# Persian: Mishenavam or mishenam?



## OldGrantonian

.
I'm a native English speaker. For two weeks every few years, I speak Farsi to some of my wife's Iranian relatives. So, in advance, I try to refresh my memory from my Farsi notes, and Anki.

My biggest problem is trying to remember how to conjugate the irregular verbs. I spend the same time trying to refresh my memory on irregular verbs, as I do for all all the other verbs, nouns, adjectives, prepositions, etc.

So here is my question: Like most Iranians, my guests are very polite. So, I'm wondering if they would mind if I conjugated all the IRREGULAR verbs as if they were REGULAR.

For example, shenidan

 -  Irregular present stem: shenav-
 -  Irregular present: mishenavam

 -  Regular present step: shen-
 -  Regular present: mishenam

So, I would say mishenam, rather than mishenavam.

Is that rude? Would Iranians understand what I'm saying?
The big advantage of that method is that I only need to know the infinitive of the verb, and then conjugate regularly.

Thanks.
.


----------



## Treaty

The regular/irregular doesn't work this way. The regular is _shenav_- and its past stem _shenoft_-. However, this past stem is not used in formal language anymore (it is even rare in informal). Instead a past stem _shenid_- is used (which I guess is a shortened form of once-existing *_shenavidan_). So, there is no such thing as _shen-_ stem to begin with and if you use it, they probably will confuse it with _shin_ (colloquial short for _neshin_-, "sit").


----------



## colognial

Hello, OldGrantonian! I wonder if there may not be a piece of information missing from your notes! If you consider the stem derived directly from the infinitive, e.g. 'sheneed' which is the stem that can be derived from 'sheneedan', then this stem is always at the same time the actual finite verb: Third Person Singular in Simple Past Tense, to be exact. This particular stem can only be subjected to further treatment to give you the different persons and past tenses, but not the present tense verbs.

Example:

SIMPLE PAST TENSE:
Sheneed*am*, I heard.
Sheneed*i*, you heard (with the 'you' being singular).
Sheneed, she/he/it heard. (Recognize the past-tense stem?)
Sheneed*eem*, we heard.
Sheneed*eed*, you (lot) heard.
Sheneed*and*, they heard.

PAST PROGRESSIVE TENSE:
*Mee*sheneed*am*, I could hear, I was hearing.
*Mee*sheneed*i*, you could hear, you were hearing.
*Mee*sheneed, she/he/it ... (Here again, you see the past-tense stem, 'sheneed', as the main part of a finite verb, that is, without a suffix.)
*Mee*sheneed*eem*, we ...
*Mee*sheneed*eed*, you ...
*Mee*sheneed*and*, they ...

So, the past-tense stem doesn't help at all if you want to conjugate in the present tense. What you need for that is the 'present tense stem'. The present-tense stem, however, has to be learned. It is irregular (leading in a way to all verbs being 'irregular') in the sense that it does not come about by your simply shortening the past stem.

Here are some examples of past- and present-tense stems - you can decide for yourself if this is regular or irregular:

Infinitive: sheneedan
Past stem: sheneed
Present stem: sheno (or shenav) = hear! (imperative) - Note: the present-tense stem, too, is a finite verb at the same time, especially if you add a little 'be' to the beginning: 'besheno' is how we say '[you] hear' in Persian.

Infinitive: goftan
Past stem: goft = he said
Present stem: gu = say!

Infinitive: doost daashtan
Past stem: doost daasht = he loved
Present stem: doost daar = love!

As I said, to conjugate a verb in the present tense you always need the present-tense stem:

Example:

*mee*shenav*am* = I hear
*be*shenav*am* = I would hear - Note: this tense is considered a present tense in Persian.

Finally, good luck! Persian verbs are hard. They're not the hardest in the world, though!


----------



## PersoLatin

OldGrantonian said:


> For example, shenidan
> 
> - Irregular present stem: shenav-
> - Irregular present: mishenavam
> 
> - Regular present step: shen-
> - Regular present: mishenam



Sorry, couldn't get rid of the blue & the underlining on ŝ, easily.

Based on the variety of forms of this verb, I believe the present stem of the present-day ŝenidan (to hear), is *ŝ**eno/ŝenu *which gives ŝenudan as the correct, or the original infinitive form. In my view, the mis-reading of the Perso-Arabic of this form, i.e. *شنو* has given us these 'present stem' varieties: *ŝenav,* *ŝenov, ŝno *& *ŝ**nav *&* ŝnov *(other combinations are possible e.g. *ŝanav,* *ŝanov*).

a ) *ŝ**eno, **ŝ**no*,* ŝenov *provide most of the colloquial/informal forms i.e.
1 mi*ŝ**eno*am, miŝenoi, miŝenoé, miŝenoim, miŝenoin, mi*ŝ**eno*an.
2 mi*ŝno*am, miŝnoi, miŝnoé, miŝnoim, miŝnoin, mi*ŝ**no*an
3 mi*ŝ**enov*om. mi*ŝ**eno*-om, and many other regional forms.
'be' can be used with 2 e.g. be*ŝ**no*am, be*ŝ**no*ii

b ) *ŝenav*,* ŝnav, ŝnov* gives us the formal versions, i.e.:
1 mi*ŝenav*am, miŝenavi, miŝenavad, miŝenavim, miŝenavid, mi*ŝenav*and.
2 mi*ŝnav*am, miŝnavi, miŝnavad (miŝnavé coll.), miŝnavim, miŝnavid(miŝnavin coll.), mi*ŝ**nav*and (miŝnavan coll.).
3 mi*ŝnov*am, miŝnovi, miŝnovad, miŝnovim, miŝnovid, mi*ŝ**nov*and.
'be' can be used with 2 & 3 e.g. be*ŝnav*am & be*ŝnov*am
Also 2 & 3 can be considered 'literary' as well as formal.

You can also see the present stem ŝeno*, *in (*ŝeno*-andé)* شنو*نده ŝenavandé or ŝenowanda.

c ) Past stem, informal:
In the same way that the present stem 'ro - رو' has given the past stem 'raft- رفت', (also 'gu-گو' & 'goft- گفت') the present *ŝ**eno/ŝenu *has given the past stem *ŝ**enoft/ŝnoft, *and this provides the informal/colloquial forms:
*ŝ**enoft*am, ...*ŝ**enoft*im... *ŝ**enoft*an and
miŝ*enoft*am, ...mi*ŝ**enoft*im... mi*ŝ**enoft*an and
mi*ŝ**noft*am, ...mi*ŝ**noft*im... mi*ŝ**noft*an
etc.

d ) Past stem, formal:
The present-day formal past stem is *ŝenid* (but must have been *ŝenud*) which gives:

*ŝenid*am, ......, *ŝenid*im.... *ŝenid*and




OldGrantonian said:


> The big advantage of that method is that I only need to know the infinitive of the verb, and then conjugate regularly.


The method generally works but there are many exceptions.


----------



## eli7

_Shenidan_ is the infinitive form. Omitting ن from the end of verb change it to بُن or ریشه فعل. So, you have _Shenid_ now.
In fact, the original verb is شنودن (Shenoodan) which is more literally and used in ancient poems. So, if we consider this verb, and applying the above-mentioned rules, we are going to have شنود (Shenood) as the stem.


OldGrantonian said:


> So, I would say mishenam, rather than mishenavam.
> 
> Is that rude?



You can take the stem Shenood )شنود(. No, it has nothing to do with being rude! You MAY be comprehended in the situation or context which it is happening.


OldGrantonian said:


> Regular present step: shen-


We don't have Shen as the stem.

Take a look at this link.


----------



## OldGrantonian

Many thanks for all the generous, detailed responses. All these will prove to be very useful.

I think my original post was possibly badly worded. This has maybe caused some sincere people to wander off my intended topic, which is "the irregular present stem". 

My question is:  if I ignore the grammar books, and convert any infinitive to a regular stem, will Farsi speakers understand me? Even if they understand me - will I be considered rude, or impolite, or lazy?

Here is some further clarification of my crazy idea to simplify some of the irregular present tenses.

My grammar book gives the following rules to form the "present stem":

 -  Remove -ndan. . E.g.: xandan (xan)
 -  Remove -ādan. . E.g.: oftādan (oft)
 -  Remove -idan. . .E.g.: davidan (dav)
 -  Remove -tan. . . .E.g.: koštan (koš)

Here is my own EXTRA crazy rule, to be applied only after the above rules have been applied:

 -  Remove -dan

In the table below, I will use the word "Correct" to apply to any irregular present stem that I see in my grammar book.

I will use the word "Crazy" to apply to any present stem that I create from the above five rules. 

Infinitive . . Correct.. . . Crazy

āmuxtan . . . āmuz . . . .āmux
āmixtan . . . .āmiz . . . .āmix
andāxtan . . ..andāz. . .andāx
āvixtan . . . . .āviz . . . .āvix
bāxtan . . . . . bāz . . . . bāx
pardāxtan . . pardāz . . pardāx
duxtan . . . . .duz . . . . . dux
sāxtan . . . . . sāz . . . . .sāx
------------------------------------
āzmudan .. . .āzmā . . āzmu
afzudan . . . . afzā . . . afzu
pāludan . . . . .pālā . . .pālu
peimudan . . .peimā . . peimu
farmudan . . .farmā . . farmu
namudan . . .namā . . .namu
-------------------------------------
sepordan . . . sepār . . .sepor
šomardan . . .šomār . .šomor
fešordan . . . .fešār . . .fešor
bordan . . . . . bar . . . . bor


----------



## PersoLatin

OldGrantonian said:


> My question is: if I ignore the grammar books, and convert any infinitive to a regular stem, will Farsi speakers understand me? Even if they understand me - will I be considered rude, or impolite, or lazy?


Never rude or impolite, wrong, maybe.
So you want to use the outcome of applying the general rule, to known irregular verbs, to conjugate? e.g. say biāmux for biāmuz, or peimādam for peimudam, then that is wrong and can cause confusion, that is, if have understood you correctly.


----------



## OldGrantonian

.


PersoLatin said:


> e.g. say biāmux for biāmuz, or peimādam for peimudam



My Farsi is limited (obviously), but I was wondering whether it would be acceptable to say "mi-peimudam" instead of "mi-peimādam", and similarly for all personal endings of the present tense.
.


----------



## PersoLatin

OldGrantonian said:


> it would be acceptable to say "mi-peimudam" instead of "mi-peimādam


'mipeimudam' is the correct version anyway, 'mipeimādam' is incorrect, which is the point I thought I made:


PersoLatin said:


> e.g. say biāmux for biāmuz, or peimādam for peimudam, then that is wrong and can cause confusion,



I think you are mixing the present and past stems.
present stem = remove 'tan/dan'
past stem = remove 'an'

So for peimudan which is irregular, pres. stem is peimā & past stem is peimud, examples be*peimā*, *peimud*am

But ask away till you get it right


----------



## OldGrantonian

.
>>  'mipeimudam' is the correct version anyway, 'mipeimādam' is incorrect, 

According to my grammar book (see attached screenshot), the "Correct" version is "mipeimādam". So, it looks as if we're trying to shoot a moving target 

It's difficult for me to know how to proceed now. Maybe, from the list, someone could pick some verbs that everyone agrees with, and then continue with my original question:  can I use the "crazy" present stem, or not?

Maybe we should restrict answers to people whose native language is Farsi - because all my wife's relatives are native Farsi-speakers.


----------



## PersoLatin

OldGrantonian said:


> According to my grammar book (see attached screenshot), the "Correct" version is "mipeimādam". So, it looks as if we're trying to shoot a moving target


The text book is correct, *you can only use the present stem in certain conjugations* e.g. bepeimā*, *for other types, you'll need the past stem which is peimud, so peimudam is correct, maybe ask your wife's folks, for confirmation. BTW - I am a native Persian speaker.


----------



## eli7

OldGrantonian said:


> My Farsi is limited (obviously), but I was wondering whether it would be acceptable to say "mi-peimudam" instead of "mi-peimādam"


There is no "mi-peimādam" in Farsi, at least I have never heard it. I believe you meant mipeimayam.

You need to know about بن فعل.
According to the screenshot you provided, consider بستن و پرداختن و پیمودن.
بستن is the infinitive.You omit ن from the end of the infinitives to get the stem ریشه فعل. ( So you have بست. 
You add ب at the beginning of the verb, with no شناسه فعل.
ببست = ببند
پرداختن => omitting ن => changes it to پرداخت
Then adding ب at the beginning => بپرداخت which is used as بپرداز or پرداز
* In Farsi, imperatives verbs can be used with or without ب.

You might find these links helpful, and this one.


----------



## OldGrantonian

.


eli7 said:


> There is no "mi-peimādam" in Farsi, at least I have never heard it. I believe you meant mipeimayam.



You are correct. I meant "mipeimayam"  : -(

My head is constantly spinning on this forum, and I was subtly misled by post #7 by PersoLatin, in which "d" crept unnoticed into the middle of words without prior warning. (This is a criticism of myself - not PersoLatin, nor any of the other generous volunteers on this forum.) 

I think I'll submit this post now, in order to prevent other kind users from pointing out my mistake.

I'll come back later, when my head stops spinning  
.


----------



## eskandar

OldGrantonian said:


> My question is:  if I ignore the grammar books, and convert any infinitive to a regular stem, will Farsi speakers understand me? Even if they understand me - will I be considered rude, or impolite, or lazy?


It will have a very similar effect to improperly conjugating verbs in English. If you met someone who was learning English and couldn't use irregular verbs correctly, saying things like "yesterday I am'd hungry, I bringed some lunch home from the store and beginned to eat it, after I eated it I drawed a picture" what would you think? Most likely, you'd understand and wouldn't think they were being rude - you'd just think they weren't very good at English. That's more or less the impression you'd give by not using the correct stems with irregular Persian verbs. However there is also room for misunderstanding. For example,



OldGrantonian said:


> In the table below, I will use the word "Correct" to apply to any irregular present stem that I see in my grammar book.
> 
> I will use the word "Crazy" to apply to any present stem that I create from the above five rules.
> 
> Infinitive . . Correct.. . . Crazy
> 
> bordan . . . . . bar . . . . bor


If you say "miboram" (just removing 'dan' from the infinitive to form the verb stem) instead of "mibaram" it means something completely different. "Mibaram", the correct present progressive form, means "I bring" or "I am bringing." If you say "miboram" it would mean "I cut" or "I am cutting" (from the infinitive boridan). That's why it's important to learn the irregular verb stems.


----------



## colognial

It would be easier not to conjugate. Or, if one were to use the crazies - some of which incidentally are quite sensible - then one might as well do away with conjugations and just use the stems for all the persons, e.g. _man sheneed_ (instead of _man sheneedam_) and _man meeshen_ (instead of _man meeshenavam_). It would be less confusing, people would understand and would not think it rude or ignorant and might even supply the correct verb. The trouble with Persian as a second language is that you need to see the grammar in practice and for that you need to be able to read the written material, and high literature in particular, and that requires learning the alphabet, which is done in this crazy script which often causes heated discussions among the natives themselves. So the issues involving Persian are just endless (moojebe hermaan)!


----------



## OldGrantonian

.
At last, after 13 posts, one poster has finally understood what I'm trying to do 

All the fault is mine. It's obvious that I don't have the ability to present my case in a narrow, focused manner, like a courtroom lawyer - or like Eskandar the Great 



eskandar said:


> ...saying things like "yesterday I am'd hungry, I bringed some lunch home from the store and beginned to eat it...



This "crazy" sentence would have been understood immediately, and in its entirety, by any Brit, Yank, Ozzie, or Kiwi. They might not even have been aware that some of the words were crazy. That's because the brain processes "messages" or "meanings" rather than individual words one at a time. The brain will always try to create something meaningful. The effect is similar to the following. Someone walking through the woods sees shadows and bushes, having leaves of various shades of green and yellow. The brain always tries to present the most "dangerous" or "helpful" or "meaningful" image to the human. So, the brain presents an image of a leopard or tiger, rather than an image of harmless leaves. Eventually, the human realizes that the "leopard" is simply a trick of the imagination. On the other hand, if the brain presented a real leopard as a harmless image...

I believe that the following text would also be understandable to English speakers:

 -  hungry yesterday am'd I, I some lunch home bringed from store and it to eat beginned...  (I've omitted "the" which has no equivalent in Farsi.)

Note that all the verbs are at the end of each sentence - as in Farsi  

When I was in Tehran (pre- and post-revolution), many Iranians were very proud to demonstrate their English, and the previous sentence was an excellent example. If they had walked around with an English grammar book in their pocket, it might have taken half an hour to construct a single correct sentence. They would have taken years to gradually learn correct English. By speaking "pidgin" English, they probably reached an acceptable standard in six months. Nobody speaks "correct" English anyway - including the four nationalities mentioned earlier. Even professors of English probably speak "everyday" English outside the classroom.

So, as in eskandar's clever example, I was planning to construct some engineered Farsi sentences containing my crazy present stems. Although the one-word crazy stems that I presented in my original post might not be understood on their own, I'm assuming that if the stems were surrounded by other "correct" Farsi words, the listener has more opportunity to understand the meaning of the whole sentence. The greater the number of supporting words, the greater the possibility of correct understanding; the fewer the number of words, the smaller the possibility.



eskandar said:


> ...there is also room for misunderstanding. For example, If you say "miboram" (just removing 'dan' from the infinitive to form the verb stem) instead of "mibaram" it means something completely different...



Yet again, eskandar succeeds in isolating the relevant important issues - and avoids sidetracking into irrelevant discussion. In this case, maybe some kind poster could study the list in my OP, and isolate those few (hopefully) crazy stems that might be misunderstood. I would then be forced to learn the correct stem only for those few verbs.

Please don't forget what I said in my OP. I only speak Farsi for two weeks every 2-3 years. The simpler my Farsi, the more quickly I can get back up to speed. The less time I spend on irregular stems, the more time I have to revise the remaining words.

Many thanks to eskandar, and all the other generous posters.


----------

