# Hindi/Urdu: paTak(h)a vs. aatish baazi



## lcfatima

Are the words paTak(h)a and aatish baazi synonymous? 

I noticed some (Hindi) dictionaries give paTaka and others paTakha. My husband says it is paTaxa. So I am not sure of the standard representation, and I have heard all 3 in spoken language.


----------



## tamah

पटाखा (paTakha) = fireworks = aatish baazi ( I think this word comes from Farsi).


----------



## Faylasoof

In Urdu: paTaaxah پَٹاخَہ (pl. pataaxeپَٹاخے ) = fire cracker. 

While <_fireworks_> = آتَش بازی - display of firework material, e.g. phul jhaRiyaa.n پھُل جھَڑياں , paTaaxe پَٹاخے  etc. etc.


----------



## lcfatima

So are they synonymous in Hindi, but in Urdu, paTaxa denotes a fire cracker and also an explosive sound, while aatish baazi is fireworks as in the visual presentation of fire crackers?

Interesting that in Urdu the word paTaxa has the Indic /T/ and the /X/.


----------



## BP.

I'd disagree somewhat to your view that _paTaakha_ denotes an explosive sound. We do say _paTaakhe sunaaii dena_ but it actually means _paTaakho.n ki aawaaze.n sunaii dena_, just like we 'hear an ambulance' and not 'the sound of the blaring horns of an ambulance'...shortcuts that might confuse you a noun and a verb. I hope I didn't understand your problem wrong!

The word for explosion is _d-hamaakaa_ but it is used exclusively for big explosive sounds. For those of lesser magnitude we might use rather colloquial terms like _chaTaakh, paTaakh, d-ham_ or even _paTaakhe daar/numaa aawaaz_. But these are all adjectives. Example: _taSweer ka _frame_ d-haRaam se farsh par aa giraa aur uska shiishaa betahaashaa mahiin chaTaakho.n ke saat-h reza reza ho rahaa_.

Note: I've used ^^^ _x_-h for an aspirated _x_ sound.


----------



## lcfatima

Okay, thanks.


----------



## Qureshpor

lcfatima said:


> Interesting that in Urdu the word paTaxa has the Indic /T/ and the /X/.



I am also curious about this combination of retroflex consonants with typically Arabic/Persian consonats. Do we need a seperate thread for this? Interestingly, to my surprise, this word is found in "Rani Ketkii" (along with be-dhaRak, laalTainoN and table)!


----------



## tonyspeed

Out of my 4 dictionaries, 2 say it has an XH and two say it has a kh. The one with origin information uses kh. Platts also omits any mention of XH. I have a feeling the XH was simply added later.


----------



## panjabigator

QURESHPOR said:


> I am also curious about this combination of retroflex consonants with typically Arabic/Persian consonats. Do we need a seperate thread for this? Interestingly, to my surprise, this word is found in "Rani Ketkii" (along with be-dhaRak, laalTainoN and table)!



I haven't read Rani Ketki in many years, but why are you surprised to see "patakhaa" in Rani Ketki?

This consonant combination, I might add, is very common in Pashto.


----------



## Qureshpor

panjabigator said:


> I haven't read Rani Ketki in many years, but why are you surprised to see "patakhaa" in Rani Ketki?
> 
> This consonant combination, I might add, is very common in Pashto.



Because Insha went out of his way to exclude every Arabic/Persian word in his story. By extension, this would exclude consonants typical of these languages. Rani Ketkii and her folk would not be expected to pronounce Kh!!


----------



## panjabigator

Will reply to this in PM. Don't want to go off topic.


----------



## joed

patakha refers to an explosive device. atishbaazi refers to to aerial fireworks.


----------



## rahulbemba

lcfatima said:


> Are the words paTak(h)a and aatish baazi synonymous?
> 
> I noticed some (Hindi) dictionaries give paTaka and others paTakha. My  husband says it is paTaxa. So I am not sure of the standard  representation, and I have heard all 3 in spoken language.



"Patakha" पटाखा  (t as spoken in tomato) is a noun which is same as "aatishbazi" आतिशबाजी . "Pataka" पताका (t as spoken in 'totaa") means a flag or dhwaj.


----------



## Faylasoof

rahulbemba said:


> "Patakha" पटाखा  (t as spoken in tomato) is a noun which is same as "aatishbazi" आतिशबाजी ....


Well, to be accurate there is a difference between پَٹاخَہ  _paTaaxa / paTaakha_ and آتَش بازی  _aatashbaazi / aatishbaazii_, as has been mentioned above:


Faylasoof said:


> In Urdu: paTaaxah پَٹاخَہ (pl. pataaxeپَٹاخے ) = fire cracker.
> 
> While <_fireworks_> = آتَش بازی - display of firework material, e.g. phul jhaRiyaa.n پھُل جھَڑياں , paTaaxe پَٹاخے  etc. etc.



and



joed said:


> patakha refers to an explosive device. atishbaazi refers to to aerial fireworks.


 Both Colloquial Hindi and Urdu seem to use these words with a distinction as mentioned above. Urdu certainly does and from many Hindiphones I also hear the same.


----------



## rahulbemba

@ Faylasoof: In Hindi, patakhaa is used for only noun, but atishbazi is used as both noun and verb. 

For example: 

आतिशबाजी में बहुत आनंद आता है. (Noun)
वह आतिशबाजी में व्यस्त था. (Verb)

Also, what do you mean by "Hindiphone". Sounds like some instrument or tool to force speak Hindi. Why can't you mean Hindi speakers, if you mean this - it would be more appropriate and respectful than "Hindiphone".


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> @ Faylasoof: In Hindi, patakhaa is used for only noun, but atishbazi is used as both noun and verb.
> 
> For example:
> 
> आतिशबाजी में बहुत आनंद आता है. (Noun)
> वह आतिशबाजी में व्यस्त था. (Verb)



To me, "aatish-baazii" appears to be a noun in both these sentences!


----------



## Faylasoof

QURESHPOR said:


> Originally Posted by *rahulbemba*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ Faylasoof: In Hindi, patakhaa is used for only noun, but atishbazi is used as both noun and verb.
> 
> For example:
> 
> आतिशबाजी में बहुत आनंद आता है. (Noun)
> वह आतिशबाजी में व्यस्त था. (Verb)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To me, "aatish-baazii" appears to be a noun in both these sentences!
Click to expand...


I quite agree! In both, _aatishbaazii_ is indeed a noun and not a verb!

For the benefit of everyone, below are the Urdu equivalents and transliterations & translations into English for both languages: 

आतिशबाजी में बहुत आनंद आता है. 
_aatishbaazii meN bahut aanand aataa hai           _

آتشبازی میں بہت لطف آتا ہے
_aatishbaazii meN bahut luTf aataa hai_

_Fireworks are very enjoyable!_


वह आतिशबाजी में व्यस्त था. 
_vah aatishbaazii meN vyast thaa_

وہ آتشبازی میں مشغول \ مصروف تھا
_voh aatishbaazii meN mashghuul / maSruuf thaa _

_He was busy / occupied with fireworks!_


It should be obvious what is a verb and what is a noun in the each of the sentences above.


----------



## amiramir

Faylasoof was very gentlemanly (womanly? I realize now I don't know your gender) and didn't respond to rahumbemba's reproach. To come to Faylasoof's defense, I would just point out that saying Urduphone/Hindiphone/Anglophone/etc is not at all disrespectful, and it is absolutely the standard way of referring to language speakers in a linguistics context. As a former linguist, I will absolutely attest to the fact that there is nothing inappropriate in this.


----------



## rahulbemba

Faylasoof said:


> वह आतिशबाजी में व्यस्त था.
> _vah aatishbaazii meN vyast thaa_
> _He was busy / occupied with fireworks!_
> 
> It should be obvious what is a verb and what is a noun in the each of the sentences above.



It is not as obvious because your translation is not what I intended the original sentence to be; the way it was written by me. 

You write the translation as:_ He was busy / occupied with fireworks!
_
While I wanted it to be: _He  was busy fireworking. _

Just like: "He was busy writing". 

In this sentence, "was writing" is used as a verb, right?  It is just like I wanted it to be in "was fireworking". Your sentence "busy with fireworks" is not correct translation to my sentence in original sense, and hence the confusion. 

I am not sure if "fireworking" is a proper word - but  this is where the two languages are different. Or at least are used as  different. Let us accept that some times in spoken languages we use a verb as a noun and the vice versa, something which doesn't necessarily happen in each of the translated language!


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> It is not as obvious because your translation is not what I intended the original sentence to be; the way it was written by me.
> 
> You write the translation as:_ He was busy / occupied with fireworks!
> _
> While I wanted it to be: _He  was busy fireworking. _
> 
> Just like: "He was busy writing".
> 
> In this sentence, "was writing" is used as a verb, right?  It is just like I wanted it to be in "was fireworking". Your sentence "busy with fireworks" is not correct translation to my sentence in original sense, and hence the confusion.
> 
> I am not sure if "fireworking" is a proper word - but  this is where the two languages are different. Or at least are used as  different. Let us accept that some times in spoken languages we use a verb as a noun and the vice versa, something which doesn't necessarily happen in each of the translated language!




You seem to be confusing the use of a verb, e.g. "writing" when it is employed as a noun.

He was busy writing.

vuh likhne meN masruuf thaa.

My writing to him turned out to be a mistake.

meraa use likhnaa ek bhuul saabit hu'ii.

Now, aatishbaazii (fire-play) is a noun through and through and however much we try to stretch it to be "fire-playing/working", it won't work!


----------



## rahulbemba

QURESHPOR said:


> You seem to be confusing the use of a verb, e.g. "writing" when it is employed as a noun.



*"He was busy writing"
*
Tell me if here, "writing" is a noun or a verb? I think it is a verb. So is the aatishbazi a verb, the way "I" used it. 

It can be different in Urdu, I am not doubting it. Anyways, I would rather stop this discussion as it is going endless. If others are not convinced by my explanation, it is fine with me - I only explained, didn't try to "convince".


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> *"He was busy writing"
> *
> Tell me if here, "writing" is a noun or a verb? I think it is a verb. So is the aatishbazi a verb, the way "I" used it.
> 
> *It is indeed a noun. If you care to look in any reputable English grammar book you will find that it would be termed as a "verbal noun" or a "gerund". Here is some useful explanation(not from a grammar book, as far as I know).
> *
> http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/gerund.htm
> 
> It can be different in Urdu, I am not doubting it. Anyways, I would rather stop this discussion as it is going endless. If others are not convinced by my explanation, it is fine with me - I only explained, didn't try to "convince".
> 
> *I could provide you with the full derivation of the compound word "aatish-baazii" but it will serve no useful purpose in the current circumstances. It might be beneficial if we were to think of this compound as "baazii" alone, which you will know the meaning of.
> *
> *Anyway, I agree with you to end this discussion. Your "explanation" has not been convincing for me.
> *


----------



## rahulbemba

rahulbemba:  < "He was busy writing" Tell me if here, "writing" is a noun or a verb? I think it is a verb. So is the aatishbazi a verb, the wa y "I" used it. >

qureshpor: < It is indeed a noun. If you care to look in any  reputable English grammar book you will find that it would be termed as  a "verbal noun" or a "gerund". > 

If "writing" is noun in "He was busy writing.", then my "aatishbazi" would also be noun and I would stand corrected. I had started the below forum in "English only" thread, and the response I got was that "writing" is a "verb" here. 

Thread: I was busy "writing" - is it verb?
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2238785

Would request you to post your comment there also, and let some experts in English also review their grammar. If it is noun (gerund) and not verb, then taking your suggestion I would start referring to grammar books than relying on our portals! 

Thanks anyway.


----------



## Qureshpor

rahulbemba said:


> rahulbemba:  < "He was busy writing" Tell me if here, "writing" is a noun or a verb? I think it is a verb. So is the aatishbazi a verb, the wa y "I" used it. >
> 
> qureshpor: < It is indeed a noun. If you care to look in any  reputable English grammar book you will find that it would be termed as  a "verbal noun" or a "gerund". >
> 
> If "writing" is noun in "He was busy writing.", then my "aatishbazi" would also be noun and I would stand corrected. I had started the below forum in "English only" thread, and the response I got was that "writing" is a "verb" here.
> 
> Thread: I was busy "writing" - is it verb?
> http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2238785
> 
> Would request you to post your comment there also, and let some experts in English also review their grammar. If it is noun (gerund) and not verb, then taking your suggestion I would start referring to grammar books than relying on our portals!
> 
> Thanks anyway.



No, I shall not post anything in that forum because I might end up quoting a couplet or two from an Urdu Ghazal! I have read suzi br's solitary reply and you do know that "One swallow does n't make a spring". Even if this lady is right, I am sorry to say, "aatishbaazii" still remains a noun!

For your information...... 

I was writing = maiN likh rahaa thaa/thii

I was busy, writing = maiN likhne meN masruuf thaa/thii

In the first, writing is a participle and hence a verb. In the second case, as I have stated earlier, it is a verbal *noun! *By all means take the advice of forum members but for a definitive answer you would agree that "The ink of a scholar('s pen) is more sacred than the blood of a martyr".


----------



## tonyspeed

Maybe I can explain it as such before this thread blasts out of control. 

 In Hindi we have the infinitive forms of verbs that end in na i.e.  likhna, bhaagna, utarna, vagerah, vagerah.. In English this corresponds  to two forms: to write and writing, to swim and swimming, to run and  running, to disembark and disembarking. Those are all infinitive forms  of verbs. In Hindi, we have a more simplistic form.

 So the test to see if aatishbaazi is a verb or not in this situation is the lack of the naa at the end. Neither can one say "maiN aatishbaazi rahaa hooN" or "main aatishbaazita hooN". Therefore, it would seem aatishbaazi is technically a noun in this situation. Comparison with English I think will confuse everyone further since English grammar rules are confusing to practically everyone.


----------



## rahulbemba

tonyspeed said:


> Maybe I can explain it as such before this thread blasts out of control.
> 
> In Hindi we have the infinitive forms of verbs that end in na i.e.  likhna, bhaagna, utarna, vagerah, vagerah.. In English this corresponds  to two forms: to write and writing, to swim and swimming, to run and  running, to disembark and disembarking. Those are all infinitive forms  of verbs. In Hindi, we have a more simplistic form.
> 
> So the test to see if aatishbaazi is a verb or not in this situation is the lack of the naa at the end. Neither can one say "maiN aatishbaazi rahaa hooN" or "main aatishbaazita hooN". Therefore, it would seem aatishbaazi is technically a noun in this situation. Comparison with English I think will confuse everyone further since English grammar rules are confusing to practically everyone.



Very good point. I agree with you by and large. 

There were more differences between patakha and atishbazi which prompted me to think one can be used as a verb also. E.g.

This is correct: Mai atishbazi kar raha hun. 
This is incorrect: Mai patakha kar raha hun.

Correct: मै आतिशबाजी कर रहा हूँ. 
Wrong: मै पटाखा कर रहा हूँ. 
Correct: मै पटाखे फोड़ रहा हूँ. 

Now in मै पटाखे फोड़ रहा हूँ, it is so clear that patakhe is a noun. But in मै आतिशबाजी कर रहा हूँ, it is getting confusing. A similar sentences is:

मै प्रतीक्षा कर रहा हूँ. (I am waiting). Here, waiting is a verb or noun? 

Since I took the definition of verb as the one indicating "motion or movement", I thought in मै आतिशबाजी कर रहा हूँ, atishbazi would also be verb. 

Anyways, this has been a good discussion. Thanks to all.


----------



## Wolverine9

Are there any other synonyms for paTaak(kh,x)aa "fire-cracker" or for aatish-baazii "fire-works"?


----------



## marrish

Wolverine9 said:


> Are there any other synonyms for paTaak(kh,x)aa "fire-cracker" or for aatish-baazii "fire-works"?


[Hindi] This one is an equivalent to P/U _aatish-baazii_, seemingly a calque: अग्निक्रीड़ा _agnikriiRaa_.


----------



## Qureshpor

marrish said:


> [Hindi] This one is an equivalent to P/U _aatish-baazii_, seemingly a calque: अग्निक्रीड़ा _agnikriiRaa_.


Sounds extremely heavy to me. Did it ever take off!


----------



## Chhaatr

AgnikriiRaa is extremely high falutin probably used by those who call a train "lohpathgaaminii" instead of "rel gaaDii"


----------



## Wolverine9

Chhaatr said:


> AgnikriiRaa is extremely high falutin probably used by those who call a train "lohpathgaaminii" instead of "rel gaaDii"



What does falutin mean?  I agree that it's uncommon and an awkward translation of aatish-baazii.  kriiRaa just sounds like an odd word to me.


----------



## Chhaatr

Wolverine9 said:


> What does falutin mean?



My mistake should have written "high-falutin" or "highfalutin".  It means pretentious.

KriiRa = game/sport.  Along with agnii it would literally mean "firegame or firesport".


----------



## marrish

Chhaatr said:


> KriiRa = game/sport.  Along with agnii it would literally mean "firegame or firesport".



Exactly. Thank you for this one. You will find this word used in this thread which I started:

Urdu, Hindi: sports club/centre 
If you can add something there, don't hesitate to do so.


----------



## Qureshpor

Chhaatr said:


> KriiRa = game/sport. Along with agnii it would literally mean "firegame or firesport".


I am glad you have provided an explanation for this word. I was begining to think the full word meant "fire-fly" (jugnuu)!


----------



## marrish

Wolverine9 said:


> Are there any other synonyms for paTaak(kh,x)aa "fire-cracker" or for *aatish-baazii* "fire-works"?


It might be interesting to mention it in this thread that in one of the previous threads Faylasoof SaaHib shared his observations of the usage of this word by some Hindi broadcasters in the sense of ''terrorism'', ''a terrorist'' becoming ''_aatish-baaz_''!!!

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1217660


----------



## Wolverine9

I'm not convinced of aatish-baaz and aatish-baazii being used in the sense of terrorist and terrorism.  No Google result even shows this meaning.  The broadcasters probably misspoke or misread the teleprompters.


----------



## marrish

Wolverine9 said:


> I'm not convinced of aatish-baaz and aatish-baazii being used in the sense of terrorist and terrorism.  No Google result even shows this meaning.  The broadcasters probably misspoke or misread the teleprompters.


Possible. I also was unsuccessful in searching on the Net for this.


----------

