IT seems that many things are frozen in time and they have not changed for centuries, neither will they. One such thing is Urdu grammar and the terms used by grammarians of Urdu.

One of the most popular and authentic books on Urdu grammar is named Qavaid-i-Urdu. Written by Baba-i-Urdu Moulvi Abdul Haq, the book was first published in 1914 and has been reprinted for the umpteenth time. Another very good book on Urdu grammar is Misbah-ul-Qavaid. Written in 1904 in two parts by Fateh Muhammad Khan Jalandhari, the book has a very lucid style. But a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then.

With all the respect and awe that these grandees inspire, what perturbs one is that every new book written on Urdu grammar uses the same centuries-old terms. The problem is terms used in Urdu grammar were initially borrowed from Persian and Arabic. Some of the early books on Urdu grammar gave the literal translations of the definitions taken from books on Arabic and/or Persian grammar. In some cases, the examples were translated literally and even the names, such as Zaid and Bakr, were not changed.

This creates two problems: Arabic is a Semitic language while both Urdu and Persian belong to Indo-European family of languages. The syntax of Arabic is much different and some examples translated verbatim do not apply completely to Urdu. Secondly, some terms might at times mean a slightly different thing. For example, in almost every book on Urdu grammar two different terms are used for ‘adjective’ and an adjective is alternatively called ‘sifat’ and ‘ism-i-sifat’. At the same time these books define a noun as ‘ism’, confusing the readers about a word if it is a noun or an adjective.

Some issues surface because of the fact that in Urdu all the parts of speech are divided into just three parts: ‘ism’ (noun), ‘f’eal’ (verb) and ‘harf’ (a class of words that includes some parts of speech). This is the way it is done in Arabic. But English has eight parts of speech, clearly defining each part. Modern-day grammarians of Persian have deviated from the past and now Persian grammar is written in a way quite different from Arabic, using different terms.

Another problem is that an infinitive is rarely sufficiently described in an Urdu book and readers are confused if a word is an infinitive (masdar) or verb (f’eal) because these books define an infinitive exactly as some Arabic books do. What complicates things is the fact that verbs are not formed in Urdu the way they are conjugated in Arabic, but Urdu books define declension and infinitives the way they are derived in Arabic, creating confusion.

The reason for following the Arabic and Persian was that Arabic was and is our religious language while Persian was not only the official language in certain eras in our history, but also the language of our cultural endeavours. This preference for Persian was not limited to aristocracy or some developed urban centres such as Delhi, but literate persons commonly used Persian even in areas like South Punjab and interiors of Sindh in their everyday lives. A scholar from Saraiki belt informed this wrier that writing personal letters in Persian was quite common in the Saraiki-speaking areas in the pre-independence era and even after the creation of Pakistan this practice of writing personal letters in Persian was in vogue for quite some time.

To teach children this preferred language, a number of books on Persian grammar were written in the Indo-Pak subcontinent, both in Persian and Urdu. An Urdu book was written by Moulvi Nazeer Ahmed Dehlvi, who is commonly referred to as ‘Deputy’ Nazeer Ahmed. The booklet titled Risala-i-Qavaid-i-Farsi Mausoom Ba Sarf-i-Sagheer was first published in 1870. Its second edition appeared in 1892. Now Lahore’s Majlis-i-Taraqqi-i-Adab has come up with a new, revised edition, which is based on the 1892 edition. Prof Dr Tehseen Firaqi has corrected the typos and added some very useful and enlightening footnotes, taking full advantage of his deep study of and exposure to Persian language and literature.

Firaqi in his intro has mentioned that Nazeer Ahmed (1830-1912) was one of the most prominent of writers and scholars of his times. He knew Arabic, Persian and English as well. For children, too, Nazeer Ahmed penned some books. This booklet on Persian grammar written in Urdu was intended for children. Nazeer Ahmed has made this book interesting and readable, though the books on grammar are usually dry and drab, adds Firaqi.

While mentioning some popular books on Persian grammar written in Iran in recent times, Firaqi has specifically pointed out what changes have been made in writing modern Persian grammar. His intro and footnotes have increased the value of the book manifold.

What we need to do is to follow the modern grammarians and use new terms, dividing parts of speech into eight parts instead of three. A book on new, modern Urdu grammar is badly needed.

drraufparekh@yahoo.com

Published in Dawn, January 20th, 2020