Talk:مہرہ

Rv

Hi @Ash wki, I hope you're well.

Any particular reason for the revert? نعم البدل (talk) 07:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

You're removing the actual pronunciation which is misleading. Words with ہ (h) in the medial position have a different pronunciation than the standard one(s). The standard ones are a spelling-accurate pronunciation (e.g. مُہْرَہ (muhrā) or مِہَندی (mihandī)) and an altered one (only in case of zer and pesh) widening the vowels (mohrā and mehandī). But the actual pronunciation widens the vowels further: môhrā and mêhêndī. All of them needs to be shown appropriately. - Ash wki (talk) 12:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, by God's grace, I'm good. Thanks. Hope you're great too. Ash wki (talk) 12:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ash wki: Sorry, are you referring to the transliteration as well or specficially the pronunciation? You reverted the transliteration, hence why I had an issue. If it's just the pronunciation then the current IPA, includes both the broad and narrow transcriptions (the latter to represent the actual majhool pronunciation)? نعم البدل (talk) 14:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm talking about both. The transliteration should include the 2nd variant (i.e. mohrā) as well because it's standard as evidenced by the Hindi equivalent मोहरा (mohrā). Ash wki (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ash wki: The Hindi and Urdu transliteration standards aren't exactly the same. They're as similar as they can be, but you can't change the spelling of the lemmas or how they're perceived. mohrā would imply that the Urdu lemma is written موہرا which isn't the case. The IPA and transliteration have to be based on the Urdu lemma, not the Hindi lemma, because it's the Urdu lemma being discussed. نعم البدل (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, majhool vowels aren't actually prolonged. It should be [moɦ.ɾɑː], not [moːɦ.ɾɑː]. Same goes for مِہِنْدی (mihindī). نعم البدل (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Who is talking about spelling? We are talking about pronunciation and transliteration. The Hindi spellings are based on prevalent age-old Hindustani/Hindvi/Rekhta pronunciation of the words. There is no separate Hindi and Urdu language. Both are registers of one language. Urdu is NOT Persian or Arabic. It has its own ways of pronunciation. For example, the name علوی. In Arabic, it's pronounced alawī. In Persian, it's alavī but in Urdu it's alvī. - Ash wki (talk) 20:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ash wki:

• We are talking about pronunciation and transliteration – Both of which are separate things. The transliteration standard used for Urdu is a mix of pronunciation and literal transliteration. One that resembles the pronunciation, without completely compromising on the spelling. Refer to the Standard for Urdu romanization thread, as well the discussion above that thread (which I'm not able to link) to sort of understand the standard that was agreed upon.
• Btw, Module:ur-translit was developed by User:Sameerhameedy not me.
• The Hindi spellings are based on prevalent age-old Hindustani/Hindvi/Rekhta pronunciation of the words. There is no separate Hindi and Urdu language. – I really don't get what point you're trying to get across. It's pretty clear that Hindi and Urdu spelling are not always the same. مُہْرَہ becomes मुह्रा when literally transliterated – and that was the transliteration generated by Module:ur-Arab-Deva. मुह्रा (muhrā) is not the same as मोहरा (mohrā). Hence, مُہْرَہ is not the same as मोहरा (not even mentioning the choti he) – that should be pretty obvious.
• Urdu is NOT Persian or Arabic. Do let me know if I ever make that point. However, that isn't to say the Urdu alphabet isn't the Perso-Arabic alphabet.
• In Arabic, it's pronounced alawī. In Persian, it's alavī but in Urdu it's alvī. – Again not really sure what point you're trying to make here. نعم البدل (talk) 22:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, try automatic transliteration for this بَیتُ الخَلاء. It's an Urdu word. I'll wait. You'll get all my points. You are very much treating Urdu as Arabic. And this: مُہْرَہ becomes मुह्रा when literally transliterated is a non-argument. It's an issue of Nagari script orthography, not Hindustani transliteration. If Hindi and Urdu weren't the same language, there wouldn't be a parameter for the Hindi script in Urdu headwords and vice versa.- Ash wki (talk) 20:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ash wki: Are you forgetting what script Urdu uses? Not Deonagri. Not sure why you're worrying about بَیت اَلْخَلاء (bait alxalā'). Words with the indefinite article can be transliterated easily. Any inconsistencies can be sorted out, I'm sure.

• If Hindi and Urdu weren't the same language, there wouldn't be a parameter for the Hindi script in Urdu headwords and vice versa – why is this related here? We're not discussing any other language, other than Urdu and Urdu spelling, and Urdu transliteration. I can assure you native Urdu speakers (ie. those who actually speak Urdu and can actually read Urdu) do not even think about Hindi, let alone wonder about the Hindi spelling. So you really need to start thinking about Urdu from an Urdu speaker's perspective, not a Hindi speaker's perspective. The Hindi/Urdu parameters are merely there for convenience, as a point of reference. The word بیت الخلاء has been transliterated into Hindi as बैत-उल-ख़ला, but I'll be damned if the common Hindi speaker actually knew what it meant.
• The spelling is m-u-h-r-a, not m-o-h-r-a. Learn to accept that languages change over time. The common spelling in Hindi may be मोहरा (mohrā), but in Urdu it's مُہْرَہ (muhra), and it always has been. A transliteration policy is in place, I'm not entirely happy with it, I've accepted it, as should you. نعم البدل (talk) 01:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)