Breakdown of قاضی مدرک را نپذیرفت.
راrâ
definite direct object marker
پذیرفتنpaziroftan
to accept
قاضیqâzi
judge
مدرکmadrak
evidence
Questions & Answers about قاضی مدرک را نپذیرفت.
The lesson is about the Negative Past Continuous (using ne-mi-), but this verb is napaziroft. Why isn't there a -mi-?
This sentence uses the Negative Simple Past ("did not accept"), not the Past Continuous ("was not accepting"). To make the simple past negative, we just add na- to the past stem paziroft, giving us napaziroft. If we wanted to say "was not accepting" (Negative Past Continuous), it would be nemipaziroft.
What is the infinitive form of the verb "to accept" here?
The infinitive is paziroftan (پذیرفتن). To get the past stem used here, you just drop the final -an to get paziroft. Since the subject "the judge" is third-person singular, there is no personal ending attached to the stem.
Why do we need the word ra (را) after madrak (evidence)?
The word ra marks a specific, definite direct object. Here, the judge didn't just reject any evidence; they rejected the specific evidence presented. Since madrak is the direct object receiving the action of the verb, it needs ra right after it.
Does the negative prefix na- change how the verb is stressed?
Yes, adding a negative prefix shifts the spoken stress to the beginning of the word. In the positive form paziroft, the stress is on the last syllable. In the negative form napaziroft, you strongly stress the prefix.