Talk:را

Persian را
In number 4 of the particle section, the bolded usage of را in the following text is given as an example of it being used as a genitive particle to mark the possessor: شنیدم که رستم ز آغاز کار چنان یافت نیرو ز پروردگار که گر سنگ را او به سر شدی همی هر دو پایش بدو در شدی šunîdam ki rustam dar âğâz-i kâr čunân yâft nêrô zi parwardigâr ki gar sang râ ô ba sar bûdê hamê har du pây-aš bad-ô dar šûdê I have heard that at the beginning, Rustam Was given such strength from God That if he were upon the top of a rock Both his two feet would keep sinking into it. (romanization in Classical Persian)

Is this usage not not marking an direct object (the direct object being سنگ)? If so, then this example would be more appropriate for sub section one of the particle section, and not sub section 4. It seems like to me that the direct object is سنگ (which is marked by را), the subject is او and the verb is سر شدی. Obviously this is not in the typical SOV (subject object verb) order used in Persian but order jumbling is a very common thing in Persian, especially in poetry.

One of the correct examples given for sub section 4 is the following:

هیچ خلق را جان نگرفتمی hēč xalq rā jān na-giriftamē. I would not have taken the life of anybody. (romanization in Classical Persian)

As you can see, جان is being possessed by خلق in this example, hence خلق is marked with را. For this type of usage, one can typically switch the order of the possessor and the possessed, remove the را and instead add an izafe kasreh after the possessed and the sentence would not change semantically and would still be grammatically correct. One can do this with the latter example (it turns into هیچ جانِ خلق نگرفتمی), but one cannot do so with the former example. MarkParker1221 (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)