# Persian: همى گوید



## deathmarker

What is the meaning of همى گوید? Here’s the context:

ملک پرسید چه می‌گوید یکی از وزرای نیک محضر گفت ای خداوند همی‌گوید وَ الْکاظِمینَ الغَیْظَ وَ الْعافِینَ عَنِ النّاسِ ملک را رحمت آمد و از سر خون او در گذشت

According to my textbook it should mean “He keeps on saying”, but this doesn’t make any sense in this context.


----------



## molana

deathmarker said:


> What is the meaning of همى گوید?


معنی همی | فرهنگ لغت عمید​

Here it means: همیشه/پیوسته


ملک پرسید: چه می‌گوید؟
 .یکی از وزرای نیک محضر گفت : ای خداوند! همی[=همواره]( این سخن را ) گوید:  وَ الْکاظِمینَ الغَیْظَ وَ الْعافِینَ عَنِ النّاسِ
 .ملک را رحمت آمد و از سر خون او در گذشت​


----------



## PersoLatin

deathmarker said:


> What is the meaning of همى گوید? Here’s the context:



This exact question has been asked before but I can't find the thread.

The English translation of همى گويد is 'he *keeps* saying.....' or 'he *repeatedly* says.....'.

As well as what molana has already said, the modern colloquial version of همى گويد is '....هى ميگه'.


----------



## deathmarker

My Persian isn't that good. Please tell me how you would translate this part of the story:

ای خداوند همی‌گوید

I'm guessing: "O lord! He keeps on saying...(verse from Kuran)"


----------



## molana

deathmarker said:


> I'm guessing: "O lord! He keeps on saying...(verse from Kuran)"


"O Lord! He is always saying and repeating (this sentence from Koran): Those who control their wrath and are forgiving toward mankind."


----------



## PersoLatin

deathmarker said:


> I'm guessing: "O lord! He keeps on saying...(verse from Kuran)"


You are guessing correctly.


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

If it had been ای خداوند می‌گوید instead, it would have meant "O lord! He is saying...", right? The difference would be that he is saying it once, not again and again.


----------



## PersoLatin

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> If it had been ای خداوند می‌گوید instead, it would have meant "O lord! He is saying...", right? The difference would be that he is saying it once, not again and again.


Exactly, although "Oh lord, he says..." is more accurate.


----------



## colognial

To add to above contributions: though we don't use همی any longer, the idea of repetition or extension over time, that is, continuing to do something over and over or ceaselessly within the time that constitutes the verb's present time, has not lost its sharpness. One way we compensate for the loss of the همی is by using a helping verb, e.g.
ای خداوند، دارد می گوید 
ماه دارد در می آید (the moon is rising [above the horizon].)
مادر داشت شام می پخت که زنگ در را زدند (the mother [Mom] was making dinner when the doorbell rang.)
But if the helping verb is omitted, then the emphasis vanishes with it, and context alone determines whether or not continuity or repetition is intended.
ای خداوند، می گوید
ماه در می آید
مادر شام می پخت که زنگ در را زدند


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

colognial said:


> To add to above contributions: though we don't use همی any longer, the idea of repetition or extension over time, that is, continuing to do something over and over or ceaselessly within the time that constitutes the verb's present time, has not lost its sharpness. One way we compensate for the loss of the همی is by using a helping verb, e.g.
> ای خداوند، دارد می گوید
> ماه دارد در می آید (the moon is rising [above the horizon].)
> مادر داشت شام می پخت که زنگ در را زدند (the mother [Mom] was making dinner when the doorbell rang.)
> But if the helping verb is omitted, then the emphasis vanishes with it, and context alone determines whether or not continuity or repetition is intended.
> ای خداوند، می گوید
> ماه در می آید
> مادر شام می پخت که زنگ در را زدند



Interesting! I guess there is a difference between "He prays" and "He is praying" in Persian: نماز می کند and دارد نماز می کند.
Although I do remember reading somewhere that there is no distinction between the two meanings in Persian and that one has to use the context to figure out what نماز می کند means. I.e. it could mean "He is praying (right now)" or "He prays (five times a day)". Maybe be the use of دارد in such contexts is colloquial?


----------



## farasso0

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> نماز می کند and دارد نماز می کند.
> ?


We usually say  نماز می خواند
And since Quran was revealed to our prophet only one time,I think همی گوید means 'says' in your example.
همی
I'm sorry I misunderstood what your wrote.  The person who was arrested had read a part of a verse from Quran and one of the ministers quoted him on that. همی گوید is می گوید. I think همی was used for emphasis not repetition.


----------



## PersoLatin

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> Interesting! I guess there is a difference between "He prays" and "He is praying" in Persian: نماز می کند and دارد نماز می کند.


Yes there's is but the context matters:
if I asked: 'چه مى گويد؟' you could correctly reply with either, so دارد دعا می‌خوا ند or دعا می‌خوا ند
if I asked: 'دارد چه مى گويد؟' you'd reply  دارد دعا می‌خوا ند

other examples:
1 درس می‌خواند - she studies (time span: present but not limited to a specific time)
2 هی درس می‌خواند (Eqv. to همی) - she keeps studying (time span: present but not limited to a specific time)
3 دارد درس می‌خواند - she is studying (time span: now, this minute, presently)

The question in the OP همى گوید, is the same as 2. From the context you can see that the king is about to have the man killed, so he asks his assistant, 'what is he saying? چه می‌گوید؟', his assistant says, 'he keeps saying... همى گوید' i.e. repeatedly saying a religious verse, (obviously for fear of his life), which conveys to the king that this man has been saying that for a while (e.g. during transport from jail to the king) and still doing it, now. Of course if this scenario was in the present time, the assistant could had said دارد می‌گوید which would mean, now and not necessary repeatedly, so not the same.


----------



## fdb

The important thing is that hamē همى is simply the older form of the prefix mē مى.  It is the same difference as between dar and andar. (ha)mē comes from the Middle Persian adverb hamēšag “always, eternally”. In early New Persian both hamē and mē are still used to give continuous meaning to the present tense of the verb, the only difference being that mē is always used as a prefix (immediately before the verb), while hamē can stand before or after the verb or at any point in the sentence. Later mē plus the present tense becomes the default form of the present, without any implication of continuous action and hamē dies out except occasionally in poetry.

In your example the king asks چه می‌گوید and the wazir answers همی‌گوید. I think it is clear that here both have exactly the same meaning (“the king asked ‘what is he saying’ and the wazir answered ‘he is saying…’”), here still in the original sense of as a marker for the present continuous.


----------



## colognial

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> Although I do remember reading somewhere that there is no distinction between the two meanings in Persian and that one has to use the context to figure out what نماز می کند means.


The concept exists for the typical Persian speaker, and there are concrete ways of introducing it into the sentence, as I have tried to demonstrate. 
I think that in English the same sort of thing can happen, where one uses the simple present tense for an action that must by necessity be continuous or repetitive. An example is when in a story the simple present tense is used in the narrative, but you sense that the action is still alive in the mind of the writer at the time of writing.
Example:
_... We wait. The secretary arrives and gives us hope. I catch a glimpse of him down the hall. Immediately thereafter he comes toward us with arms half spread. The woman explains that I was there first. So I walk behind him as he leads me into his room._ (F.Kafka, _The diaries_)


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

I just checked a textbook on Persian. It says that ھمی gives the sense of "to keep on doing, to do over and over", and it does not have to be prefixed to the verb. It gives the following example:

بوی جوی مولیان آید ھمی      یاد یار مھربان آید ھمی
(رودکی)

Translation (the textbook's, not mine): The scent of the Mulian river keeps coming; the memory of the beloved friend keeps coming.


----------



## farasso0

kalilah wa dimnah said:


> I just checked a textbook on Persian. It says that ھمی gives the sense of "to keep on doing, to do over and over", and it does not have to be prefixed to the verb. It gives the following example:
> 
> بوی جوی مولیان آید ھمی      یاد یار مھربان آید ھمی
> (رودکی)
> 
> Translation (the textbook's, not mine): The scent of the Mulian river keeps coming; the memory of the beloved friend keeps coming.


I think it has other meanings too:
*همی گوید* ابوالفضل محمدبن حسین البیهقی .... Here it means 'says' not 'is saying'


----------



## colognial

Well, what does Boofazl say?
Here's another one, this time from the Shaah Naame:
چو کاوه برون شد ز درگاه شاه
بر او انجمن گشت بازارگاه
همی برخروشید و فریاد خواند
جهان را سراسر سوی داد خواند
Rewritten in prose the line will become  می خروشید و فریاد می کرد.
Also,
مبین به سیب زنخدان که چاه در راه است
کجا همی روی ای دل بدین شتاب کجا
The 'hami' can be taken as being equivalent to 'mi', or not. It makes sense for it to be the mark of a mozaare ekhbaari (مضارع اخباری) as well, but only because 'hami' endows this tense with its own 'here and now' quality. This is pure guesswork on my part, naturally (!), but the examples are laid out for all to judge.


----------



## PersoLatin

colognial said:


> The 'hami' can be taken as being equivalent to 'mi', or not. It makes sense for it to be the mark of a mozaare ekhbaari (مضارع اخباری) as well, but only because 'hami' endows this tense with its own 'here and now' quality. This is pure guesswork on my part, naturally (!), but the examples are laid out for all to judge.


Hi colgnial, I agree that 'hami' can be the same as 'mi' in many cases, especially when used in poetry, to satisfy stylistic, metering and rhyming requirements.

However in prose, there's no need to use both in the same line, if they are to represent the same tense, as there's no stylistic advantage to be gained. Why then would Saedi use both, if they were meant to be the same? Also how else would one convey the sense of repetition of a verb, in classical times, other than with 'hami'?


deathmarker said:


> ملک پرسید چه *می‌گوید *یکی از وزرای نیک محضر گفت ای خداوند *همی‌گوید *وَ الْکاظِمینَ الغَیْظَ وَ الْعافِینَ عَنِ النّاسِ ملک را رحمت آمد و از سر خون او در گذشت





I believe if you replace همی‌گوید with می‌گوید (in the OP), you'd loose something and that something is the sense of repetition. Of course the context also gives us a big clue but that is not how you and fdb see it:


PersoLatin said:


> From the context you can see that the king is about to have the man killed, so he asks his assistant, 'what is he saying? چه می‌گوید؟', his assistant says, 'he keeps saying... همى گوید' i.e. repeatedly saying a religious verse, (obviously for fear of his life), which conveys to the king that this man has been saying that for a while (e.g. during transport from jail to the king) and still doing it, now. Of course if this scenario was in the present time, the assistant could had said دارد می‌گوید which would mean, now and not necessary repeatedly, so not the same.







colognial said:


> مبین به سیب زنخدان که چاه در راه است
> کجا همی روی ای دل بدین شتاب کجا


I believe, here, 'hami' has the sense of 'repeatedly', the same as همی‌گوید.


----------



## farasso0

> Well, what does Boofazl say?


تاریخ بیهقی


----------



## colognial

PersoLatin, I agree with you about the special function of همی, and this has been my position from the start. The only thing I'm adding to your argument above is that می گوید could stand in for همی گوید, which explains why it has altogether driven the latter verb out of usage in our time. Languages tend to develop in the direction of simplification. Also, it is possible to see the odd همی گوید in old texts where one would normally expect to see a می گوید. I think this may be because the context is such that it warrants some emphasis on the گوینده being alive, present, and able to verify the thing that is being said.


----------



## The Pathan

What about the way it has been used three times in the following?

خرد گر سخن برگزیند همی همان را گزیند که بیند همی
ستودن نداند کس او را چو هست میان بندگی را ببایدت بست
خرد را و جان را همی سنجد اوی در اندیشهٔ سخته کی گنجد اوی


----------



## kalilah wa dimnah

The Pathan said:


> What about the way it has been used three times in the following?
> 
> خرد گر سخن برگزیند همی همان را گزیند که بیند همی
> ستودن نداند کس او را چو هست میان بندگی را ببایدت بست
> خرد را و جان را همی سنجد اوی در اندیشهٔ سخته کی گنجد اوی



Is this from شاھنامہ?


----------



## fdb

Has anyone seen my contribution (no. 13)?


----------



## PersoLatin

The Pathan said:


> خرد گر سخن برگزیند همی همان را گزیند که بیند همی


خرد گر سخن برگزیند همی
همان را گزیند که بیند همی

_If wisdom were to select the spoken words, it will *always/every time *pick the ones (همان) it sees *always/all the time*._

The first همی applies to گزیند and the second to بیند



The Pathan said:


> خرد را و جان را همی سنجد اوی در اندیشهٔ سخته کی گنجد اوی


Here همی is the same as می, plus همیشه/always/every time, so همیشه می‌سنجد 'always evaluates/measures'


----------



## PersoLatin

fdb said:


> Has anyone seen my contribution (no. 13)?


Hi fdb, for my part, I saw your contribution and in post 18, I replied to colognial's post which, I believed, was in agreement with your contribution.

I still believe همی, despite being the predecessor of می, has an element of repetition in it which must have developed at a later stage (around classical stage of NP). And that's how 'hami' developed into 'hey mi' which still exists (productive) in colloquial Persian, as in هی ‏می‌گوید/she repeatedly says.


----------



## hacker man

PersoLatin said:


> Here همی is the same as می, plus همیشه/always/every time, so همیشه می‌سنجد 'always evaluates/measures'



How can this verse be correct? sanjad does not rhyme with gonjad!


----------



## PersoLatin

hacker man said:


> How can this verse be correct? sanjad does not rhyme with gonjad!


خرد را و جان را همی سنجد اوی
در اندیشهٔ سخته کی گنجد اوی
I think the 'jad' of گنجد and سنجد together with اوی provide sufficient rhyme, to make it work.


----------



## fdb

jad is the qāfiya and ōy is the radīf.


----------



## PersoLatin

Another example with همى:
یکی از ملوک خراسان محمود سبکتکین را به خواب چنان دید که جمله وجود او ریخته بود و خاک شده مگر چشمان او که همچنان در چشم خانه همی‌گردید نظر می‌کرد سایرحکما از تأویل این فرو ماندند مگر درویشی که به جای آورد و گفت هنوز نگران است که ملکش با دگرانست.

Here we have همى & مى together: .....مگر چشمان او که همچنان در چشم خانه همی‌گردید نظر می‌کرد....., except for his eyes that still kept turning, in the eye sockets, observing...


----------

