1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Hindi
  4. >
  5. "क्या आप लोग प्यासे हैं?"

"क्या आप लोग प्यासे हैं?"

Translation:Are you people thirsty?

July 20, 2018



A more natural sentence is- "kyā aap logon ko pyās lagī hai?"


Revisiting this comment, it reminds me of French and similar languages, where the literal translation is "do you have hunger / thirst ?".

An example - are you guys hungry? - kyaa aap logon ko bhookh lagi hai? - [literal translation: do you people feel hunger?] source: I'm a native speaker. Using the literal translation of "are you people hungry?" - " kyaa aap log bhookhe hain?" - has different connotations [not used by natives in this context] and may not be as polite.


"Are you thirsty?" should be the right translation.


No, because you are completely ignoring the word लोग

[deactivated user]

    you are NOT completely ignoring the word 'people' because 'you' in english already conveys this!


    It is but the translation means the same. In english you can refer to more than a single person, it can be general.


    What's more, "you people" is a little impolite in British English, and carries a lot of racist overtones in the US. Linguistically, Duo is correct, but it feels very icky writing to me.


    You are learning the nuances of Hindi, so it's important to let go of those types of conditioning.


    Nobody's objecting to the Hindi, the point is it doesn't really teach 'the nuances of Hindi' - because to a native British or American English speaker 'you people' has a very different tone from तुम लोग to a native Hindi speaker (or presumably by extension 'you people' to a native Indian English speaker).

    A better translation would capture that nuance by translating to something similar in tone, even though different words. I don't have a suggestion that isn't very regional though - things like 'y'all', 'you folks', 'you guys', 'you chaps', etc.


    For me it sounds so strange and unnatural "are you people thirsty". I translated it as "are you thirsty" and it was considered as a mistake.


    बहुत धन्यवाद :) I am not Indian or English. Your comments are very important and helpful.


    Ditto. Thanks for this valuable piece of socio-linguistic information. I am a New Yorker and the translation of āp log as "you people" sounds socio-linguistically off key. Since āp is supposed to show respect/formality, and around here, "you people" verges on impolite, if said to strangers, "you people" seems wrong. I think we avoid saying "you people" in more formal circumstances by saying "All of you" or even "you all". I think that in most of North America, people would say "you folks", but that would elicit smirks in NYC. I am beginning to hear "folks" replacing "people" a bit in the North East. I suppose it is an aspect of the homogenization of the American Language.


    I think respect/formality formulas are not translatable into American English. I don't know about British English, but a linguistic trend in the US evolving over at least a century has been the gradual elimination of formal language. It is so easy in other languages to get a stranger's. Entirely natural to say "Señor" or Señora" for example, while in America we are stuck with "Mam" or "Sir" which sound old-fashioned and might even offend someone nowadays. I can only come up with the lame "Excuse Me" as though I had belched or something. I think The U.S. and India are sort of opposite kinds of societies, one has become so informal that we infamously substitute a friendly manner for formal manners; while the other has a very nuanced palette of terms to indicate familiarity, formality, respect, and their opposites.


    ""Mam" or "Sir" which sound old-fashioned"

    The terms that show respect in Hindi and other languages have been around longer than sir and ma'am. So, while you deem one to sound old-fashioned (dismissing formalities and respectful expressions), you are praising the same of another language. Do you think the way we express these things in Hindi is more modern than the ways to do the same in English? I still use sir and ma'am. I was raised to be respectful. My children do the same. The only people who get offended by it are people we really should not allow to concern us, as they are the type to look to be offended. I will not let those type change my character, as their behavior is merely a reflection of their own character.


    He means that it sounds old-fashioned in America, to Americans, not that Hindi 'equivalents' are more modern.

    It's a bit of an American TV trope for example 'don't call me ma'am' (in some sassy offended tone). I also think it's strange (I'm British) but I do recognise what he's saying.

    It's also (in my very limited experience of America) inverted sometimes, which I find really strange - apparent deference to a shopkeeper/cleaner/waiter/etc. as a customer for example. The closest thing to that in Britain I think would be among peers in sport, but that's not a modern development and perhaps even a little quaint.


    I know what he means. I am American, born here and have lived here for almost 50 years.

    Ma'am is a contraction of madame and came into usage in the 1600s, while sir came into usage in the 1200s. Ji has been used dating back hundreds of years proof.


    Are all of you thirsty, should be excepted. At least give respect to them! Are you people thirsty sounds veryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy rude! I have reported.


    Are these people are thirsty has been accepted but Are you people thirsty has not been accepted


    I'm not native english but that sentence seems to have a wrong syntax no?


    It's ok, but probably best avoided by non-native speakers; it sounds like a regional US colloquialism to me (British), don't think I've ever heard anybody address 'you people' here.

    Just 'you' alone, or we tend to use anybody/everybody (or anyone/everyone) more - 'is anybody thirsty?' is how I would say this. Whereas (at least certain regions) there they do address groups directly more, 'y'all thirsty?', etc.


    In the southern US states, saying "you people" can be considered racist, but even in the northern states, it is not a polite way of addressing people. It has a negative connotation. The American English equivalent of addressing a group of people formally and respectfully would be: "Are all of you thirsty?" or if addressing a certain number of people: "Are the four of you thirsty?" Using "Are you all thirsty?" could be another option, but it sounds strange in my opinion. And addressing friends and those we are familiar with, we could say "Are you guys thirsty?" in the northern states and "Are y'all thirsty?" in the southern states. "Are you folks thirsty?" could be another option, but the word "folks" is used mainly by the older generations, in my experience. All of this to say, there should be more than one way to correctly translate this in English, especially since the sentence is meant to be conveyed in a respectful manner, which is not the case in the USA for the sentence "Are you people thirsty?"


    For me the correct translation is "are you thirsty people ?" I mean that the answer is not "people thirsty". This order is not correct in english even if it's not my native language.


    That is incorrect. It is addressing "you people", asking are you people thirsty. Asking if they are thirsty people infers something else, which is not polite. The English is fine. I am a native speaker.

    [deactivated user]

      'You people' is more formal, as per my understanding. Yes it sounds weird because we all speak informally. 'You guys' 'You all' popped in my head as well.


      In American English, "you people" is informal bordering on rude, depending on tone.


      Hindi has a differerent set of words implying politeness/respect. AAP is one of them. To make it clear that you are asking the entire bunch and not addressing one individual - the use of LOG is required. The equivalent in American english would be "Y'all" :)


      some people in US are racist and they have their tone, pitch, and volume... the main thing with hindi is to talk politely...

      nothing wrong here... relax..


      I really don't see how that's racist but k


      There are many sentences which are repeated twice or thrice


      Repetition is good for memory.


      There is no option of thirsty


      "You people" especially to Americans will have racial connotations (it's often a racist way white people refer to black people) and should be avoided. It should not be used here. Colloquially "you guys" or "you all(=ya'll)" would be acceptable, but the answer should use the standard English use of "you" in the plural id est "Are you(pl) thirsty?"


      The problem here is that English has a different flavor all over the globe. It may sound loosely racist in the US (although I think it is a bit of a stretch), but that is not the case elsewhere I know of. Aren't we getting too politically correct by avoiding a very natural English expression.

      But I agree that they should also accept the alternative you suggested, even the 'ya'll' :)


      The problem is "you people" used in a non-racist way doesn't sound natural at all in standard English. For "Vosotros" in Spanish "Ihr" in German "Vous" in French etc. the other Duolingo courses use "You(pl)" for the answer, this seems like the way to go.


      There is no single standard for English. US English, UK English, Scottish, Australian, Canadian, South African . . . all have their own standard registers. "You people" and "we people" is standard Indian English.


      I disagree that it's racist. It's only racist based on context and who is using it.

      Also, many of us use "y'all". I guess that's better than being misinterpreted by people like you who are under the impression that it's racist. LOL!


      "You people" definitely sounds awkward. "You all" would be a more natural way to show that it is plural.


      If you meet speakers of Indian English, they naturally address any group as "you people" or, if they are a member of the group, "we people." It's standard practice in their dialect of English, and shows the influence of Indic grammar.

      It's better to get used to encountering the most prevalent forms used in Indian English than to insist on American or British English as the standard. What an irony it would be to engage in cultural imperialism in the name of political correctness.


      I don't think it's "cultural imperialism" to suggest that Duolingo accept American or British English answers as correct.


      Thank you!

      I have even heard a friend say "पंडित लोग", when speaking to some local priests. LOL


      Not sure if it's racist (I think that really depends on the context), but I (in the US) perceive "you people" as quite rude. A typical context is "What's wrong with you people?" -- and of course whether it's racist or not depends on who the "people" are. (I have in mind DMV employees or telephone customer-service agents.)


      But, if someone were to say, "You people have done a great job", would you think it was rude? "You people are welcome to come to this event"...

      Context is everything.


      In American English "you people" is almost always used in a negative context. If I hear "you people" I expect it to be followed by an insult. That's why this is so jarring...


      I am American. Born and raised, Washington DC. I could drive to the White House in 10 minutes, as we speak.


      I agree and disagree!

      I believe that "you people" is a pretty standard phrasing in American English. In the early 90s there was a politician who once used the phrase to address African-Americans in a way that was contextually demeaning. Geneally, I think it's acceptable, though a bit brusque -- and I would advise a student of English to avoid using it to address a group of African-Americans! However, it's probably the most natural translation for "aap log."

      "You (pl)" would be accurate and acceptable.

      "You all" may be less problematic, though I think that "you all" would only be used in a situation where the speaker wanted to emphasize that they are addressing the entirety of a group.

      "Y'all" itself is more flexible, and I use it constantly, but it may be too informal to serve as a translation of "aap log."

      "You guys" is also too informal. Further, it is insensitive to gender, and in some contexts comical.


      You guys makes me think of Goonies! LOL

      Hey, you guys!


      "You guys" is currently seen as sexist, so not a good choice.


      Never heard anyone think of it as sexist. That's a first


      Are you all thirty?


      I'm very thirsty haaa......


      Its giving are you people thristy thats wrong sentence ok duo

      Learn Hindi in just 5 minutes a day. For free.