Nûsra => it was writen------ Denûsrê => it is being writen
In Zazaki were this:
Nusîyo = It was written. Nusîyeno = It is being written.
In Zazaki do exit also other 2 forms:
Form 2:
ame nustene = it was written. yeno nustene = it is being written.
from "amayene" = to come. as in kurmanci "hatin". in persian: amadan.
Form 3 - only vor verbs with "do":
- qise keno = he speaks.
- qise beno = it is being speaken.
- qise bî = it was speaken.
- keno = does. as in kurmanci / sorani: dike / deked ("en" in zazaki = "di" in kurmanci / sorani).
- beno = as in kurmanci / sorani: dibe / debed. see the parallels with english "being", its have the same root.
- bî = as in kurmanci / sorani: bû. "qise kiribû" in kurmanci were in zazaki: qise kerdbî.
A) Female Izafe in Kurmanji: Sorani can borrow this archaic feature; ex: gulA min, evinA min
This is so possible as that kurmancs borrow from english the "it". Sorani-speaker don't can imagine this beacuse sorani have no gender. In zazaki do also exist famle and man, too in the pronomes:
o = he, a = she. ey = him, aye = her. also in the izafe is a gender, in zazaki: gula mi = for feminin, gulê mi = for men.
The izafe-sytem in sorani is the best i think. Gender makes not much sence. It is not important if somebody says "roja min" or "rojî min". ok by humans or animals make its sence. But by dead objects i see not a sence.
Sorry for my bad english, i dont know so good english.
RE-adding (not adding) of those pronounes which Sorani lost, namely ''ez, tu, hun (in some Sorani regions pronounced as engo), wî/wê .
Nothing gramatical more (or at least I dont remember since they were not important)
the "ez" is old-iranic, it is als exist in zazaki and talysh (in azerbaycan). in parthic was this: "äz". in avesta: äzem. it comes from proto-indoeuropean: *eghom. in old-persian: edham or so. see d <-> z ( like "zan" vs. persian "dan" for "know"). also persian lost this pronomes.
