Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Hindi/Urdu Profile

  Tags: Urdu | Hindi
 Language Learning Forum : Collaborative writing Post Reply
15 messages over 2 pages: 1
liddytime
Pentaglot
Senior Member
United States
mainlymagyar.wordpre
Joined 6047 days ago

693 posts - 1328 votes 
Speaks: English*, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Galician
Studies: Hungarian, Vietnamese, Modern Hebrew, Norwegian, Persian, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 9 of 15
21 May 2012 at 7:09pm | IP Logged 
LatinoBoy84 wrote:
I would love to see this added to the main page.

I strongly second this!
Hindi/Urdu needs to be on the main page. Professor Arguelles' post on Urdu is also excellent:
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?T ID=65&PN=1&TPN=1

( Sigh ... just another reminder of what underdogs the Indo-Aryan languages are ;-) ... )
2 persons have voted this message useful



zooplah
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
zooplah.farvista.net
Joined 6186 days ago

100 posts - 116 votes 
Speaks: English*, Esperanto
Studies: German

 
 Message 10 of 15
22 May 2013 at 11:36am | IP Logged 
NascentOne wrote:

TIME NEEDED
At least 1-2 years of dedicated study. It is still much easier than anything east Asian, with Hindi/Urdu at least having alphabets which do not require memorizing thousands of characters, and their grammars are vaguely similar to European grammars; some people have compared their grammars to being distant second cousins of their European counterparts.

So the difficulty rating here would probably be 4/5?
1 person has voted this message useful



liddytime
Pentaglot
Senior Member
United States
mainlymagyar.wordpre
Joined 6047 days ago

693 posts - 1328 votes 
Speaks: English*, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Galician
Studies: Hungarian, Vietnamese, Modern Hebrew, Norwegian, Persian, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 11 of 15
22 May 2013 at 3:23pm | IP Logged 
zooplah wrote:
NascentOne wrote:

TIME NEEDED
At least 1-2 years of dedicated study. It is still much easier than anything east Asian, with Hindi/Urdu at least having alphabets which do not require memorizing thousands of characters, and their grammars are vaguely similar to European grammars; some people have compared their grammars
to being distant second cousins of their European counterparts.

So the difficulty rating here would probably be 4/5?

Nah.. I would say it is more of a 2 or 3 out of 5. It's on par with German or Greek. The bulk of it is familiar to an Indo-European language speaker, but the cases, abugida and concepts of transitive/intransitive verbs make it a bit more challenging than, say Spanish or Italian. Certainly not a 4
anyhow!
1 person has voted this message useful



Talib
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6479 days ago

171 posts - 205 votes 
Speaks: English*, Arabic (classical)
Studies: Arabic (Egyptian)

 
 Message 12 of 15
22 May 2013 at 4:43pm | IP Logged 
liddytime wrote:
   
Nah.. I would say it is more of a 2 or 3 out of 5. It's on par with German or Greek. The bulk of it is familiar to an Indo-European language speaker, but the cases, abugida and concepts of transitive/intransitive verbs make it a bit more challenging than, say Spanish or Italian. Certainly not a 4
anyhow!


Thanks for the that. I am eagerly awaiting my TY Beginner's Hindi course to come, and I was under the false impression that Hindi/Urdu would be a 4 because of the retroflex consonants and the ornate Urdu script.

By the way, is the Hindi script easier than the Urdu script, and is the Hindi script written with the vowels?

Edited by Talib on 22 May 2013 at 4:44pm

1 person has voted this message useful



napoleon
Tetraglot
Senior Member
India
Joined 4834 days ago

543 posts - 874 votes 
Speaks: Bengali*, English, Hindi, Urdu
Studies: French, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 13 of 15
23 May 2013 at 3:41pm | IP Logged 
Talib wrote:
liddytime wrote:
   
Nah.. I would say it is more of a 2 or 3 out of 5. It's on par with German or Greek. The bulk of it is familiar to an Indo-European language speaker, but the cases, abugida and concepts of transitive/intransitive verbs make it a bit more challenging than, say Spanish or Italian. Certainly not a 4
anyhow!


Thanks for the that. I am eagerly awaiting my TY Beginner's Hindi course to come, and I was under the false impression that Hindi/Urdu would be a 4 because of the retroflex consonants and the ornate Urdu script.

By the way, is the Hindi script easier than the Urdu script, and is the Hindi script written with the vowels?

Difficulty is a relative thing, is it not?
Someone who already knows an indic script can pick up another indic script quite easily. Just as it is easy for someone to learn the urdu script if they already know the arabic script.
To answer the scond question, the devanagari script indicates vowels very clearly.
2 persons have voted this message useful



Medulin
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Croatia
Joined 4486 days ago

1199 posts - 2192 votes 
Speaks: Croatian*, English, Spanish, Portuguese
Studies: Norwegian, Hindi, Nepali

 
 Message 14 of 15
24 May 2013 at 9:42am | IP Logged 
napoleon wrote:

To answer the scond question, the devanagari script indicates vowels very clearly.


Except for the most common vowel: SWHA:

''
Schwa deletion in Hindi

Although the Devanagari script is used as a standard to write modern Hindi, the schwa ('ə') implicit in each consonant of the script is "obligatorily deleted" at the end of words and in certain other contexts, unlike in Sanskrit.[1] This phenomenon has been termed the "schwa syncope rule" or the "schwa deletion rule" of Hindi.[1][3] One formalization of this rule has been summarized as ə -> ø | VC_CV. In other words, when a schwa-succeeded consonant is followed by a vowel-succeeded consonant, the schwa inherent in the first consonant is deleted.[3][4] However, this formalization is inexact and incomplete (i.e. sometimes deletes a schwa when it shouldn't or, at other times, fails to delete it when it should), and can yield errors. The rule is reported to result in correct predictions on schwa deletion 89% of the time.[4] Schwa deletion is computationally important because it is essential to building text-to-speech software for Hindi.[4][5]

As a result of schwa syncope, the Hindi pronunciation of many words differs from that expected from a literal Sanskrit-style rendering of Devanagari. For instance, राम is Rām (not Rāma), रचना is Rachnā (not Rachanā), वेद is Véd (not Véda) and नमकीन is Namkeen (not Namakeen).[4][5] The name of the script itself is pronounced Devnāgrī (not Devanāgarī).[6]

Correct schwa deletion is also critical because, in some cases, the same Devanagari letter-sequence is pronounced two different ways in Hindi depending on context, and failure to delete the appropriate schwas can change the sense of the word.[7] For instance, the letter sequence 'रक' is pronounced differently in हरकत (har.kat, meaning movement or activity) and सरकना (sarak.na, meaning to slide). Similarly, the sequence धड़कने in दिल धड़कने लगा (the heart started beating) and in दिल की धड़कनें (beats of the heart) is identical prior to the nasalization in the second usage. Yet, it is pronounced dhadak.ne in the first and dhad.kane in the second.[7] While native speakers correctly pronounce the sequences differently in different contexts, non-native speakers and voice-synthesis software can make them "sound very unnatural", making it "extremely difficult for the listener" to grasp the intended meaning.[7]''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwa_deletion_in_Indo-Aryan_la nguages

[devnagri] is a perfect script for Sanskrit and Nepali (since shwa's are not reduced),
but it's not perfect for Hindustani. Even the name of actress Ranaut is problematic,
the wrong spelling Kangana is used instead of the correct Kangna. Were [devnagri]
perfect, her name wouldn't be pronounced (and Romanized) incorrectly, more often than not.
(She is Kangna and not Kangana).

Edited by Medulin on 24 May 2013 at 9:46am

4 persons have voted this message useful



linguaholic_ch
Triglot
Groupie
IndiaRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 4866 days ago

69 posts - 96 votes 
Speaks: English, Hindi, Bengali
Studies: Japanese, Esperanto, French

 
 Message 15 of 15
07 April 2014 at 7:50pm | IP Logged 


I believe in Hindi and other Indic languages too, a single letter like "g" is pronounced
as "ga" seperately (pronounced like u in but, that is schwa I presume). The schwa is
deleted only because I believe Hindi in its modern form has become more smooth and the
pronunciation has become more fluid. That is why people pronounce "Kangna" differently.
But Sanskrit required it. That is why a a sign (`) used to be used under each letter
which needed a schwa. Even Hindi and Bengali uses this sign but not much nowadays. Only
some pure Sanskrit words uses it today.


3 persons have voted this message useful



This discussion contains 15 messages over 2 pages: << Prev 1

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.3281 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.