Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
The asker opted for community grading. The question was closed on 2010-11-18 16:54:10 based on peer agreement (or, if there were too few peer comments, asker preference.)
English to Urdu translations [PRO] General / Conversation / Greetings / Letters
English term or phrase:ملک یا ملکٔ
Some times people Put a 'hamza' ٔ on ک. Is it permissble?
Explanation: To my knowledge, in Urdu, ک is written without the *humza/squiggly sign.
In Arabic, in Holy Quran when ک is written in full, whether in Indo-Pak script or Uthmani script, it has the squiggly sign on it. (This sign is not written when ک is followed by a joining letter, as in the second ک in the same phrase below.)
ذٰلِكَ الْڪِتٰبُ لَا رَيْبَ
To check the usage in today's Arabic, I put two simple Arabic words ذالک and تلک in a search engine and most entries showed the ک with the squiggly sign, but there was one entry I saw that didn't have it.
So, I think if someone is writing Urdu with the squiggle on ک, they're using their Arabic keyboard or are using Arabic script on purpose. I think if one has a choice, one shouldn't use the squiggle. If someone else is using it, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they know what letter it is, they're just being unnecessarily (if not inappropriately) stylish with it.
Perhaps there is some old Urdu script that does use the squiggle on the ک, I don't remember seeing one though.
*P.S. I'm not sure if that symbol on ک can be called a 'humza' as it looks different then a regular humza...a "squiggle" perhaps? If the symbol is indeed a different sign then 'humza' and people are adding a 'humza' on their ک, then that could be considered wrong.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2010-11-14 20:46:09 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Correction: In second last line, please read the first "then" as "than"...so it would read:
"If the symbol is indeed a different sign than 'humza' and ...."
Honestly, I was quite satisfied and happy with the answer that I got from Mr. Sajjad Nadeem. But later when I got the answer from Ms. Lone, I thought it to be comprehensive and complete.
I thank all the participants especially Ms. Lone and Mr. Nadeem
I just looked below, Quamrul Islam sahib has given a link to a document on Arabic script. I didn't get a chance to browse the full document but page 5 shows the different form of the Arabic ک. This is the link he gave: http://omega.enstb.org/yannis/pdf/arabic-simpli98.pdf
According to above, the symbol is not a humza, it's an orthographic sign. (I still prefer 'squiggle'). So, I'd say if a person uses an Urdu font that does not automatically give the squiggle like Ramesh Bhatt sahib's font does, and one adds a humza manually to get a similar look, that would be incorrect because that sign is not suppose to be a humza.
I also have Nafees Nastaleeq but I don't get that squiggle on ک. I used to have UNINASTALEEQ and that didn't show the squiggle on ک. None of my Urdu fonts do. (I think we should probably not call it a 'humza' as in Arabic too, the squiggle sign is not there to add any 'humza' sound to ک, it's just a symbol that comes along with the letter ک, when it occurs in its full form and looks a lot like humza). But I've never seen it in printed Urdu text; always in Arabic text.
It is just the Font style, in my view. Nafees Nastaleeq Font shows it when you type ک but it disappears soon after you type another letter joining ک. Other fonts have no such problem. And is there any Urdu word that can have ک with the Hamza sound in the end. I am not aware about that.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
7 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +1
ملک
Explanation: میرے خیال میں یہ انداز کتابت کا اختلاف ہے۔ اس کے لفظ کے معنی میں کوئی تبدیلی واقع نہیں ہوتی مگر ء والا ک استعمال کرنا عام روزمرہ کے معمول کی کتابت میں استعمال نہیں ہوتا۔ اب اس کے بنیادی اسلوب سے تو میں واقف نہیں ہوں مگر اس کی اجازت کسی حد تک دی جا سکتی ہے اگر ساری کی ساری تحریر اسی انداز میں ہو۔ بہرحال عام کتابت میں اس کا استعمال میرے مطابق موزوں نہیں ہے۔
Sajid Nadeem Pakistan Local time: 02:14 Works in field Native speaker of: Panjabi, Urdu
Explanation: To my knowledge, in Urdu, ک is written without the *humza/squiggly sign.
In Arabic, in Holy Quran when ک is written in full, whether in Indo-Pak script or Uthmani script, it has the squiggly sign on it. (This sign is not written when ک is followed by a joining letter, as in the second ک in the same phrase below.)
ذٰلِكَ الْڪِتٰبُ لَا رَيْبَ
To check the usage in today's Arabic, I put two simple Arabic words ذالک and تلک in a search engine and most entries showed the ک with the squiggly sign, but there was one entry I saw that didn't have it.
So, I think if someone is writing Urdu with the squiggle on ک, they're using their Arabic keyboard or are using Arabic script on purpose. I think if one has a choice, one shouldn't use the squiggle. If someone else is using it, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they know what letter it is, they're just being unnecessarily (if not inappropriately) stylish with it.
Perhaps there is some old Urdu script that does use the squiggle on the ک, I don't remember seeing one though.
*P.S. I'm not sure if that symbol on ک can be called a 'humza' as it looks different then a regular humza...a "squiggle" perhaps? If the symbol is indeed a different sign then 'humza' and people are adding a 'humza' on their ک, then that could be considered wrong.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2010-11-14 20:46:09 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Correction: In second last line, please read the first "then" as "than"...so it would read:
"If the symbol is indeed a different sign than 'humza' and ...."
Qudsia Lone Local time: 17:14 Specializes in field Native speaker of: Urdu PRO pts in category: 4
Grading comment
Honestly, I was quite satisfied and happy with the answer that I got from Mr. Sajjad Nadeem. But later when I got the answer from Ms. Lone, I thought it to be comprehensive and complete.
I thank all the participants especially Ms. Lone and Mr. Nadeem
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +6
