Multiple Complementizers and Recursive که | Farsi Grammar

Persian که can recur because clauses can contain other clauses: می‌دانم که گفتی که فردا می‌آیی “I know that you said that you are coming tomorrow.” The first که introduces what I know; the second introduces what you said. This is not one doubled conjunction. Each token opens the content clause selected by a different predicate.

The same written form also introduces relative clauses. In a long sentence, one که may modify a noun while another introduces reported content or evaluation. Accurate reading therefore requires a boundary-by-boundary parse rather than translating every که as English that.

One form, recursively repeated jobs

Job of که	What licenses it	Example frame
content complementizer	speech, thought, knowledge, or evaluation predicate	می‌دانم که P
content complementizer inside another complement	an embedded selecting predicate	می‌دانم که گفتی که P
relative linker	a preceding head noun	نویسنده‌ای که P
adverbial/result linker	a construction such as آن‌قدر ... که	آن‌قدر خسته بود که P

می‌دانم که گفتی که فردا زودتر می‌آیی.

mi-dânam ke gofti ke fardâ zud-tar mi-âyi.

I know that you said that you are coming earlier tomorrow. (neutral careful speech; two content boundaries)

مدیر توضیح داد که فکر می‌کند که هزینه‌ها کاهش می‌یابند.

modir towzih dâd ke fekr mi-konad ke hazine-hâ kâhesh mi-yâband.

The manager explained that she thinks that costs will decrease. (formal; recursive content clauses)

English can omit either that. Persian also omits که in some short conversational complements, but explicit repetition is grammatical and can help mark levels in careful prose. The real constraint is that each overt که must be licensed by a selecting predicate, a head noun, or a larger construction, and the clause it introduces must be structurally complete in context.

💡

Work from left to right: after every speech, thought, or evaluation predicate, ask what proposition supplies its content. The که immediately before that proposition belongs to that predicate.

Bracketing embedded speech and thought

The recursive structure can be represented in prose as “I know [that you said [that P]].” Persian does not change که according to depth. Person, tense, and mood inside each clause remain independently interpretable.

سارا گفت که شنیده است که قطار امشب حرکت نمی‌کند.

Sârâ goft ke shenide ast ke qatâr emshab harekat nemi-konad.

Sara said that she had heard that the train would not run tonight. (formal-neutral; report inside a report)

فکر می‌کنم که او می‌داند که جلسه لغو شده است.

fekr mi-konam ke u mi-dânad ke jalase laghv shode ast.

I think that she knows that the meeting has been cancelled. (neutral; belief over knowledge)

Persian does not automatically shift every embedded tense into the past just because the outer report is past. امشب حرکت نمی‌کند can retain the timetable's present relevance. See Reported Speech and Tense Retention.

An omitted subject is recovered at each level from agreement and discourse. In the Sara example, third-person شنیده است most naturally refers back to Sara; قطار is the overt subject of the innermost clause. Repeating او can clarify a contrast, but که itself carries no person reference.

Evaluation over embedded claims

Impersonal evaluations can scope over an already embedded report. Each predicate controls the mood and factual stance of its own complement: تعجب‌آور است که evaluates the claim “they say P,” while می‌گویند که attributes P to an unspecified source.

تعجب‌آور است که می‌گویند که هیچ مشکلی وجود ندارد.

ta'ajjub-âvar ast ke mi-guyand ke hich moshkeli vojud na-dârad.

It is surprising that they say that no problem exists. (formal; evaluation of an attributed claim)

ممکن است که اعلام کنند که پروازها با تأخیر انجام خواهند شد.

momken ast ke e'lâm konand ke parvâz-hâ bâ ta'khir anjâm khâhand shod.

They may announce that the flights will operate with delays. (formal; possibility takes subjunctive اعلام کنند, reported content takes indicative future)

The first complement after ممکن است is nonasserted and therefore uses subjunctive اعلام کنند. The innermost clause reports the content of the possible announcement and uses indicative future انجام خواهند شد. One string contains two moods because the two که clauses have different semantic governors.

💡

Recursive syntax does not flatten mood. Evaluate each boundary separately: possibility/desire often licenses subjunctive; speech, knowledge, and assertion normally introduce indicative content.

Relative که beside complementizer که

A noun-modifying relative can itself contain reported content, or a reporting clause can contain a noun with a relative. Identify the relative token by its immediately preceding head noun and by the role that noun plays inside the modifying clause.

نویسنده‌ای که دیروز دیدیم گفت که کتاب تازه‌اش آماده‌ی انتشار است.

nevisande-i ke diruz didim goft ke ketâb-e tâze-ash âmâde-ye enteshâr ast.

The writer whom we saw yesterday said that her new book was ready for publication. (neutral; relative که, then content که)

استاد گفت که مقاله‌ای که فرستاده بودیم نیاز به بازنویسی دارد.

ostâd goft ke maqâle-i ke ferestâde budim niyâz be bâz-nevisi dârad.

The professor said that the article we had sent needed revision. (academic; content که, then relative که)

In the first sentence, نویسنده‌ای is the understood object of دیدیم; in the second, مقاله‌ای is the understood object of فرستاده بودیم. The other که in each sentence introduces a proposition and leaves no corresponding noun-phrase gap. Review the gap/resumption diagnostics under Relative Clauses with Resumptive Pronouns.

Omission in speech, retention in dense prose

After frequent predicates such as گفتن and فکر کردن, conversation can omit a complementizer when the boundary remains obvious. Recursive sentences may therefore contain fewer overt که tokens than syntactic levels.

گفت فکر می‌کند فردا هوا بهتر می‌شود.

goft fekr mi-konad fardâ havâ behtar mi-shavad.

He said he thinks the weather will improve tomorrow. (careful conversation; both complementizers omitted)

This is natural when the predicates and short clauses make the nesting transparent. In academic or administrative prose, restoring one or both که often reduces processing cost. Relative که, however, is not freely omitted in the same way; it is the overt linker for the noun-modifying clause.

Punctuation and processing

Modern Persian normally does not insert a comma merely between a selecting verb and its که complement. Commas instead set off parenthetical material or nonrestrictive relatives. For three or more embedded propositions, punctuation alone cannot eliminate processing difficulty; split the sentence or replace one clause with a noun phrase.

گزارش نشان می‌دهد که مدیر تأیید کرده است که بودجه تغییر نخواهد کرد؛ این نتیجه هنوز قطعی نیست.

gozâresh neshân mi-dahad ke modir ta'yid karde ast ke budje taghyir na-khâhad kard; in natije hanuz qat'i nist.

The report indicates that the manager has confirmed that the budget will not change; this conclusion is not yet certain. (formal; semicolon separates the writer's evaluation)

مدیر ثبات بودجه را تأیید کرده است، اما این نتیجه هنوز قطعی نیست.

modir sabât-e budje râ ta'yid karde ast, ammâ in natije hanuz qat'i nist.

The manager has confirmed the stability of the budget, but this conclusion is not yet certain. (formal rewrite with nominalization)

The rewrite loses the explicit “the report indicates” source layer, so it is not automatically equivalent. Good editing first decides which attribution levels matter, then removes only dispensable embedding.

Common Mistakes

1. Doubling که at one boundary

❌ می‌دانم که که گفتی فردا می‌آیی.

Incorrect — two adjacent tokens compete at the boundary after می‌دانم; the second که belongs after گفتی.

✅ می‌دانم که گفتی که فردا می‌آیی.

mi-dânam ke gofti ke fardâ mi-âyi.

I know that you said that you are coming tomorrow.

2. Moving که after the clause it introduces

❌ سخنگو توضیح داد بودجه تغییر نمی‌کند که.

Incorrect — content که precedes the proposition licensed by توضیح داد; it cannot be stranded after that proposition.

✅ مدیر گفت که جلسه لغو شده است.

modir goft ke jalase laghv shode ast.

The manager said that the meeting had been cancelled.

3. Forcing one mood across every level

❌ ممکن است که اعلام می‌کنند که پرواز لغو بشود.

Incorrect — possible announcing takes subjunctive اعلام کنند; the announcement's asserted content normally takes indicative لغو می‌شود.

✅ ممکن است اعلام کنند که پرواز لغو می‌شود.

momken ast e'lâm konand ke parvâz laghv mi-shavad.

They may announce that the flight will be cancelled.

4. Adding a comma inside a tight complement boundary

❌ مدیر گفت، که بودجه کافی نیست.

Incorrect neutral punctuation — do not separate گفت from its required content with a comma.

✅ مدیر گفت که بودجه کافی نیست.

modir goft ke budje kâfi nist.

The manager said that the budget was not sufficient.

Key Takeaways

Repeated که normally reflects recursive structure: each speech, thought, knowledge, or evaluation predicate can select its own clause.
The same form also introduces relatives; a preceding head noun and an internal gap or resumptive diagnose that function.
Tense, mood, and subject reference are computed at each embedded level, not once for the whole sentence.
Conversation may omit content که where boundaries remain clear; formal dense prose often retains it.
Punctuation clarifies major discourse boundaries, but excessive embedding is best repaired by splitting or careful nominalization.

Now practice Farsi

Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.

Start learning Farsi →