# Persian: Old people are not as jealous as young people.



## seitt

Greetings,

Please, how can I express the sentence “Old people are not as jealous as young people.” in Colloquial Persian?

My aim is not to comment on old people and young people but rather a linguistic problem: should ‘as jealous as’ be ‘به حسودیِ’ or ‘به حسادتِ’ or something else again?

Best wishes, and many thanks,

Simon


----------



## searcher123

پيران/سالمندان به اندازه‌ي جوانان حسود نيستند
پيرا/سالمندا قدّ جوونا حسود نيستن (Colloquial)



> should ‘as jealous as’ be ‘به حسودیِ’ or ‘به حسادتِ’ or something else again?


No problem if you translate it so too:

پيران/سالمندان به حسود‌ي جوانان نيستند
پيرا/سالمندا به حسودي جوونا نيستن (Colloquial)


----------



## seitt

Thank you so much, marvellous.

Just one more thing: would ‘به حسادتِ’ be wrong or just unusual?


----------



## searcher123

You are welcome.



seitt said:


> would ‘به حسادتِ’ be wrong or just unusual?


It is wrong. حسادت is a noun and you can not use it as an adjective.


----------



## aisha93

> It is wrong. حسادت is a noun and you can not use it as an adjective.



I guess you meant an adverb, because حسودی is an adverb, and حسود is the adjective, is it not so?


----------



## seitt

Many thanks - actually I'm really not sure what حسودی is grammatically because, indeed, if it were a noun it could be replaced by حسادت, which we know is a noun.

There's nothing like it in English grammar, so I suggest we invent a term such as "adjectival abstraction", it being based on حسود, which is indeed an adjective.


----------



## aisha93

I guess it is an adverb because it came after به , such as (به راحتی=easily) or به سختی ...etc.


----------



## Jervoltage

حسودی is a noun here (more specifically اسم مصدر) which means حسود بودن,  and is simply formed by adding ی to the adj. حسود (you can read about the ways of forming اسم مصدر here under اقسام اسم مصدر.)



seitt said:


> Thank you so much, marvellous.
> 
> Just one more thing: would ‘به حسادتِ’ be wrong or just unusual?



It's just unusual. It's a common construction in comparisons to use an adjective +" اسم مصدر-forming" ی. However, there are instance where a "real" noun is simply used, to quote from the interwebs:علوم انساني و اجتماعي به دقت علوم طبيعي نيست.
سیر نزولی اقتصاد جهان، دیگر به سرعت قبل نیست.
...
​


seitt said:


> Many thanks - actually I'm really not sure what حسودی is grammatically because, indeed, if it were a noun it could be replaced by حسادت, which we know is a noun.



So again, it is a noun, and it can be replaced by another noun if, of course, the result sounds natural.


----------



## seitt

Thank you so much for clearing that one up.

Btw, please could we have a translation of علوم انساني و اجتماعي به دقت علوم طبيعي نيست.
سیر نزولی اقتصاد جهان، دیگر به سرعت قبل نیست 
if it's not too much trouble?
What do you think of using به دقیقی and به سریعی in the above sentences? Equally good? Better? Worse?​


----------



## Jervoltage

aisha93 said:


> I guess it is an adverb because it came after به , such as (به راحتی=easily) or به سختی ...etc.



به راحتی، به سختی، ... are adverbial phrases. راحتی، سختی، ... are nouns (اسم مصدر) on their own.


----------



## Jervoltage

seitt said:


> Thank you so much for clearing that one up.
> 
> Btw, please could we have a translation of علوم انساني و اجتماعي به دقت علوم طبيعي نيست.
> سیر نزولی اقتصاد جهان، دیگر به سرعت قبل نیست
> if it's not too much trouble?​



You're most welcome.

Of course,
#1 The humanities and the social sciences are not as precise as the natural sciences.
#2 The global economic decline is not as steep as before.


----------



## seitt

Many thanks, truly a most valuable contribution.

What do you think of using به دقیقی and به سریعی in the above sentences? Equally good? Better? Worse?


----------



## Jervoltage

My pleasure!



seitt said:


> What do you think of using به دقیقی and به سریعی in the above sentences? Equally good? Better? Worse?



As I said, it just doesn't sound natural using به دقیقی or به سریعی instead.


----------



## darush

aisha93 said:


> I guess it is an adverb because it came after به , such as (به راحتی=easily) or به سختی ...etc.



براحتی = easily
به راحتی is not equal to _easily

_عایشه براحتی پیانو می نوازد/..be raahati piano../: aisha plays the Piano easily
عربی به راحتی فارسی نیست /arabi be raahati*e *faarsi nist/*Edit:* Arabic is not  at the easiness of Farsi(thanks to QURESHPOR!)

-Piraa be hasudi*e *javunaa nistan


----------



## aisha93

Great correction and explanation, thank you.


----------



## Qureshpor

darush said:


> براحتی = easily
> به راحتی is not equal to _easily
> 
> _عایشه براحتی پیانو می نوازد/..be raahati piano../: aisha plays the Piano easily
> عربی به راحتی فارسی نیست /arabi be raahati*e *faarsi nist/: Arabic is not easy as Farsi(harder than Farsi)
> 
> -Piraa be hasudi*e *javunaa nistan


ba-raaHatii is exactly the same as bah raaHatii. It is just the suffix "bah" has a host of meanings, e.g at, in, with, by etc

1) Aisha plays the piano with easiness/ease

2) Arabic is not at the easiness of Farsi


----------

