please translate it into english
 

yah main tha jo khailny gya tha


yah main hi:wacko: tha jo khailny gya tha

[QUOTE=talha king;932335]yah main tha jo khailny gya tha


yah main hi:wacko: tha jo khailny gya tha[/QUOTE]
it was me,who went to play,indeed it was me,who went to play.

don't know what is ‘wacko'.is it part of the sentence?seems like English word :wacko:

[QUOTE=talha king;932335]yah main tha jo khailny gya tha


yah main hi:wacko: tha jo khailny gya tha[/QUOTE]

it was me who had gone to play.
it was in fact me who had gone to play.

[QUOTE=qublai khan;932349]it was me,who went to play,indeed it was me,who went to play.
[/QUOTE]
My microscopic effort:
Your sentence is correct except the pronoun,me;rather, it should be "i".Because in that particular case we have to stress upon the one who went to play;hence,we have needed nominative subjective pronoun.(This explanation itself illustrates you how perfect tenses are fixed up in a compound sentece)
So correct sentence could be:
It was indeed i, who went to play.

[QUOTE=nawepukhtoon;932364]it was me who had gone to play.
it was in fact me who had gone to play.[/QUOTE]
I was not interested to paddle my wheels lest i see the name of newpakhtoon, those guys who respected me deserves the respect as well.
Any how i hope we will pray fro each other and thanks for supporting me in feed back portfolios.
Mere tarraf se gift:
We use past perfect tense when already an action is done in the past and we proceed it further.
For example;
hunn!
I [B]went[/B] to bazar at 6 oclock, not i had gone to bazar at 6 pm.
Than question arises when this tense is being used,
Consider this example:
[U]I told her[/U] that i [B]had[/B] gone to bazar.
[U]She got the job[/U] when she [B]had[/B] lost her graduate course.
Here you need an intense verb in an independent clause to justify the existance of past pariticple along with auxiliary verb had.
While in above examples underlined parts are independent clauses.

Than,
in case of deconstruction of the above sentence:It was indeed i who went to play.

1.it was i(look intense verb is missing and it is compensated with auxiliary, so its a complement)
Note:we use object of the complement in objective case unless some stress is needed upon, which is elaborted by adverb 'indeed' in the aforementioned sentence)
it is concluded that intense verb is missing so slightest variation is necessary
Anyhow,
I hope you people have learnt from my effort and in case of discrepancy correction is appreciated.:clap

Dear ursula thanks a lot for your generous reply. then I welcome you from the core of my heart to be among us once again.
coming to the actual point, I would say it is wrong to say it was me. it was I is 100 per cent correct. besides the past tense in the subordinate clause, I think , is wrong. the sentence says ' gaya tha' not ' gaya'. for gaya we use past tense that is went. but for 'gaya tha' we always use past perfect tense. this had been taught to us in our matric classes.

welcome back Ursula,


I was also suspicious of that translation.thanks for correction.

Sent from my A10 using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=qublai khan;932638]welcome back Ursula,


I was also suspicious of that translation.thanks for correction.

Sent from my A10 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]
Thanks for your nice words.:shy
No discrepancy from your side.
Its a sighhhhh for me.:joker

[QUOTE=nawepukhtoon;932622]Dear ursula thanks a lot for your generous reply. then I welcome you from the core of my heart to be among us once again.
coming to the actual point, I would say it is wrong to say it was me. it was I is 100 per cent correct. besides the past tense in the subordinate clause, I think , is wrong. the sentence says ' gaya tha' not ' gaya'. for gaya we use past tense that is went. but for 'gaya tha' we always use past perfect tense. this had been taught to us in our matric classes.[/QUOTE]
Again bundle of thanks.
Sir, problem is that we don't follow the exact time of reference in lower grade classes( I mean ye sab chawlyan main bhy prty rhy hun) iss lye mjhe inhain ghallat kehne main koy buray nhy.
Lastly i explained it after a long long consideration.Ask me individually and i do hope that in that case we will reach at nice conclusion.
Any how its fun for me to argue and than counter argue.
Because by doing so we will learn inshallah.:angle:angle:vic

[QUOTE=ursula;932611]My microscopic effort:
Your sentence is correct except the pronoun,me;rather, it should be "i".Because in that particular case we have to stress upon the one who went to play;hence,we have needed nominative subjective pronoun.(This explanation itself illustrates you how perfect tenses are fixed up in a compound sentece)
So correct sentence could be:
It was indeed i, who went to play.


I was not interested to paddle my wheels lest i see the name of newpakhtoon, those guys who respected me deserves the respect as well.
Any how i hope we will pray fro each other and thanks for supporting me in feed back portfolios.
Mere tarraf se gift:
We use past perfect tense when already an action is done in the past and we proceed it further.
For example;
hunn!
I [B]went[/B] to bazar at 6 oclock, not i had gone to bazar at 6 pm.
Than question arises when this tense is being used,
Consider this example:
[U]I told her[/U] that i [B]had[/B] gone to bazar.
[U]She got the job[/U] when she [B]had[/B] lost her graduate course.
Here you need an intense verb in an independent clause to justify the existance of past pariticple along with auxiliary verb had.
While in above examples underlined parts are independent clauses.

Than,
in case of deconstruction of the above sentence:It was indeed i who went to play.

1.it was i(look intense verb is missing and it is compensated with auxiliary, so its a complement)
Note:we use object of the complement in objective case unless some stress is needed upon, which is elaborted by adverb 'indeed' in the aforementioned sentence)
it is concluded that intense verb is missing so slightest variation is necessary
Anyhow,
I hope you people have learnt from my effort and in case of discrepancy correction is appreciated.:clap[/QUOTE]

AoA,

Could you kindly tell me what do you do for your English ? I read your posts and your written expression is pretty good. Kindly throw light on it.

Jazak'ALLAH Khairan.

Regards,
RMKamran.

Any how its fun for me to argue and than counter argue.
Because by doing so we will learn inshallah.:angle:angle:vic[/QUOTE]
Again arguments and counterarguments with you but I will stand firm on my stance because this has been taught to us by sir amjad who is now a csp officer in audit and accounts.
regards.

[QUOTE=RMKamran;932666]AoA,

Could you kindly tell me what do you do for your English ? I read your posts and your written expression is pretty good. Kindly throw light on it.

Jazak'ALLAH Khairan.

Regards,
RMKamran.[/QUOTE]
Reading, writing and most importantly learning some hidden tricks of grammar and its fundamental principles.
Inshalah, I will do here, so keep your fingers crossed.
Once manjanbazms post in off topic lounge has elaborated a good point and i noted it down,thus i decided to provide this service.
[B]In return.
I just want from you folks to have a dua for me.[/B]
I hope you guys will enjoy my good explanation.:)

[QUOTE=nawepukhtoon;932670]
Again arguments and counterarguments with you but I will stand firm on my stance because this has been taught to us by sir amjad who is now a csp officer in audit and accounts.
regards.[/QUOTE]
Bit awkward, do you know CSS ka aik sal ka topper agle sal fail ho jata he.:unsure:
Anyhow, I am not imposing my lunatic idea. You all alone could consult any good international site or even a book.
P.S. I have a serious doubt on exploring the world of English.
Read some internationally recognized goood authors.
I hope arguments must be finished off without any further elaboration in case of your disagreement.:8: