In my old (not too big) Hindi dictionary I can't find अातंकवाद! Also, how would you derive 'terrorist' from this?


----------



## BP.

It becomes _aantakwaadi_.


----------



## Illuminatus

In Hindi, 

Aatank - आतंक - Terror
Aatankwaad - आतंकवाद - Terrorism
Aatankwaadi - आतंकवादी - Terrorist

Aatishbaaji is understood by everyone to mean _Fireworks_ and has no other connotation I know of.


----------



## panjabigator

How about <daishatgardi>?  Would that be understood?


----------



## Illuminatus

Yeah, dahshat-gardi (दहशतगर्दी) is also well understood.

News channels generally use _Atankwaad_ et al. and throw in Dahshatgardi etc. sporadically.

In fact, _aatankwaadi dahshat failaate hai.n_ (आतंकवादी दहशत फैलाते हैं) sounds pretty idiomatic to me.


----------



## panjabigator

But not <dahshatgard aata.nk phailaate hai.n>?


----------



## Faylasoof

Interesting! The use of dahshat-gardi and atankwaad etc. is new to me for Indian broadcasts. I tune in regularly to Zee and Sony and they keep using ‘aatashbaaz’ and ‘aatashbaazi’. I was surprised to hear the same recently from a ‘molvi’ from Varanasi! What the local channels use, I have no idea as I live abroad. The only time I hear 'dahshat gard' etc. is when I tune in to the international broadcast services of BBC Urdu (radio) or PrimeTV or Aaj TV etc.


----------



## lcfatima

On Pakistani TV dahshatgardi is (unfortunately) very commonly used.


----------



## panjabigator

I was surprised to learn that _dahshatgardi_ is not used in Persian.  In class, I've learned/used "terrorist" and "terrorism".


----------



## BP.

You should teach your teacher a new word. It is formed after all using a verb from their language!


----------



## Faylasoof

panjabigator said:


> I was surprised to learn that _dahshatgardi_ is not used in Persian.  In class, I've learned/used "terrorist" and "terrorism".



PG, 
The Persian equivalents of the Urdu  دھشتگردی _dahshatgardii_ and دھشتگرد   _dahshatgard_ are, respectively, ارعابگري_  ir3aabgarii /ir2aabgarii_ and ارعابگر_  ir3aabagar / ir2aabgar_.

But I guess they are using _terrorist _/  تروریستی _tiruuristii_ and _terrorism /_ تروریسم _tiruurism_ in speech. What about in formal written Persian? Same as above, ارعابگري and ارعابگر? 

The Urdu دھشتگردی and دھشتگرد are our own inventions of course!


----------



## panjabigator

Faylasoof said:


> PG,
> The Persian equivalents of the Urdu  دھشتگردی _dahshatgardii_ and دھشتگرد   _dahshatgard_ are, respectively, ارعابگري_  ir3aabgarii /ir2aabgarii_ and ارعابگر_  ir3aabagar / ir2aabgar_.
> 
> But I guess they are using _terrorist _/  تروریستی _tiruuristii_ and _terrorism /_ تروریسم _tiruurism_ in speech. What about in formal written Persian? Same as above, ارعابگري and ارعابگر?
> 
> The Urdu دھشتگردی and دھشتگرد are our own inventions of course!



I believe that written Persian and spoken Persian are the same here, but I'll wait for a more knowledgeable forero to weigh in.  I suspect that this is limited to Iranian Persian only.


----------



## Istriano

In Bollywood movies they always use _terrorism _and _terrorist _in the middle of the Hindi dialog.


----------



## eskandar

Faylasoof said:


> PG,
> The Persian equivalents of the Urdu  دھشتگردی _dahshatgardii_ and دھشتگرد   _dahshatgard_ are, respectively, ارعابگري_  ir3aabgarii /ir2aabgarii_ and ارعابگر_  ir3aabagar / ir2aabgar_.
> 
> But I guess they are using _terrorist _/  تروریستی _tiruuristii_ and _terrorism /_ تروریسم _tiruurism_ in speech. What about in formal written Persian? Same as above, ارعابگري and ارعابگر?
> 
> The Urdu دھشتگردی and دھشتگرد are our own inventions of course!



I had never heard of ارعابگر and ارعابگری before, and from searching online they seem to be pretty rare. تروریست and تروریزم are the most common terms, even in formal written Persian, both in Iran as well as Afghanistan. I also see دهشت‌ افکن and دهشت‌ افکنی in written Iranian and Afghan Persian, though I've never heard them spoken. (I have no idea what terms might be used in Tajik Persian).


----------



## Faylasoof

eskandar said:


> I had never heard of ارعابگر and ارعابگری before, and from searching online they seem to be pretty rare. تروریست and تروریزم are the most common terms, even in formal written Persian, both in Iran as well as Afghanistan. I also see دهشت‌ افکن and دهشت‌ افکنی in written Iranian and Afghan Persian, though I've never heard them spoken. (I have no idea what terms might be used in Tajik Persian).


 Actually, since I wrote my last post above I found out from reading books in Persian (from Iran) that it is indeed تروریست and تروریزم in both speech and formal, written Persian! These are very common!


----------



## souminwé

Faylasoof said:


> Interesting! The use of dahshat-gardi and atankwaad etc. is new to me for Indian broadcasts. I tune in regularly to Zee and Sony and they keep using ‘aatashbaaz’ and ‘aatashbaazi’. I was surprised to hear the same recently from a ‘molvi’ from Varanasi! What the local channels use, I have no idea as I live abroad. The only time I hear 'dahshat gard' etc. is when I tune in to the international broadcast services of BBC Urdu (radio) or PrimeTV or Aaj TV etc.




Lol, I assure you that you're mishearing aatankvaadi as aatishbaazi.


----------



## Faylasoof

souminwé said:


> Lol, I assure you that you're *mishearing* aatankvaadi as aatishbaazi.


 
Thank you for your contribution! *Really!*


I can now assure you that my hearing is perfectly OK ! We get regular Indian TV news (telecasted directly from India) and the word _aatishbaazi _to mean a _terrorist_ has been used until quite late. If there is now a move to officially go for _aatankvaadi_ then it is different. But to say I "misheard" _aatankvaadi_ as _aatishbaazi_ is just laughable! The two are not even remotely similar either phonetically or otherwise.


----------



## tonyspeed

Faylasoof said:


> the word _aatishbaazi _to mean a _terrorist_ has been used until quite late. If there is now a move to officially go for _aatankvaadi_ then it is different.



aatish is fire. aatishbaz is one who makes fireworks and aatishbazi means pyrotechnics or fireworks. So even if one or more news stations were using that word to mean terrorist, they would have been using the wrong word. The legitimate Hindi word for terrorist is aatankvaadi and is now used as such on the news quite frequently.

If anything maybe they were using aatishbaazi to specifically refer to bombings as opposed to terrorism on a whole...


----------



## Faylasoof

tonyspeed said:


> aatish is fire. aatishbaz is one who makes fireworks and aatishbazi means pyrotechnics or fireworks. So even if one or more news stations were using that word to mean terrorist, they would have been using the wrong word. The legitimate Hindi word for terrorist is aatankvaadi and is now used as such on the news quite frequently.
> 
> If anything maybe they were using aatishbaazi to specifically refer to bombings as opposed to terrorism on a whole...


 
_*Exactly! Please refer to the first post of this thread, which happens to be mine anyway! There you see where the term comes from and how it has been traditionally used in Urdu! *_

Yes, they were wrong to use it ... and it wasn't just one or two stations who were / are guilty of this. I regularly listen to broadcasts form India and this misuse has been all too frequent!

If the use of _aatankvaadi_ has of late become frequent then it is good news! It would still be nice to know which is used more frequently. I have heard _aatishbaz / aatishbazii_ all too frequently. I remember this (_aatishbaz / aatishbazii_ ) all too well after the Mumbai attacks! 


I don't think so! I'm sorry but this is like clutching at straws! As I say above, after the Mumbai attacks the terrorists who were armed with guns, i.e. were not bombers as such, were being constantly referred to as _aatishbaz (_!), much to our annoyance.


----------

