Reported Yes-No Questions | Farsi Grammar

Reporting a yes-no question creates two finite verbal domains: the matrix act of asking, knowing, or checking, and the proposition whose truth remains open. In دیروز پرسید آیا هنوز اینجا کار می‌کنم, past پرسید locates the question act, while present کار می‌کنم locates a state that still holds and agrees with the reporter as first person.

This page is specifically about those verbal consequences: tense, aspect, agreement, person, deixis, and polarity. The syntax and register of آیا، که آیا، یا نه, clause order, and punctuation are taught on Indirect Yes-No Questions. Persian has no general rule that mechanically backshifts every embedded verb after a past reporting verb.

Two predicates, two anchors

Domain	Question to ask	Possible forms
matrix predicate	When did the asking or uncertainty occur?	می‌پرسد، پرسید، پرسیده بود، نمی‌دانست
embedded predicate	When does the questioned state or event hold?	کار می‌کند، رفت، رفته است، می‌آید
embedded agreement	Who is the participant from the reporter’s viewpoint?	دارم، داری، دارد، داریم...
deictic center	What do today, here, this, and tomorrow refer to now?	امروز/آن روز، اینجا/آنجا، فردا/روز بعد

The matrix past supplies no automatic “past” feature to the embedded verb. Choose the embedded form from its own temporal relation and the speaker’s current commitment.

💡

Draw two timelines mentally. Place the asking event first; then place the questioned event independently. Only chronology—not English sequence-of-tense convention—licenses a Persian tense change.

A current state can stay present

Suppose a speaker asked Mahsa yesterday about employment that may still continue today. The direct question and later report change person and demonstrative reference, but present tense remains justified.

هنوز در این شرکت کار می‌کنی؟

hanuz dar in sherkat kâr mi-koni?

Do you still work at this company? (direct question; present state)

دیروز از مهسا پرسیدم که آیا هنوز در آن شرکت کار می‌کند.

diruz az Mahsâ porsidam ke âyâ hanuz dar ân sherkat kâr mi-konad.

Yesterday I asked Mahsa whether she still works at that company. (state still current; second person becomes third person)

English often translates کار می‌کند as worked after asked. That English backshift does not prove the Persian state is past. Persian retains the present because هنوز makes continuing validity relevant. If Mahsa no longer works there and the report concerns a closed earlier period, کار می‌کرد becomes appropriate for that real temporal reason.

از کارمند سابق پرسیدم آیا آن زمان در بخش فروش کار می‌کرد.

az kârmand-e sâbeq porsidam âyâ ân zamân dar bakhsh-e forush kâr mi-kard.

I asked the former employee whether he or she worked in sales at that time. (closed past interval; past imperfective independently motivated)

Closed past and anterior aspect

A reported question about a completed event may use the simple past, present perfect, or past perfect according to viewpoint. The forms do not form a mechanical conversion chain.

دیشب به جلسه رفتی؟

dishab be jalase rafti?

Did you go to the meeting last night? (direct question; closed event)

صبح از نوید پرسیدم که آیا شب قبل به جلسه رفته بود.

sobh az Navid porsidam ke âyâ shab-e qabl be jalase rafte bud.

In the morning I asked Navid whether he had gone to the meeting the previous night. (event anterior to the asking time)

Here رفته بود is appropriate because the possible attendance precedes a past asking point. It is not present merely because English uses had gone. With no need to establish that anterior reference point, پرسیدم آیا دیشب به جلسه رفت is also possible.

گزارش را فرستاده‌ای؟

gozâresh râ ferestâde-i?

Have you sent the report? (direct question; current relevance)

مدیر از من پرسید که آیا گزارش را فرستاده‌ام.

modir az man porsid ke âyâ gozâresh râ ferestâde-am.

The manager asked me whether I had sent the report. (present perfect retained; the result remains relevant)

The direct second-singular فرستاده‌ای becomes first-singular فرستاده‌ام because the person who was addressed is now the person reporting. Tense retention and person shift are separate decisions.

Future time without obligatory future morphology

Iranian Persian normally uses the present indicative for planned future events. A past matrix verb does not automatically replace it with an English-style “future in the past.”

فردا به دفتر می‌آیی؟

fardâ be daftar mi-âyi?

Are you coming to the office tomorrow? (direct question; futurate present)

هفته‌ی پیش از ناهید پرسیدم که آیا روز بعد به دفتر می‌آید.

hafte-ye pish az Nâhid porsidam ke âyâ ruz-e ba'd be daftar mi-âyad.

Last week I asked Nahid whether she was coming to the office the following day. (future relative to the asking; present form retained)

روز بعد replaces original فردا because the reporter has moved the temporal center. If the report is made on the same day as the question, فردا can remain. The change follows reference, not a memorized direct-to-indirect substitution.

Agreement follows the reported participants

Every embedded finite verb agrees with its subject as identified in the report. The matrix subject and the person asked need not be the same as that embedded subject.

برای شروع آماده‌اید؟

barâ-ye shoru' âmâde-id?

Are you ready to begin? (direct question to us; polite/plural second person)

مدیر از ما پرسید که آیا برای شروع آماده‌ایم.

modir az mâ porsid ke âyâ barâ-ye shoru' âmâde-im.

The manager asked us whether we were ready to begin. (ما controls first-plural آماده‌ایم)

Do not let third-singular پرسید pull the embedded copula into third singular. It agrees with مدیر; embedded آماده‌ایم agrees with ما.

💡

Update person from roles, not words: original speaker, original addressee, current reporter, and reported participant may be four different people.

Matrix negation does not reverse embedded polarity

Negating the reporting predicate denies the act or knowledge state. It does not silently negate the proposition being questioned.

از وکیل نپرسیدم که آیا قرارداد را خوانده است.

az vakil naporsidam ke âyâ qarârdâd râ khânde ast.

I did not ask the lawyer whether he or she had read the contract. (negative asking event; embedded issue positive)

از وکیل پرسیدم که آیا قرارداد را نخوانده است.

az vakil porsidam ke âyâ qarârdâd râ nakhânde ast.

I asked the lawyer whether he or she had not read the contract. (positive asking event; embedded proposition negative)

Likewise, نمی‌دانم آمده است یا نه means that I lack the answer to the positive issue “has he/she come?” It does not mean “I know that he/she has not come.” Keep each negative prefix attached to the predicate whose event it denies.

Register must remain coherent across both verbs

Everyday Tehran speech may reduce both layers: ازش پرسیدم فردا میاد یا نه (informal, regional: Tehran). Formal prose uses از او پرسیدم که آیا فردا می‌آید. The temporal principle is identical, but mixing a reduced matrix with an otherwise bureaucratic embedded predicate is stylistically conspicuous.

ازش پرسیدم فردا میاد یا نه.

az-esh porsidam fardâ miyâd yâ na.

I asked him or her whether they’re coming tomorrow. (informal, regional: Tehran)

Common Mistakes

1. Backshifting a state that still holds

⚠️ دیروز پرسید هنوز در تهران زندگی می‌کردم.

diruz porsid hanuz dar Tehrân zendegi mi-kardam.

Grammatical for a past or backgrounded residence, but not the intended still-current reading: the past imperfective does not present the state as holding now.

✅ دیروز از من پرسید که آیا هنوز در تهران زندگی می‌کنم.

diruz az man porsid ke âyâ hanuz dar Tehrân zendegi mi-konam.

Yesterday she asked me whether I still live in Tehran.

2. Retaining the original addressee’s ending

⚠️ مدیر از من پرسید که آیا آماده‌ای.

modir az man porsid ke âyâ âmâde-i.

Grammatical if the manager asked me about you; wrong for a question addressed to me, which requires first-singular آماده‌ام.

✅ مدیر از من پرسید که آیا برای مصاحبه آماده‌ام.

modir az man porsid ke âyâ barâ-ye mosâhebe âmâde-am.

The manager asked me whether I was ready for the interview.

3. Replacing the embedded finite predicate with an infinitive

❌ پرسیدم که آیا نوید فردا برگشتن.

Incorrect — the singular embedded subject requires a finite verb with tense and agreement, not the infinitive برگشتن.

✅ پرسیدم که آیا نوید فردا برمی‌گردد.

porsidam ke âyâ Navid fardâ bar-mi-gardad.

I asked whether Navid was returning tomorrow.

4. Letting matrix negation change the embedded answer

⚠️ نپرسیدم آیا آمده است یعنی پرسیدم آیا نیامده است.

naporsidam âyâ âmâde ast ya'ni porsidam âyâ nayâmade ast.

A grammatical sentence expressing a false equivalence: negating پرسیدن denies asking; it does not turn the embedded question into a negative one.

✅ نپرسیدم آیا مهمان‌ها رسیده‌اند یا نه.

naporsidam âyâ mehmân-hâ reside-and yâ na.

I did not ask whether the guests had arrived.

5. Mixing colloquial and formal verb systems

⚠️ ازش پرسیدم که آیا فردا تشریف میاره.

az-esh porsidam ke âyâ fardâ tashrif miyâre.

Understandable, but colloquial ازش/میاره clashes with formal آیا and honorific تشریف آوردن.

✅ از ایشان پرسیدم که آیا فردا تشریف می‌آورند.

az ishân porsidam ke âyâ fardâ tashrif mi-âvarand.

I asked them whether they would come tomorrow. (formal/respectful)

Key Takeaways

Matrix and embedded predicates have independent tense, aspect, polarity, and agreement.
Retain a present or perfect when its state or result remains current; choose a past form only when chronology motivates it.
Recalculate person from the reporting situation, and change deictic words only when their center changes.
Matrix negation denies asking or knowing; embedded negation changes the proposition under question.
Keep both verbal layers within one coherent register.

Now practice Farsi

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

Start learning Farsi →