# Hindi/Urdu: final h as exhalation



## tonyspeed

In another thread it was pointed out that in Urdu the word for day is darvaazah as opposed to Hindi darvaazaa. 
In Urdu is there actually a final exhalation that is pronounced with set of words( vajah and jagah)? Or is 'ah' pronounced as simply as 'aa' in Urdu with no final 'H'? In Hindi is the exhalation ever pronounced for these words?

It is also interesting to note that it IS spelt jagah and vajah in Hindi , while darvaazah somehow became darvaazaa, which is according to the actual pronunciation.


----------



## greatbear

"-ah" is very much pronounced for words like "jagah", "vajah", "fatah"/"fateh", etc., and hence the orthography. In words like "darvaazaa(h)", in Hindi no exhalation occurs, and at least in colloquial Urdu, I don't hear it.


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> In another thread it was pointed out that in Urdu the word for day is darvaazah as opposed to Hindi darvaazaa.
> In Urdu is there actually a final exhalation that is pronounced with set of words( vajah and jagah)? Or is 'ah' pronounced as simply as 'aa' in Urdu with no final 'H'? In Hindi is the exhalation ever pronounced for these words?
> 
> It is also interesting to note that it IS spelt jagah and vajah in Hindi , while darvaazah somehow became darvaazaa, which is according to the actual pronunciation.


tonyspeed SaaHib, if I am not mistaken, "darvaazah" was suggested in place of "darvaazaa" because the thread under discussion "to look forward to" was under the banner of Urdu. For this reason it made sense to point out that in Urdu the word is "darvaazah" for the benefit of an Urdu learner, namely ihsaan jii. 

Secondly, I think this has been mentioned before. Though it may not be totally explicit, the language that we discuss at least from the perspective of Urdu is the standard written language and not the spoken colloquial one, unless of course this is clearly stated. A number of Urdu speakers try to use a transliteration scheme that closely follows the written scheme. In Urdu, the word is written as "darvaazah" because in its original Persian, it is "darvaazah".

Is the final h aspiration pronounced in Urdu words? Well in some instances almost invariably and in others probably only by very careful speakers. There are equivalent Indic words such as gyaarah, baarah, terah... etc which I believe are pronounced with an aspiration by most average to good speakers of Urdu and Hindi. Words ending in "-aah", like Allaah, baadshaah, panaah, chaah are also pronounced. Urdu poetry gives an allowance for shortening this vowel for metrical reasons and therefore we find words such as "rah, gunah, mah, gah etc" where once again the h is pronounced. Then there is the category of words such as vajh, fatH etc where the h is pronounced even when they are pronounced as "vajah, fataH etc.

Finally words such as mazah, bandah, aa'indah, xamyaazah into which darvaazah also falls are normally pronounced as maza, banda, aa'inda, xamyaaza and darvaaza NOT......darvaazaa! If you pronounce "darvaazah", you will surely notice that the first vowel is long and the second is short. 

I hope this has shed some light on the question


----------



## marrish

tonyspeed said:


> In another thread it was pointed out that in Urdu the word for day is darvaazah as opposed to Hindi darvaazaa.


I agree with the elaboration QP SaaHib has provided for this topic, and it was indeed a case of being correct in an Urdu thread. 

Urdu word for ''day'' is _darvaazah_? No, it is _roz, din, yaum_.


----------



## tonyspeed

QURESHPOR said:


> Finally words such as mazah, bandah, aa'indah, xamyaazah into which darvaazah also falls are normally pronounced as maza, banda, aa'inda, xamyaaza and darvaaza NOT......darvaazaa! If you pronounce "darvaazah", you will surely notice that the first vowel is long and the second is short.
> 
> I hope this has shed some light on the question




So once again another word where the pronunciation is different. In Hindi darvaazaa and Urdu darvaaza (spelled darvaazah).

I'm trying to make sense of how the words were transcribed into Hindi. The confusing part is the word is vajah in Hindi (often pronounced vajaah, or colloquially vaje) where as in Urdu it is written as vajh but pronounced vajaah as well. Confusing.


----------



## marrish

tonyspeed said:


> So once again another word where the pronunciation is different. In Hindi darvaazaa and Urdu darvaaza (spelled darvaazah).
> 
> I'm trying to make sense of how the words were transcribed into Hindi. The confusing part is the word is vajah in Hindi (often pronounced vajaah, or colloquially vaje) where as in Urdu it is written as vajh but pronounced vajaah as well. Confusing.


Indeed, the final vowel in ´_darvaazah_´ is not of the same length as the one that follows ´z´.

It may be confusing but Urdu is not responsible for other languages adopting a different method of transcription according to their pronunciation. I believe Hindi writes its words as they are spoken in Hindi so everything is allright.

Yes, you are right, ''reason'' is written as _vajh وجہ_ in Urdu and spoken so in the standard language, however the pronunciation is frequently easied to _vajah_. Still, _vaj*aa*h_ is unknown to me in Urdu, this as a piece of information.


----------



## tonyspeed

marrish said:


> Yes, you are right, ''reason'' is written as _vajh وجہ_ in Urdu and spoken so in the standard language, however the pronunciation is frequently easied to _vajah_. Still, _vaj*aa*h_ is unknown to me in Urdu, this as a piece of information.



_is jaankaarii se sar meN dard aa paRaa.._

Hindi: vajeh, vajaah, vajah?
Urdu: vajh, vajah
_
yakiin hai ki yih jaankaarii kisii_ dictionary _meN nahiiN hogii.._


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> _is jaankaarii se sar meN dard aa paRaa.._
> 
> Hindi: vajeh, vajaah, vajah?
> Urdu: vajh, vajah
> _
> yakiin hai ki yih jaankaarii kisii_ dictionary _meN nahiiN hogii.._


mujhe yaqiin nahiiN aa rahaa kih aap ko yaqiin kyoN nahiiN aa rahaa!

vajh/vajah >>> vajeh, pronounced in the same manner as jageh by some people. 

vajh, subH >>> vajah, subah....this is same as sharm, vazn >>> sharam, vazan

in chhoTii chhotii baatoN se apne aap par bojh mat Daaliye, janaab!


----------



## greatbear

vajah/vajeh, subah/subeh in Hindi. I have never heard a "vajaah" in my life, in Hindi or Urdu.


----------



## tonyspeed

greatbear said:


> vajah/vajeh, subah/subeh in Hindi. I have never heard a "vajaah" in my life, in Hindi or Urdu.


     I have heard it many many times, especially in movies.  Colloquial Hindi by Tej Bhaatia says when the proceeding vowel is unstressed , the ह is dropped but the vowel becomes long,  as in vajah but pronounced vajaa, tarah but pronounced taraa. P. 58

Does anyone have a link to the two standard tips of urdu pronunciations of vajh, jagh, or tarh?


----------



## greatbear

^ Now that you mention movies, I confess to have heard "vajaa(h)" and the like in TV programmes and films; I used to associate it somehow with Punjabi-influence pronunciation till now.


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> I have heard it many many times, especially in movies. Colloquial Hindi by Tej Bhaatia says when the proceeding vowel is unstressed , the ह is dropped but the vowel becomes long, as in vajah but pronounced vajaa, tarah but pronounced taraa. P. 58
> 
> Does anyone have a link to the two standard tips of urdu pronunciations of vajh, jagh, or tarh?


This is never "jagh" in Urdu. Always with an intervening vowel, as "jagah".


----------



## Alfaaz

tonyspeed said:
			
		

> _is jaankaarii se sar meN dard aa paRaa.._


_dard-e-sar (aur shaayad maعlumaat) meiN izaafah karne ke liye_, one could also point out the difference between *w*ajh/_*w*_azn and *v*ajh/_*v*_azn!  (Arabic derived Urdu words seem to be pronounced by many (naturally...probably not intentionally) with more of a rounded w sound rather than a sharp v sound. This would of course vary from person to person.)



			
				tonyspeed said:
			
		

> Does anyone have a link to the two standard tips of urdu pronunciations of vajh, jagh, or tarh?


Hopefully these should work for now, YT (for wajh): 
Faiz: RAAT YUN DIL MAIN TERI KHOYEE HUI YAAD AYEE FAIZ AHMED FAIZ
Zia Mohai-ud-deen: Faiz Ahmad Faiz-Raat yun dil mein teri شعر و نغمه Jafri Archives


----------



## tonyspeed

Alfaaz said:


> _dard-e-sar (aur shaayad maعlumaat) meiN izaafah karne ke liye_, one could also point out the difference between *w*ajh/_*w*_azn and *v*ajh/_*v*_azn!  (Arabic derived Urdu words seem to be pronounced by many (naturally...probably not intentionally) with more of a rounded w sound rather than a sharp v sound. This would of course vary from person to person.)
> Hopefully these should work for now, YT (for wajh):
> Faiz: RAAT YUN DIL MAIN TERI KHOYEE HUI YAAD AYEE FAIZ AHMED FAIZ
> Zia Mohai-ud-deen: Faiz Ahmad Faiz-Raat yun dil mein teri شعر و نغمه Jafri Archives




The links are very interesting. In the first he says "vajèhè" where "è" is the short-è sound seen in the pronunciation of words like mahal.
In the second he says "vajèh", where 'è' represents the short-è sound as well. 

That being said, it would seem that the Hindi pronounciation of vajeh is the closest to the Urdu vajèh and vajèhè, but è has become e (é).
This makes me wonder if I  have been mis-hearing vajèh as vajeh for some Hindi speakers.


----------



## Qureshpor

I am not sure whether you listened to the correct link. Here is the poet himself in this short clip on Youtube. Just copy paste this on YT.

RAAT YUN DIL MAIN TERI KHOYEE HUI YAAD AYEE FAIZ AHMED FAIZ


----------



## Alfaaz

The difference between tarH(a) and tarhe/jagah and jageh will probably be clearer. I can send links by PM to tonyspeed SaaHib and anyone else interested.


----------



## tonyspeed

QURESHPOR said:


> I am not sure whether you listened to the correct link. Here is the poet himself in this short clip on Youtube. Just copy paste this on YT.
> 
> RAAT YUN DIL MAIN TERI KHOYEE HUI YAAD AYEE FAIZ AHMED FAIZ




Yes, I am distinctly hearing him say "vajèhè" in that link at around 00:22.


----------



## Qureshpor

tonyspeed said:


> Yes, I am distinctly hearing him say "vajèhè" in that link at around 00:22.


We are then hearing different things. I am hearing him say "vajh". After the "h", there is a natural expulsion of air giving the effect/impression of an a being pronounced. The same can be said about "sharm" where there is a slight a sound, a semi a if you will.


----------



## tonyspeed

QURESHPOR said:


> We are then hearing different things. I am hearing him say "vajh". After the "h", there is a natural expulsion of air giving the effect/impression of an a being pronounced. The same can be said about "sharm" where there is a slight a sound, a semi a if you will.



Well, if you want to distinguish between the è in mahal and the multiple è sounds I am hearing vajèhè, then, yes, it is shorter, but nonetheless sounds like a è to my ears (as far as the actual sound, ignoring the duration), as opposed to an 'a'.  I am not hearing the absence of a vowel sound. There is some kind of vowel sound both before and after the H. vaj-(small vowel-)h(-small vowel)


----------



## marrish

I didn't hear any vowel between [j] and  in the provided references, which are superb, by the way.


----------



## Qureshpor

A number of Urdu words with a final "-ah" as in mazah, darvaazah...end up having a long vowel in Hindi system of writing. I don't know if many people know but the Urdu word "parvaa" (care) ends up having an "h" added in Hindi!!


----------



## greatbear

^ So much so that someone speaking "parvaa" would be considered by me and many others to be speaking a very bad and maybe south Indian-influenced Hindi 

As a Kannadiga would say, "parvaa illaa"!


----------



## marrish

greatbear said:


> ^ So much so that someone speaking "parvaa" would be considered by me and many others to be speaking a very bad and maybe south Indian-influenced Hindi
> 
> As a Kannadiga would say, "parvaa illaa"!


That's ironic twist of fate!


----------



## Dib

Qureshpor said:


> A number of Urdu words with a final "-ah" as in mazah, darvaazah...end up having a long vowel in Hindi system of writing.



Seeing mazah and darvaazah side-by-side gave me some ideas that I couldn't resist checking out. Hence reviving this old thread. Remember that "canonical" Urdu/Hindi short a and long aa do not differ only in length, but also in quality. That is, simply stretching short a won't sound like a long aa, and vice versa. Keeping this in mind, my question about the *standard Urdu* pronunciation:
1) Do the two vowels in mazah have the same vowel quality and quantity (i.e. length)? Please check what *sounds* the "good"/"proper" pronunciation to you, without referring to the spelling.
2) Do the first and last vowels of darvaazah have the same vowel quality and quantity?

In my opinion, in case of darvaazah, the first two vowels are the canonical short a and long aa, and hence agreed upon by Urdu and Hindi-daans. But the final vowel is really a phonetically short/shortened *unaccented* vowel with quality similar to the long "aa". It shares phonetic characteristics with both the first and second vowel in the word. That might be the reason why Urdu and Hindi experts here seem to have a difference of opinion, even though I doubt they have any actual difference in pronunciation. I feel, the difference is one of analysis.

The question of mazah is even more interesting to me. Because the accent is on the second syllable (at least in the usual Hindi pronunciation), I think there is no chance of such a 50-50 vowel in the second syllable here. So does standard Urdu pronunciation of mazah also have a short second vowel? Do you know of any metrical supporting evidence (of either or both short and long pronunciation)?


----------



## tarkshya

I will tell you how I speak and hear these words, and you can safely take that as the pronunciation an average North Indian "hindiphone" person. You can compare that with the experts and see how it sounds to them.

I speak the final vowel both in دروازہ and  مزہ as long /aa/. Accent is also over the final vowel in both cases. I typically do not differentiate between standard Hindi and standard Urdu pronunciation because I find that nothing but pandering to vested interests. Most differences in Hindi and Urdu pronunciation can be put down to geographical variations rather than any inherent quality of the language. After all pronunciation in Western Punjab and Eastern Bihar *will* differ because of the sheer geographical distance between them.


----------



## HZKhan

tarkshya said:


> I typically do not differentiate between standard Hindi and standard Urdu pronunciation because I find that nothing but pandering to vested interests. Most differences in Hindi and Urdu pronunciation can be put down to  geographical variations rather than any inherent quality of the  language.



I disagree.
For starters, Hindi speakers do not pronounce x, gh, and q.


----------



## tarkshya

tarkshya said:


> I will tell you how I speak and hear these words, and you can safely take that as the pronunciation an average North Indian "hindiphone" person. You can compare that with the experts and see how it sounds to them.
> 
> I speak the final vowel both in دروازہ and  مزہ as long /aa/. Accent is also over the final vowel in both cases. I typically do not differentiate between standard Hindi and standard Urdu pronunciation because I find that nothing but pandering to vested interests. Most differences in Hindi and Urdu pronunciation can be put down to geographical variations rather than any inherent quality of the language. After all pronunciation in Western Punjab and Eastern Bihar *will* differ because of the sheer geographical distance between them.



I would like to modify my own reply a little bit. I can't decide where the accent falls when I pronounce darwaazaa. Sometimes it is on "waa" syllable, and sometimes it is on "zaa". But I guess stress on "waa" is more common. Quality and length of the final vowel in both mazaa and darwaazaa is same for me.


----------



## gagun

greatbear said:


> ^ So much so that someone speaking "parvaa" would be considered by me and many others to be speaking a very bad and maybe south Indian-influenced Hindi
> 
> As a Kannadiga would say, "parvaa illaa"!



They might speak urdu thatswhy it is *parvaa* not parvah(wrong pronunciation).

Thank you


----------



## Dib

Dib said:


> The question of mazah is even more interesting to me. Because the accent is on the second syllable (at least in the usual Hindi pronunciation), I think there is no chance of such a 50-50 vowel in the second syllable here. So does standard Urdu pronunciation of mazah also have a short second vowel? Do you know of any metrical supporting evidence (of either or both short and long pronunciation)?



Since nobody commented on this, I tried to look around a bit myself. The first two instances of مزہ, I found, in the user-friendly Divan-e-Ghalib in wikisource seem to need a long vowel (either inherently or by position) in the second syllable to fit the meter:

Couplet 205-4:
دے مجھ کو شکایت کی اجازت کہ ستمگر
کچھ تجھ کو مزہ بھی مرے آزار میں آوے

Couplet 206-4:
بے طلب دیں تو مزہ اس میں سوا ملتا ہے
وہ گدا جس کو نہ ہو خوۓ سوال اچّھا ہے

My understanding of Urdu meters (and metrics in general) is rather shaky, so I am not trying to provide a detailed scansion, but I indicate in blue what I think fits into the same foot as مزہ in the other line.

If my metrical analysis is correct (*please indicate if you find any fault, or are confident that I am in fact right*), then مزہ here has to be pronounced as "mazaa" with a long second vowel. I suppose, in case of the first couplet a "mazah" with a final audible "h" following a short "a" would also fit the meter, but it can probably be safely ruled out, as that has never been the contention. Even if my analysis is correct, it only attests to the acceptance of the pronunciation "mazaa" with a long final "aa" in Urdu poetry. There may also exist an alternative with short a. My search was no way exhaustive enough to rule that out. But, I'd really love to see some such evidence if anybody comes across it.

---

Note: In A Desertful of Roses, the ghazal numbers are different - 173 & 174. I don't know why.


----------



## tonyspeed

Pakistani Khan said:


> I disagree.
> For starters, Hindi speakers do not pronounce x, gh, and q.




This only applies to reading. In colloquial Hindi, there are Hindi speakers that pronounce these consonants sometimes based on their knowledge of spoken Hindi. In a similar way, I am sure there are also Urdu speakers that do not pronounce these consonants all the time. 

The more you know, the more you realise it is all the same except for those who are prescriptivists and regard the script as the standard. Those are the ones that tend to widen the gap.

I am guessing that in this case too, the script-prescriptivists will say vajah in Hindi is always vajah and vajh in Urdu is always vajh, ignoring the common vajaa and vaje.


----------



## Sheikh_14

Qureshpor said:


> tonyspeed SaaHib, if I am not mistaken, "darvaazah" was suggested in place of "darvaazaa" because the thread under discussion "to look forward to" was under the banner of Urdu. For this reason it made sense to point out that in Urdu the word is "darvaazah" for the benefit of an Urdu learner, namely ihsaan jii.
> 
> Secondly, I think this has been mentioned before. Though it may not be totally explicit, the language that we discuss at least from the perspective of Urdu is the standard written language and not the spoken colloquial one, unless of course this is clearly stated. A number of Urdu speakers try to use a transliteration scheme that closely follows the written scheme. In Urdu, the word is written as "darvaazah" because in its original Persian, it is "darvaazah".
> 
> Is the final h aspiration pronounced in Urdu words? Well in some instances almost invariably and in others probably only by very careful speakers. There are equivalent Indic words such as gyaarah, baarah, terah... etc which I believe are pronounced with an aspiration by most average to good speakers of Urdu and Hindi. Words ending in "-aah", like Allaah, baadshaah, panaah, chaah are also pronounced. Urdu poetry gives an allowance for shortening this vowel for metrical reasons and therefore we find words such as "rah, gunah, mah, gah etc" where once again the h is pronounced. Then there is the category of words such as vajh, fatH etc where the h is pronounced even when they are pronounced as "vajah, fataH etc.
> 
> Finally words such as mazah, bandah, aa'indah, xamyaazah into which darvaazah also falls are normally pronounced as maza, banda, aa'inda, xamyaaza and darvaaza NOT......darvaazaa! If you pronounce "darvaazah", you will surely notice that the first vowel is long and the second is short.
> 
> I hope this has shed some light on the question


This was brilliantly insightful. In which case why does Urdu opt for the choTii he for countries i.e. Amreeka, Bartaaniya, itaaliya, Romaaniya and hispaaniya as opposed to an alif as used by both Persian and Arabic? Is it deliberately signaling that we opt for a softer a sound than Arabic. I do feel unknowingly or knowingly Urduphones do pronounce these terms with a less exaggerated a sound. For instance, Amreekaa is pronounced with a softer Amreeka-h.


----------



## aevynn

Dib said:


> In my opinion, in case of darvaazah, the first two vowels are the canonical short a and long aa, and hence agreed upon by Urdu and Hindi-daans. But the final vowel is really a phonetically short/shortened *unaccented* vowel with quality similar to the long "aa". It shares phonetic characteristics with both the first and second vowel in the word. That might be the reason why Urdu and Hindi experts here seem to have a difference of opinion, even though I doubt they have any actual difference in pronunciation. I feel, the difference is one of analysis.
> 
> The question of mazah is even more interesting to me. Because the accent is on the second syllable (at least in the usual Hindi pronunciation), I think there is no chance of such a 50-50 vowel in the second syllable here.


Another way in which the orthography is not completely phonemic (ie, besides the fact that pronunciations of _darvaazah_ and _mazah_ differ in accent) has to do with etymology. Indo-Aryan words with (what I hear to be) the same "50-50 vowel" as in _darvaazah_ (eg, _ghoRaa_, _sannaaTaa_, _bhaaRaa_, _(sair-)sapaaTaa_, ...) are typically spelled with an _alif_ rather than a _gol he_.

And on that note, here's a poem by Mir Taqi Mir which rhymes رستہ ("path") with بستا ("reside"):

do taraf se thaa kuttoN kaa rastah​kaash jangal meN jaake maiN bastaa​


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

My understanding is that, when a Hindi/Urdu pair has a final -ह in Devanagari, that means tha there is an actiual /ɦ/ sound in the word, rather than a transformed or somewhat elongated _-a(h)_  sound. For example:



जगह​جگہ​_jagah, not jaga(h)_​"site"​गिरह​گِرہ​_girah, not gira(h)_​"knot"​तरह​طَرَح​_taraH, not tara(h)_​"manera"​सुबह​صُبح​_SubaH, not Suba(h)_​"dawn"​


Is my perception correct?

Still, even if my above "rule" is true, are the -teen numbers an exception?
In any video and clip I hear, whether in Hindi or in Urdu, I can't really detect any final  _-h_ sound in:



ग्यारह​گیارہ​_gyaara(h)_​बारह​بارہ​_baara(h)_​तेरह​تیرہ​_tera(h)_​चौदह​چودہ​_chauda(h)_​पंद्रह​پندرہ​_paNdra(h)_​सोलह​سولہ​_sola(h)_​सत्रह​سترہ​_satra(h)_​अठारह​اَٹھارَہ​_aThaara(h)_​


but just a final _-aa_ instead. And this coming even from Hindi speakers accustomed to talk in a didactic, writing-driven way.

So, is my perception also correct, that -teen numbers are an exception to the above "rule"?


----------



## Qureshpor

^ In all the above words, the ہ or ح, as far as Urdu is concerned, is a constituent part of the word. Whether anyone cares to pronounse this sound or not is another matter.


----------



## aevynn

Qureshpor said:


> I don't know if many people know but the Urdu word "parvaa" (care) ends up having an "h" added in Hindi!!


ibn-e-Safii kii "xaufnaak 3imaarat" ke 11veN pej se:


----------



## Qureshpor

aevynn said:


> ibn-e-Safii kii "xaufnaak 3imaarat" ke 11veN pej se:
> View attachment 67689


Thank you for responding in "capitals" aevynn SaaHib but in Urdu too, those who are not in the know, also commit the same error! This includes the rekhta.org people.

نہ ستائش کی تمنّا نہ صلے کی پروا
گر نہیں ہیں مرے اشعار میں معنی نہ سہی

غالب

زخم پر چھڑکیں کہاں طفلانِ بے پروا نمک
کیا مزا ہوتا، اگر پتھر میں بھی ہوتا نمک

غالب


----------



## Qureshpor

aevynn said:


> Another way in which the orthography is not completely phonemic (ie, besides the fact that pronunciations of _darvaazah_ and _mazah_ differ in accent) has to do with etymology. Indo-Aryan words with (what I hear to be) the same "50-50 vowel" as in _darvaazah_ (eg, _ghoRaa_, _sannaaTaa_, _bhaaRaa_, _(sair-)sapaaTaa_, ...) are typically spelled with an _alif_ rather than a _gol he_.
> 
> And on that note, here's a poem by Mir Taqi Mir which rhymes رستہ ("path") with بستا ("reside"):
> 
> do taraf se thaa kuttoN kaa rastah​kaash jangal meN jaake maiN bastaa​


The reason why -ah and -aa are allowed to rhyme is because in terms of metrical length, they are equivalent.


----------



## aevynn

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> My understanding is that, when a Hindi/Urdu pair has a final -ह in Devanagari, that means tha there is an actiual /ɦ/ sound in the word, rather than a transformed or somewhat elongated _-a(h)_ sound. For example:
> 
> 
> 
> जगह​جگہ​_jagah, not jaga(h)_​"site"​गिरह​گِرہ​_girah, not gira(h)_​"knot"​तरह​طَرَح​_taraH, not tara(h)_​"manera"​सुबह​صُبح​_SubaH, not Suba(h)_​"dawn"​
> 
> 
> Is my perception correct?
> 
> Still, even if my above "rule" is true, are the -teen numbers an exception?
> In any video and clip I hear, whether in Hindi or in Urdu, I can't really detect any final _-h_ sound in:
> 
> 
> 
> ग्यारह​گیارہ​_gyaara(h)_​बारह​بارہ​_baara(h)_​तेरह​تیرہ​_tera(h)_​चौदह​چودہ​_chauda(h)_​पंद्रह​پندرہ​_paNdra(h)_​सोलह​سولہ​_sola(h)_​सत्रह​سترہ​_satra(h)_​अठारह​اَٹھارَہ​_aThaara(h)_​
> 
> 
> but just a final _-aa_ instead. And this coming even from Hindi speakers accustomed to talk in a didactic, writing-driven way.
> 
> So, is my perception also correct, that -teen numbers are an exception to the above "rule"?


@MonsieurGonzalito: I don't think your "rule" is really a hard-and-fast rule, and people do sometimes (in my circles, often!) pronounce even those words which are spelled with a final ह in Devanagari with a final "aa" sound, both the teen numbers and the others. Nabeel Shaukat Ali's "Bewajah" came up on shuffle for me today, and the repetition of the word "wajah" in a Coke Studio song reminded me of you and your post in this thread (I'm confident you've already heard this song! ). More specifically, consider the following (non-consecutive) lines from this song:

hijr-e-yaaraaN na(h) sataa be_wajah
ban gayaa tuu kyuuN wajah be_wajah
chal paRaa karne ye(h) wafaa be_wajah
baat ai dil na(h) baRhaa be_wajah
chal paRaa zikr teraa be_wajah
DhuunDtaa kyuuN hai wajah be_wajah

These are _all_ of the distinct lines from the song that end in the word "be_wajah," so it seems evident to me that the intention was for the colored words to act as a qaafiyA with "be_wajah" serving as a radiif (I know it's not a ghazal, but this terminology seems appropriate anyway). In other words, the word "wajah," which is spelled as I've transliterated in both scripts (वजह / وجہ), has been made to rhyme with several other words that are transcribed with a terminal "aa" grapheme in both scripts. This rhyming sounds quite natural to me.


----------



## Qureshpor

aevynn said:


> @MonsieurGonzalito: I don't think your "rule" is really a hard-and-fast rule, and people do sometimes (in my circles, often!) pronounce even those words which are spelled with a final ह in Devanagari with a final "aa" sound, both the teen numbers and the others. Nabeel Shaukat Ali's "Bewajah" came up on shuffle for me today, and the repetition of the word "wajah" in a Coke Studio song reminded me of you and your post in this thread (I'm confident you've already heard this song! ). More specifically, consider the following (non-consecutive) lines from this song:
> 
> hijr-e-yaaraaN na(h) sataa be_wajah
> ban gayaa tuu kyuuN wajah be_wajah
> chal paRaa karne ye(h) wafaa be_wajah
> baat ai dil na(h) baRhaa be_wajah
> chal paRaa zikr teraa be_wajah
> DhuunDtaa kyuuN hai wajah be_wajah
> 
> These are _all_ of the distinct lines from the song that end in the word "be_wajah," so it seems evident to me that the intention was for the colored words to act as a qaafiyA with "be_wajah" serving as a radiif (I know it's not a ghazal, but this terminology seems appropriate anyway). In other words, the word "wajah," which is spelled as I've transliterated in both scripts (वजह / وجہ), has been made to rhyme with several other words that are transcribed with a terminal "aa" grapheme in both scripts. This rhyming sounds quite natural to me.


As stated in an earlier poetry, a word ending in -ah (as in mazah) is considered to be of equal "vazn" as a word ending in -aa (as in davaa). In a Ghazal مزہ would be written as مزا to look aesthetically the same throughout the Ghazal. An example of this is the Ghalib Ghazal begining with the line (the matla3)..

kahte ho nah deN ge ham, dil agar پڑا paayaa
dil kahaaN kih gum kiije? ham ne مدّعا paayaa

3ishq se tabii3at ne ziist kaa مزا paayaa
dard kii davaa paa'ii, dard-i-be دوا paaya

In case of "vajah", the word infact is vajh, as in Faiz's..

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

* raat ko

You can hear Faiz reciting this in a Youtube video with the pronunciation "be-vajh". Although poets have license (poetic license) over some matters, I don't know if Nabeel Shaukat Ali's nazm would pass or not even with such a license.


----------



## Qureshpor

Qureshpor said:


> ^ In all the above words, the ہ or ح, as far as Urdu is concerned, is a constituent part of the word. Whether anyone cares to pronounse this sound or not is another matter.


3aashiq-i-Ghayuur jii de aur us taraf nah dekhe
vuh aaNkh jo chhupaa de to tuu bhii Tuk chhup*aa rah*

pahuNcheN ge aage dekheN kis darjah ko abhii to
us maah-i-chaardah kaa sin das hai yaa kih b*aarah*

mustazhir-i-muHabbat thaa koh-kan vagarnah
yih bojh kis se uThtaa ek aur ek gy*aarah*


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Qureshpor said:


> jaise saHraa'oN meN haule se chale baad-i-nasiim
> jaise biimaar ko *be-vajh* qaraar aa jaa'e



Nayara Noor, probably from the series "Dhoop KInaray",  says /be-ʋədʒɦ*a*/  [example Youtube:  C1YzXI9f4CQ at 0:58]. I didn't know it was possible to have final, short "a's".

Asha Boshle, in the Bollywood movie "Janwar", says /be-ʋədʒ*ɑː*/ (long a, no /ɦ/) [example Youtube: aTABMDqn2No at 0:40]

Faiz, reciting himself, as in [example Youtube: 4hBQXboL3sA at 0:18] purposedly says  /be-ʋədʒ*əɦ*/

So I guess there is lassitude ...


----------



## Qureshpor

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> Nayara Noor, probably from the series "Dhoop KInaray",  says /be-ʋədʒɦ*a*/  [example Youtube:  C1YzXI9f4CQ at 0:58]. I didn't know it was possible to have final, short "a's".
> 
> Asha Boshle, in the Bollywood movie "Janwar", says /be-ʋədʒ*ɑː*/ (long a, no /ɦ/) [example Youtube: aTABMDqn2No at 0:40]
> 
> Faiz, reciting himself, as in [example Youtube: 4hBQXboL3sA at 0:18] purposedly says  /be-ʋədʒ*əɦ*/
> 
> So I guess there is *lassitude* ...


No, I suspect the two ladies may not know that the word is vajh and not vajah.


----------



## aevynn

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> So I guess there is lassitude ...






MonsieurGonzalito said:


> Nayara Noor... says /be-ʋədʒɦa/... I didn't know it was possible to have final, short "a's".


My preference here is to analyze the phonemes as /ʋədʒɦaː/ and then apply the stress analysis that @Dib jii offered in post #24 above.

More precisely, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒɦaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋədʒ.ɦaː/, and then we have two syllables of equal moraic weight, so the first one gets stressed and we obtain /'ʋədʒ.ɦaː/. In contrast, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋə.dʒaː/ and then the second syllable has greater moraic weight, so it gets stressed and we obtain /ʋə'dʒaː/. (Both of these realizations are quite common in day-to-day speech.)

@Dib jii's analysis avoids creating extra phonemes and also avoids complicating phonotactic constraints. I think it's very neat and parsimonious 



Qureshpor said:


> In a Ghazal مزہ would be written as مزا to look aesthetically the same throughout the Ghazal. An example of this is the Ghalib Ghazal begining with the line (the matla3)..
> 
> kahte ho nah deN ge ham, dil agar پڑا paayaa
> dil kahaaN kih gum kiije? ham ne مدّعا paayaa
> 
> 3ishq se tabii3at ne ziist kaa مزا paayaa
> dard kii davaa paa'ii, dard-i-be دوا paaya


Thank you for sharing this nice example, Qureshpor jii!



Qureshpor said:


> I don't know if Nabeel Shaukat Ali's nazm would pass or not even with such a license.





Qureshpor said:


> I suspect the two ladies may not know that the word is vajh and not vajah.


My humble opinion is that Faiz is as great an authority on the language as is Nabeel Shaukat Ali, or Nayara Noor, or Asha Bhosle, or even a completely illterate villager who speaks the language day-to-day but has never studied poetry. Faiz may have written this particular poem with the phonemic analysis /ʋədʒɦ/ in mind, but, as I see it, the word وجہ वजह does not belong to Faiz alone.


----------



## Qureshpor

aevynn said:


> My preference here is to analyze the phonemes as /ʋədʒɦaː/ and then apply the stress analysis that @Dib jii offered in post #24 above.
> 
> More precisely, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒɦaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋədʒ.ɦaː/, and then we have two syllables of equal moraic weight, so the first one gets stressed and we obtain /'ʋədʒ.ɦaː/. In contrast, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋə.dʒaː/ and then the second syllable has greater moraic weight, so it gets stressed and we obtain /ʋə'dʒaː/. (Both of these realizations are quite common in day-to-day speech.)
> 
> @Dib jii's analysis avoids creating extra phonemes and also avoids complicating phonotactic constraints. I think it's very neat and parsimonious
> 
> 
> Thank you for sharing this nice example, Qureshpor jii!
> 
> 
> 
> My humble opinion is that Faiz is as great an authority on the language as is Nabeel Shaukat Ali, or Nayara Noor, or Asha Bhosle, or even a completely illterate villager who speaks the language day-to-day but has never studied poetry. Faiz may have written this particular poem with the phonemic analysis /ʋədʒɦ/ in mind, but, as I see it, the word وجہ वजह does not belong to Faiz alone.


I don’t quite follow this. Please elaborate if you can.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

aevynn said:


> More precisely, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒɦaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋədʒ.ɦaː/, and then we have two syllables of equal moraic weight, so the first one gets stressed and we obtain /'ʋədʒ.ɦaː/. In contrast, the phoneme sequence /ʋədʒaː/ would be syllabified as /ʋə.dʒaː/ and then the second syllable has greater moraic weight, so it gets stressed and we obtain /ʋə'dʒaː/. (Both of these realizations are quite common in day-to-day speech.)



I don't know how many of the internal stresses in a verse have to match, in order to make an Urdu poem acceptable. But one would think that at least the last one on an hemistich should.
It that is true (I have no idea), then to Qureshpoor jii's point, "_bevaja(h)"_, at least in the poem in question,  should match the stress of "_meN haule"._



jaisesaHraaoNmeNhaulejaisebiimaarkobevaja(h)


----------



## aevynn

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> jaisesaHraaoNmeNhaulejaisebiimaarkobevaja(h)


Analysis in terms of the rules of Urdu poetic meter is not quite the same as a linguistic phonemic analysis, but I believe your metrical analysis is incorrect by the standards of Urdu poetic meter. I think in Urdu poetic meter, "maar" is broken up into two units: maa (long) and r (short).

Also, it maybe doesn't make sense to compare the 3rd and 4th lines, since I think it is rather the 2nd and 4th lines (ie, the ones that rhyme) that match in meter:



jaiseviiraanemeNchup*ke**se*bahaaraajaa'ejaisebiimaarkobe*waj**h*qaraaraajaa'e


Interestingly... It seems like the two metrical units of the word وجہ are matching against "ke se" in the 2nd line. Based on what I've managed to understand from Pritchett and Khaliq's book, "ke se" could both be "flexible syllables." This means that the two lines would match in meter not only if وجہ is analyzed as "waj.h" (as above, which, as @Qureshpor jii informs us, is what Faiz likely intended), but also if it were analyzed as "waj.haa" (as Nayara Noor sings) or "wa.jaa" (as Asha Bhosle sings)! 

But I'm not confident about Urdu poetic meter, so hopefully someone more knowledgeable than me can corroborate.


----------

