Some words transliterated with “ah” reflect their original or traditional spelling. In modern pronunciation, however, the “ah” often shifts toward an “èh” sound, which we represent with the accented letter “è.” This is a sound somewhere between “a” and “e,” similar to the “e” in English words like “bed” or “get.” (It should not be confused with the traditional “e” used elsewhere in Romanisation, as in mehmān or chehra.) Historically, some words, such as bahn (bèhn) and pahlā (pèhlā), developed from older or fuller forms like bahin and pèhlā, where the “-ahi-” sequence gradually came to be pronounced with the same contracted “èh” sound.

Gurmukhi often preserves this fuller “-ahi-” spelling, while Panjabi speakers may pronounce such words either more closely to the spelling or with the contracted “èh” sound. Other words, such as rahasya and rèhmat (rèhmat), may likewise be pronounced with either “ah” or “èh.” Both pronunciations are widely understood, and our Romanisation uses “è” when reflecting the latter pronunciation.

Hindi and Urdu share a common linguistic heritage but have developed distinct literary traditions and pronunciation patterns. Consequently, some words differ in pronunciation between the standard forms of each language as well as in everyday speech. Examples include yoṅ / yūṅ, vah / woh, and pāṅv / pāoṅ.

Rather than following only one modern pronunciation, our transliteration seeks to respect the historical origin, or etymology, of each word whenever practical, while presenting these original forms in a way that is clear and natural for modern readers.

You may notice that some songs use Yīshu (the traditional form found in Hindi Bible translations, though commonly pronounced Yeshu today), while others use Yesū (the modern or more commonly pronounced form of Yisū). This is intentional.

Rather than forcing a single pronunciation across every language, we preserve the form traditionally used within each language and its Bible translation. Songs written in, or influenced by Hindi generally use Yīshu/Yeshu, while songs written in or influenced by Urdu and Panjabi generally use Yisū/Yesū.

This not only respects the literary and biblical tradition of each language, but also reflects the pronunciation that sounds most natural within that linguistic context.

Urdu, and to a lesser extent Gurmukhi, often preserve traditional spellings even though everyday pronunciation has changed over time. Modern Hindi generally follows a more phonetic way of writing, so changes in pronunciation are more often reflected with spelling.

For this reason, our transliteration sometimes preserves traditional spellings while also acknowledging their modern pronunciation, allowing readers to appreciate both the historical form and the way the word is commonly spoken today.

The dots and lines are not decoration. They help show sounds that English spelling cannot clearly show by itself. A line often marks a longer vowel, while a dot can show a different consonant sound, nasal sound, or retroflex sound.

Once you get used to them, the lyrics become easier to pronounce because the spelling gives you more information.

We take into account common spelling-based pronunciations and pronunciation inconsistencies within each language. In Hindi, for example, readers may interchange or confuse sounds such as j / z and ph / f, particularly where distinctions represented by the nuqtā are overlooked or inconsistently observed. In Urdu, short vowels are usually left unwritten, which can sometimes lead to uncertainty or inconsistency in pronunciation, particularly over which short vowel a word contains, or whether an unwritten vowel should be pronounced between consonants. Also leaving an uncertainty of how consonant clusters should be read. Our transliteration therefore does not rely on spelling or common reading alone, but considers established pronunciation, etymology, and the linguistic tradition from which a word originates.

Hindi and Urdu, despite their different scripts and literary traditions, are closely related standardized forms of Hindustani and share essentially the same grammatical and colloquial linguistic base. For this reason, differences in vocabulary should not automatically be treated as reasons to alter a word’s established pronunciation. Where a word has entered Hindustani from Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic, or another language, our transliteration seeks to respect its established pronunciation, etymology, and the linguistic tradition from which it originates. Panjabi, however, is a distinct Indo-Aryan language. Although it shares a large portion of its vocabulary with Hindi and Urdu, borrowed and inherited words are subject to Panjabi’s own pronunciation, grammar, and spelling conventions.