Hello Kulka. Thank you my sister. I am really happy that it was useful to know abt intransitive and transitive verbs.
You know what, languages need standard forms. Some have got their standard (formal) forms during history whilst some have not. Undoubtedly to have a standard language via sifting out vocabularies and grammatical features from all Kurdish dialects is a much better and more rational choice to make rather than picking a local subdialect like Suleymani Soraní as standard language which is a very senseless idea. Anyways I was telling my kinfolk that I am considering such a purpose and they couldn’t feel me at all. Until once they came to me while were mentally exhausted and asked me "please do your best achieve a standard form or whatever it is, cuz we are bloody sick of these entertaining programs (like that of Evín Aso) in which everybody's words need to be interpreted …

" I hope one day we would have a standard form, God willing.
By the way I know many Soraní speaking guys still cannot use Latin alphabet appropriately. Even those who apparently work for Kurdish channels occasionally do some terrible blunders regarding to spelling.
And abt your parental city, or probably as they call it in Polish "gmina" (~ "city"), no I didn’t get upset and you were right I am all surprised. Initially I could guess from the letters "ó" and "w" that it might be a Polish or even Hungarian city. But eventually I couldn’t resist my curiosity and I googled it so I found out it is a Polish city. A historical city, I could feel from the pictures and a very beautiful place to visit of course.

Then you are not Kurdish? If so, are you married to a Kurdish guy or something?
Be sure I am to answer every single question that you have. So don’t mention it, we all are here to share what we know.

And the only thing that I am good in is Linguistics and it is all I care for.

By the way unfortunately I don’t live in West Midlands, but in Middle East I do. I live in Iran.
Ok back to our topic, yes for sure you can use the same thing in any case:
من توم دیت
تو منت دیت
ئێمه تومان دیت....
But for the next thing that you asked, in some dialects it is possible to say so, but not all of speakers may comprehend you that way because it is not really popular amongst Soraní speakers:
من ئه و دیتم
تو من دیتت....
To say it without "
ew" is almost impossible. As far as I know only Soraní speakers from Sine are able to use such a feature for third person singular:
دیین : díyín : to see
دیتم : dítim : I saw you
دییم : díyim : I saw him/her…
But to my knowledge none of Suleymani or Hewlérí speakers comprehend them. I don’t think "
min dítimí" could make sense to those speakers. They would probably understand it as "s/he saw me".
Well you next questions just remind us the fatal fact that we do lack in a standard form. "
Ditimtan" or "
díttanim" belong to various subdialects. If you ask me, the first one is pure Kurdish but the second one is under the sway of Persian grammar where they say: "
dídínem". Let me elucidate it to you. The three above examples are comprised of these components:
dít – im – tan
see – me – you (plural)
dit – tan – im
see – you (plur.) – me
díd – ín – em
see – you (plur.) - me As you can see, in the first form we got this structure:
verb – object - subjectBut in the second and third forms:
verb – subject - objectIn Soraní both forms are in used within different subdialects, and since we got no standard form then it is just a matter of the speaker's birth place to use which one of the structures.
But if I am not mistaken these are more popular within Suleymani region:
توم دیت / دیتمت
ئه وم دیت
ئێوه م دیت / دیتمتان
ئه وانم دیت / دیتمیانAlso I am sorry I think I have left something in my first examples: "
dítimin" is not for "second person plural", but only for "third person plural":
دیتمن / دیتیانم : I saw them
دیتتانم / دیتمتان : I saw you (plur.)Yes you are right "ewan minyan dít" means "they saw me". But when the object is to attach the verb, for sure, it gets complicated and you should hold both forms (as I exampled above) within your mind to figure out what the person you discourse with tries to convey! Just remember the two grammatical structures. I guarantee they aren’t gonna use any other structures out of these two:
verb – object – subject
verb – subject – objectFor example, "they saw us":
dít – man – yan (verb – object – subject)
dít – yan – man ( verb – subject – object) In Soraní script:
دیتمانیان
دیتیانمانAs I told you the first structure is more popular (as far as I know).
And about second person singular, sorry I missed one more thing. As I explained before, we got two different groups of pronouns one for intransitive verbs and another for transitive ones. In the pronouns for intransitive verbs we have two forms for second person singular:
-یت : -ít
-ی : -íThe most accurate form is the first one, which I mistakenly illustrated as "-it" in my examples, but it is "-ít:
هاتیت / هاتی : hatí / hatít : you (sing.) cameAs you mentioned we can overlook pronouncing final
"-t". And remember that it got nothing to do with
"-it" the pronoun for second person singular in transitive verbs. Pronouns for transitive and intransitive verbs should be hold independently from each other. Also we can not miss final
"-t" for second person singular in transitive verbs:
دیتت : ditit : you (sing.) sawNo I haven’t got confused. I completely love words and linguistics. Bewilderment is a part of linguistics and language learning but it turns into a sweet feeling as soon as you figure out the right thing.
I believe it too. Certainly there would be no learning without understanding.
You are welcome. I am waiting for your further questions or possible explanations needed in connection with my above examples.
Be fine
