# Persian: جنوب مشغول پیشروی



## kalilah wa dimnah

In this context:

ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل بوده است و نیروهای پیشمرگه کرد از شرق به شهر نزدیک می شوند.

what does janoob-e mashghool-e peeshrooy mean?

artesh-e eraaq az janoob-e mashghool-e peeshrooy be soo-ye mawsel boode ast.


----------



## Treaty

It is _az jonoob_ (from south) _mashghool-e pishravi_ ([has been] marching forward) ...
_pishravi _is made of prefix _pish_ (fore) and _ravi_ (from the present stem of _raftan_). The structure _mashgool-e_ + infinitive/action noun is another way to make a progressive verb (though it usually means 'busy doing sth').


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

Thanks! Would this translation be correct:

The Iraqi army (literally: army of Iraq) has been marching toward Mawsil and the Pishmarga forces of the Kurds are coming closer to the city from the east.

Why wasn't it simply ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل است ? What change in meaning did the word بودہ bring?


----------



## Treaty

My translation would be:
The Iraqi Army has been marching toward Mosul from south and the Kurdish Pishmarga forces are approaching to the city from east.

We use بوده است as a present perfect tense (has been) as the Iraqi army started the operation earlier and has continued it so far. 

Mosul موصل is pronounced _mūsel _or_ mūsol _in Persian.


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

Treaty said:


> My translation would be:
> The Iraqi Army has been marching toward Mosul from south and the Kurdish Pishmarga forces are approaching to the city from east.
> 
> We use بوده است as a present perfect tense (has been) as the Iraqi army started the operation earlier and has continued it so far.
> 
> Mosul موصل is pronounced _mūsel _or_ mūsol _in Persian.



Thanks. Actually, I wasn't talking about omitting است. I was talking about omitting بودہ. Compare:

ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل بودہ است

ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل است

Why did the writer insert بودہ? Was there a specific reason? Did the meaning change because of it?


----------



## Treaty

Sorry. Please read my post again. I misunderstood your question but edited my post quickly (even you used the edited post in your quote).


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

lol! Yes, I did use the new post without even realizing it! 
If I have understood you correctly 

ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل است

would imply that they are busy in marching toward Moosil, whereas

ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل بودہ است

means that they started marching in the past and are still engaged in it.

I had the exact same query regarding this:

آیا پدر حضرت ابراهیم (ع) کافر بوده است؟ (taken from an actual Iranian website)

آیا پدر حضرت ابراهیم (ع) کافر بود؟ (my own sentence)

آیا پدر حضرت ابراهیم (ع) کافر است؟ (my own sentence)

The third is completely wrong since the father of Ibrahim (عليه السلام) is not alive.
What about the first and second? Is there a difference between the two? If there is, I don't get it.


----------



## colognial

Hi, kalilah wa dimnah.

With the first sentence, the question really is: Where do we stand with the father now? Do we talk about him today as someone who was an atheist in his time?

With the second sentence, the question is historical and it takes you back to the past: What convictions did he have when he was alive?

Also, one small point, just to clear up any possible misinterpretations: pishravi kardan is not necessarily taken to mean 'to march on foot'. If it is not known for certain whether the army is marching or riding on, maybe, tanks, then it may be better to say "the Iraqi army has been advancing towards Moussell".


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

خیلی ممنون

I might add that I just heard the following (I can't type it in the Persian script because I don't know how to spell it!):

yeki az a'zaa-ye shooraa-ye shahr-e tehraan darbaare-ye vaagozaari-e vaamhaa-ye kalaan be a'zaa-ye in shooraa gofte ke aanhaa be daam oftaadand (or maybe it's oftaade-and).

The person who was speaking said it so fast that I couldn't figure out whether it was oftaade-and or oftaadand. Any idea which one he might have meant? I got it from BBC Persian's radio.


----------



## deathmarker

It should have been وامھائی کلان, not وامھای کلان, because it's "big debts", not "the big debts".
At least, that's what I think.
Also, I am surprised that the word کلان was used, because it has long since become obsolete. The word for "big" in modern Persian is only بزرگ.


----------



## Treaty

deathmarker said:


> It should have been وامھائی کلان, not وامھای کلان, because it's "big debts", not "the big debts".
> At least, that's what I think.
> Also, I am surprised that the word کلان was used, because it has long since become obsolete. The word for "big" in modern Persian is only بزرگ.


کلان is commonly used in various financial expressions. Nevertheless, it may be a revival of the obsolete word not a continuation. The loans وام in question are already discussed in the Iranian media. So, there is no problem to use it as definite 'the big loans'. 


colognial said:


> Also, one small point, just to clear up any possible misinterpretations: pishravi kardan is not necessarily taken to mean 'to march on foot'. If it is not known for certain whether the army is marching or riding on, maybe, tanks, then it may be better to say "the Iraqi army has been advancing towards Moussell".


Thanks. You're right. 'march' was the first word came into my mind and I took it metaphorically. By the way, کافر doesn't mean 'atheist' but a non-believer in a particular religion. The figure in question (Azar, I guess) was apparently a believer in some god(s) whose idols he made.


----------



## colognial

Here's my transcription:

yeki az a'zaa-ye shooraa-ye shahr-e tehraan darbaare-ye vaagozaari-e vaamhaa-ye kalaan be a'zaa-ye in shooraa gofte ke aanhaa be daam oftaadand
یکی از اعضای شورای شهر تهران درباره ی واگذاری وام های کلان به اعضای این شورا گفته که آن ها به دام افتادند

My guess is, oftaadand is the more likely verb tense here. The reason is, if the member of the council had said 'we have been deceived' - which is different from "trapped", but then you do tend to mix up your words in such situations! - then the implication would have been that the honourable members were still trapped or being deceived or whatever it is they are claiming happened.

وام هایی کلان would have suggested that the large sums in loans were hitherto unheard of.

کلان is used in expressions such as macro-economy (اقتصادِ کلان), The Greater Tehran (کلان شهرِ تهران), macro-planning (برنامه ریزیِ کلان, طرح ریزیِ کلان).

Finally, I always believed a کافر to be an atheist, while a مرتد or از دین برگشته was an apostate, a person who renounced religious dogma. I wonder how they say 'atheist' in Arabic.


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

In modern Arabic it is دهري dahriyy. As far as I can tell it is the same in classical Arabic.
Sources: Edward Willian Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon and Hans Wehr's Arabisches Wörterbuch.

By the way, colognial, isn't Tehran spelled طهران in both Arabic and Persian? I used to think it was spelled that way in only Arabic but then recently read a Persian sentence in a Persian dcitionary that spelled it the Arabic way. Are both spellings acceptable?


----------



## colognial

Thanks, kalilah wa dimnah. I'm almost sure we don't use 'dahri' much in Persian. As for the spelling of Tehran, طهران is by now a quaint way of spelling what is officially spelt تهران; one would use the Arabicised version for effect, I should imagine, to emphasize the old-worldliness of a particular text perhaps. However, the transition has been so gradual, I am sure that both spellings must have been considered equally correct for quite a long time, and that طهران may never become wholly obsolete. Other examples of words with the 't' sound in them and with two acceptable spellings are بلیت/بلیط (ticket) and باتری/باطری (battery).


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

Got it. Thanks. Reminds me of the old spelling of "room": اطاق
By the way, I believe "سو" by itself means "in the direction of", so why does the writer insert بہ before it?
ارتش عراق از جنوب مشغول پیشروی به سوی موصل بوده است
The ی at the end of سو is understandable: it is the orthographic repesentation of the اضافہ between سو and موصل.


----------



## PersoLatin

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> By the way, I believe "سو" by itself means "in the direction of", so why does the writer insert بہ before it?


سو by itself means 'direction', to say '*in* the direction of', or '*to*wards', you do need به, which here translates as in or to.


----------



## Ali Smith

Treaty said:


> It is _az jonoob_ (from south) _mashghool-e pishravi_ ([has been] marching forward) ...
> _pishravi _is made of prefix _pish_ (fore) and _ravi_ (from the present stem of _raftan_). The structure _mashgool-e_ + infinitive/action noun is another way to make a progressive verb (though it usually means 'busy doing sth').


Can جنوب also be pronounced janub?


----------

