# Hindi: baad meN



## Wolverine9

Some synonyms for _baad _"afterward, later" include _pashchaat _and _upraant_.  Are _pashchaat meN_ and _upraant meN_ valid expressions alongside _baad meN_?  If not, is there a synonomous expression to _baad meN_ using _pashchaat, upraant_, or another word?  It would be peculiar if _baad meN_ was the only possible expression.

Thanks.


----------



## marrish

As a non-Hindi speaker who knows Hindi my impression is that "_ke pashchaat_" is used but I never read or heard "_upraant_". It is always "_ke pashchaat_" and not _pashchaat meN_ as far as I know but you have to expect Hindi speakers to decide on this matter.


----------



## Wolverine9

Thanks, marrish. "_ke pashchaat_" is the equivalent of "_ke baad_", but do you think it also means the same as "_baad meN_"?


----------



## Chhaatr

You can use _tatpashchaat_ for _baad meN_. Like _pashchaat_, you will find _upraaNt_ too being used mostly with _ke_.


----------



## Wolverine9

Thanks, Chhaatr.  I guess _tadupraaNt _is another equivalent of _baad meN_.


----------



## littlepond

And there is also "phir" as synonym for "baad mein". Both "tatpaschaat" and "tadupraant" are not colloquial terms: they belong to the literary register.


----------



## Chhaatr

Thanks for _phir_. The most obvious options are more often than not forgotten. I agree, anything other than _baad meN_ and _phir_ are high register.


----------



## marrish

Thank you Chhaatr SaaHib, I learnt new ways of expressions like _tatpashchaat_ and _tadupraant_. They are formidable!

To the topic, they would translate back to Urdu _is ke ba3d_. 

I am getting the impression from the posts that neither of them goes with "_meN_".


----------



## Wolverine9

marrish said:


> Thank you Chhaatr SaaHib, I learnt new ways of expressions like _tatpashchaat_ and _tadupraant_. They are formidable!
> 
> To the topic, they would translate back to Urdu _is ke ba3d_.
> 
> I am getting the impression from the posts that neither of them goes with "_meN_".



Why wouldn't _tatpashchaat _mean _ba3d meN_ as Chhaatr mentioned?


----------



## marrish

I can be wrong but I think that tat means "this" in Sanskrit and "pashchaat" after. It means literally "is ke ba3d" but I don't know about its usage, Chhaatr SaaHib's statement is right, I assume, as for the usage. As I said, I've learnt these words just yesterday, from this thread so I can't say anything more.


----------



## littlepond

^ But any "baad" needs anyway an antecedent. Any "after" has a "before" (the "tat", the this referring to which something has occurred later on). Can you think of any situation where "baad mein" is not substitutable by "is ke baad"?


----------



## Qureshpor

^ I think there is a subtle difference between "x ke baad" and "baad meN".

In the former, one is talking about an event or events after a point stretching into time but without a demarcation. In the latter there is a period/duration implied.

x..........................................> (x ke baad), e.g marne ke baad kyaa ho gaa?

x<.........................................>(x ke baad meN), e.g. baiTing pahle kareN yaa baad meN?


----------



## littlepond

But, there is the same subtle difference between 'x ke baad' and 'is ke baad'; I was talking of the latter. 'is' can be abstract intervention here.

"baiTing pehle karen yaa [kuchh karne ke] baad mein?" To rephrase, in your sentence, "baad mein" can be replaced by "tatpaschaat" or "tadupraant". Can you or marrish jii come up with a sentence where that wouldn't be possible? I don't think that's possible.


----------



## mundiya

marrish jii, you were close. "tat" usually means "that", so "tatpashchaat" should mean "*us* ke baad".

baad me.n kar lenaa
us/is ke baad kar lenaa

These two sentences don't mean exactly the same thing to me. I would translate "baad me.n" as "later" in the first sentence; and "us/is ke baad" as "after that/this, afterward" in the second sentence.

littlepond jii's suggestion of "phir" might be the only true equivalent of "baad me.n".  I can't think of any others.


----------



## marrish

littlepond said:


> To rephrase, in your sentence, "baad mein" can be replaced by "tatpaschaat" or "tadupraant". *Can you or marrish jii come up with a sentence where that wouldn't be possible? I don't think that's possible.*
> 
> 
> mundiya said:
> 
> 
> 
> marrish jii, you were close. "tat" usually means "that", so "tatpashchaat" should mean "*us* ke baad".
> 
> *baad me.n kar lenaa
> us/is ke baad kar lenaa
> 
> These two sentences don't mean exactly the same thing to me. I would translate "baad me.n" as "later" in the first sentence; and "us/is ke baad" as "after that/this, afterward" in the second sentence.
> *littlepond jii's suggestion of "phir" might be the only true equivalent of "baad me.n". I can't think of any others.
Click to expand...

 mundiya jii, thanks for recognition and correction at the same time, of course '_tat_' means 'that', it is "my bad" (not _baad_ or as it is in Urdu _ba3d_  I agree with your view here. Both sentences are different.
littlepond jii, take for example this simple dialogue: Q: _chaleN_? A: _nahiiN yaar, baad meN_. 

I am not under the impression that this "_baad meN_" can be replaced by _tatpashchaat_ or _tadupraant_, leaving the matter of register aside of course.

Mind you, since I acquired these words just recently, as I said before, I am not familiar with the real usage although technically it can't be equivalent in my opinion.


----------



## mundiya

I should add that "phir" is only an equivalent of "baad me.n" in some cases.

yeh kitaab baad me.n paRh lo
yeh kitaab phir paRh lo

These sentences have totally different meanings.

Just thought of a phrase sometimes used in formal Hindi: "pashchaatkaal me.n".  I believe this is used synonymously with "baad me.n".


----------



## littlepond

marrish jii, in that case, "punaha" (पुनः) suits both kinds of contexts: it can go wherever both "baad mein" and "ke baad" can go. However, one caveat is that "पुनः" can also mean (and often does) "again, yet again". (Thus, it fits not only "phir" but also wherever "phir se" can be used.)


----------



## mundiya

^ "Punaha" would have the same problem as "phir" in terms of meaning (which you have noted).  This is why I think "pashchaatkaal me.n" fits best as a synonym.


----------



## saadillah

Wolverine9 said:


> Thanks, marrish. "_ke pashchaat_" is the equivalent of "_ke baad_", but do you think it also means the same as "_baad meN_"?


thank ..you for share with me .. that helped


----------

