Questions & Answers about آنها سکههای طلا و ثروت زیاد داشتند.
Why is there no می (mi-) prefix on داشتند if the lesson is about the past continuous?
The verb داشتن (to have) is irregular. When it means 'to possess,' it doesn't take the می prefix for the past continuous. We just use the simple past form داشتند to mean both 'they had' and 'they used to have'.
Why is there an extra ی (y) in سکههای (sekkeh-hây-e)?
The base word is سکه (sekkeh - coin). We add ها (hâ) to make it plural (سکهها). To link it to طلا (talâ - gold) meaning 'coins of gold', we need the 'ezâfe' connecting vowel (-e). Since سکهها ends in a vowel, we add a 'y' sound as a bridge, resulting in سکههای.
Why is طلا (talâ) singular if we are talking about multiple coins?
In Farsi, when a noun like طلا (gold) is used to describe the material an object is made of, the material word stays singular. You only pluralize the object itself (سکهها).
Does زیاد (ziâd - a lot) describe the gold coins too, or just the wealth?
It just describes the wealth. Adjectives generally describe the noun directly before them. Here, زیاد comes right after ثروت (servat - wealth) and connects to it with a hidden 'ezâfe' connector. If they wanted to say 'a lot of gold coins,' the word زیاد would have been placed right after the coins.