Dogri to Hindi: shared postpositional structure does not make endings interchangeable
A familiar personal name can carry source grammar
Sawhney’s Dogri morphology paper explicitly contrasts a Dogri form containing Ram-e before gi with Hindi Rām ko. Both identify Ram in the relevant recipient relationship, but the name’s source form contains grammatical material that the Hindi example does not reproduce. The extra -e is not part of a newly introduced person’s name.
The same paper notes that this Dogri name pattern depends on the name’s shape. A translator should not apply one visible source-name ending mechanically to every person mentioned. The relevant question is whether a sequence identifies the name itself or expresses its grammatical role in that phrase.
This is useful in a Dogri instruction about giving someone water or another item. Preserve the recipient’s identity while rebuilding the Hindi construction. Leaving every source ending attached can make grammatical material look like part of a name; deleting letters without recognizing their function can damage the actual name. The complete phrase establishes which interpretation is appropriate.
Oblique case remains important, but it is not identical in every detail
Snell’s Hindi Skeleton Grammar explains that postpositions govern oblique forms and that masculine nouns in -ā change to -e in the oblique singular. Hindi therefore is not a language in which every noun necessarily stays in its dictionary form before a relationship word. The specific name comparison above does not erase the broader case system.
Sawhney separately notes a Dogri cardinal numeral changing to an oblique form when the noun it modifies is oblique, illustrating ikk-e in a phrase involving one road. The number is still one; the ending belongs to the source construction rather than changing the quantity.
For a Dogri message containing a counted object and a following postposition, distinguish how many objects are meant from the forms required by the surrounding grammar. Do not translate an oblique-looking numeral as another number. Equally, do not infer that the same suffix must appear on the Hindi numeral simply because the Hindi noun phrase also has an oblique relationship.
Shared terminology such as oblique and postposition identifies a useful comparison, not a guarantee that the two paradigms match form for form. Interpret each noun phrase before transferring its individual pieces.
A manner expression should keep its meaning when its agreement disappears
The Dogri paper contrasts gender-sensitive forms of a slow manner expression involving Ram and Rani. Its discussion identifies inflection in the relevant -ɑ adverb class, distinguishing that pattern from Hindi. A grammatical change in the source does not necessarily ask for a different pace or manner in the translation.
Snell illustrates Hindi manner expressions formed with a noun plus se, including ease and difficulty constructions. Such a target phrase packages manner differently from treating every source ending as a gender suffix that needs a Hindi counterpart. The translation should express how the action happens.
In a message directing two people to act slowly, the source can change form with its participants while retaining the same instruction. Keep that shared meaning unless the Dogri text actually specifies a difference. Related vocabulary and a familiar script can make this pair appear transparent; the useful checks are the name’s identity, the phrase’s quantity and role, and the manner expressed by the complete construction.
Language references