Diffference between ږ and ژ (Jhay) and ښ (Kheen) and خ (Khay)?

[Pukhtoon]

As it relates to these letters, ږ and ژ and ښ and خ, respectively, is there any practical difference in their pronunciations?

From what I understand, northern Pukhtoons pronounce ږ like ګ ("Gaaf"), or a "G" sound whereas southern Pashtoons pronounce ږ same as they would ژ (Jhay).

That being the case, which is it? It seems that both letters, depending on the region, are pronounced same as another letter already present in the alphabet. Therefore, why the need for ږ?

Similarly, is there a difference between the ښ ("Kheen" as in "پښتو" or "Pukhto") and خ ("Khay" as in "خبدری" or "Khaburreih")? If not, the same question posed as above, why is there a ښ (kheen)?

Any explanations or reference to resources explaining the sound difference or explanation as to the reason for the redundancy in sounds (if there even is one) would be appreciated.

[tor_khan]

^ The unique Pashto letters you point out are essential so that the standard written language is the same despite our individual dialects. We are able to read the language in the same way thus پښتو is the same language whatever your dialect. Compare that to پشتو and پختو - you begin to speak of separates which is misleading.

Whilst we can speak of phonemes used more often in one dialect or another, we actually all do use the same sounds broadly over a period of time.

Sometimes the pronunciations don't always follow the expected pattern and what you find is a word with a sound that could be considered from elsewhere. A couple of examples that stem from my experience.

ږ and ژ

Mostly you will read نږدې for 'near'; and if I was to vocalise this outside my usual household situation, I would sound ږ as ګ . However, I figure, within the household set up, I would most likely say نژدې .

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

People in Wardak, Logar, Kabul, Paktia, Paktika & Khost do not pronounce "ښ" exactly the same way we pronounce "خ". "خ" is pronounced from the throat. "ښ" is pronounced with the front/middle of the tongue pressed against roof of the mouth.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

similarly, we do not say: Kha ( yes, good). We say Khya.

[Pukhtoon]

^ The unique Pashto letters you point out are essential so that the standard written language is the same despite our individual dialects. We are able to read the language in the same way thus پښتو is the same language whatever your dialect. Compare that to پشتو and پختو - you begin to speak of separates which is misleading.

Whilst we can speak of phonemes used more often in one dialect or another, we actually all do use the same sounds broadly over a period of time.

Sometimes the pronunciations don't always follow the expected pattern and what you find is a word with a sound that could be considered from elsewhere. A couple of examples that stem from my experience.

ږ and ژ

Mostly you will read نږدې for 'near'; and if I was to vocalise this outside my usual household situation, I would sound ږ as ګ . However, I figure, within the household set up, I would most likely say نژدې .

Thank you for your response - I appreciate it. I guess after reading your postو my question would be: if the purpose of having one letter make two different sounds is to promote hegemony and uniformity in the language, couldn't that still be accomplished, possibly by removing the superfluous letter? I think what your getting at makes sense, but sometimes I wonder if these letters don't have a unique pronunciation that my or our ears simply can't pick up on.

Citing your example of پختو versus بشتو, the way it seems now, people simply read the ښ (kheen) like a ش (sheen), why not just read the خ (khay) like a ش (sheen) similar to the way people read ږ and ژ or ښ and ش ?

I guess what I don't understand is that if we already have a letter that exclusively makes the sound "jhay," i.e., ژ, and we already have a letter that exclusive makes the sound "G," i.e., ګ, then why do we need ږ which depending on the dialect (North or South) makes one of these two sounds? Isn't it redundant?

Does ږ ,ژ, and ګ, in fact, have distinct and unique sounds (presently or historically) that we simply do not pronounce properly anymore?

OR (as you mentioned)

To elaborate on your above point, since ږ either makes the ګ or ژ sound, is the seeming redundancy purposeful so that southern dialect speakers can chose to pronounce ږ as ژ (jhay) and northern speakers as ګ ("G") as they see fit but the written can remain the same for both areas?

Similarly, is ښ, then, only put into words in places where the southern and northern dialect conflict as to the pronunciation, i.e., using ښ in پښتو so that the reader can insert either the "sh" or "kh" pronunciation as they see fit (Pashto or Pukhto, respectively)? Is this why words like خبړی (Khaburreih) uses a خ instead of ښ because the pronunciation is consistent as to the خ (khay) in both dialects?

Thoughts and comments appreciated and thank you again for the above post.

[tor_khan]

Similarly, is ښ, then, only put into words in places where the southern and northern dialect conflict as to the pronunciation, i.e., using ښ in پښتو so that the reader can insert either the "sh" or "kh" pronunciation as they see fit (Pashto or Pukhto, respectively)? Is this why words like خبړی (Khaburreih) uses a خ instead of ښ because the pronunciation is consistent as to the خ (khay) in both dialects?

Thoughts and comments appreciated and thank you again for the above post.

To your last question, yes. خبری does not require a ښ as the /kh/ sound is used in all dialects. (I assume you meant to spelt it without the hard retroflex R sound (ړ): in خبری , right?)

Similarly flower (ګل) cannot be spelt with a ږ as the /g/ sound is used in all dialects.

In my opinion, knowing when to use ش خ ښ etc comes from listening to the spoken form. I can't say I know all dialects, but at least from the people that I know or have dealt with and having listened to dialects on the media etc. (also having read a bit) I can make a fairly accurate go at picking the correct letter when spelling.

Scholars in the past made a good go at addressing the dialectical issues by coming with a common script. It's a great achievement. The irregularities that persist do so because we are still largely an illiterate people and when some people learn to read/write at a basic level, they do so in dialect.

You can recreate most Pashto sounds using the existing Urdu alphabet*. This may work to a point when they are labelling Pashto CDs in Peshawar, but that script is useless to anyone from Quetta when the characters do not allow Pashto speakers in the south to read Pashto in the form they speak/understand.

* though ڼ does not exist in Urdu

[bactrianeagle]

Thank you Pukhtoon Jana for bringing the topic into discussion.
.
I believe, Pashto and Pukhto will have 2 different fates in the future. The Kandahari dialect the only Pashto dialect with a sophisticated and logical grammar, understandable pronounciation and higher prestige. However, in schools they have replaced it now for the northern or eastern dialect where no rules are defined yet. Some journalists even mix Westen and Eastern Pashto what always cuases a mess and difficulties with reading fluently. How can such a desastrous language mix be of use for academics on day?
.
So if you really want to learn and understand Pashto you better learn the Kandahari standard Pashto. Otherwise we will have to wait until they have found some standard rules for the Eastern Pashto.
.
As to kh, sh letters issue, I guess that for an Eastern standard dialect your proposals of replacing zh by g etc. would be a good idea.

[Pukhtoon]

Thank you Pukhtoon Jana for bringing the topic into discussion.
.
I believe, Pashto and Pukhto will have 2 different fates in the future. The Kandahari dialect the only Pashto dialect with a sophisticated and logical grammar, understandable pronounciation and higher prestige. However, in schools they have replaced it now for the northern or eastern dialect where no rules are defined yet. Some journalists even mix Westen and Eastern Pashto what always cuases a mess and difficulties with reading fluently. How can such a desastrous language mix be of use for academics on day?
.
So if you really want to learn and understand Pashto you better learn the Kandahari standard Pashto. Otherwise we will have to wait until they have found some standard rules for the Eastern Pashto.
.
As to kh, sh letters issue, I guess that for an Eastern standard dialect your proposals of replacing zh by g etc. would be a good idea.

You are welcome and thank you for your response. You referred to a lack of set rules in the "Eastern" dialect of Pukhto, could you care to elaborate?

Also, for any person with more knowledge then myself, outside of the initial run at standardizing Pukhto into a written language during the time of Pir Roshan (ra) during the 1500's I believe what were other major milestones in the standardization of the language? I think some of these milestones might shed light on why we have some of the seeming in-congruence in the language.

[Badlun]

We exaggerate the differences in hard dialect(northern) and soft dialect(southern) and we find kandahari nationalists and pekhwari nationalists. The question is of few sounds mainly two as mentioned above.

Grammar , syntax, semantics, orthography, morphology, phonology, phonetics etc are exactly same in both the dialects

Khin/shin and ge/je are used n pure Pashto words while words like Gul or Kahabar are not pure Pashto words derived from Persian.