Persian to Bulgarian: object markers, doubled pronouns and recipients
Persian ra identifies a phrase, not an extra participant
Roberts’s Persian Grammar Sketch treats rā and its colloquial forms as an object marker attached to the entire noun phrase. Its example behruz sib-hā=ro xord means Behruz ate the apples. The marker belongs to the apples as the object; it does not name a person or add a second action. A Persian description or possessive inside the object phrase must therefore stay connected to the same object when the sentence becomes Bulgarian.
The sketch also records disagreement among researchers over whether definiteness, specificity or topicality best explains all uses of the marker. That is a useful restraint for translation: do not convert every occurrence into one fixed Bulgarian pronoun or assume it always adds the same emphasis. Establish what the phrase refers to and its role in the surrounding conversation. In the apples example, the eater and the things eaten must remain distinct regardless of how Bulgarian expresses the object.
Bulgarian can mention one object through two expressions
Mišeska-Tomić’s analysis of Bulgarian clitic doubling shows a short pronoun and a full noun phrase representing the same participant. Its example Poznavam go tova čuvstvo means I know this sentiment. The short go does not introduce a different thing in addition to the sentiment. In the topicalized constructions discussed, the clitic helps maintain a grammatical and discourse connection to the object.
This differs from Persian rā: a Bulgarian doubling clitic is not simply a relocated version of that marker. The study describes discourse conditions, distinctions between definite and indefinite objects, and additional behavior with experiencer predicates. For a Persian message introducing a matter already under discussion, preserve that conversational connection without mechanically doubling every object. Conversely, deleting a required Bulgarian clitic because the full noun phrase is already present can damage the intended construction. Judge whether the two expressions share one referent, rather than counting them as two objects merely because both are written.
Keep the thing transferred separate from its recipient
The Bulgarian Universal Dependencies object description illustrates Купувам му къща, roughly I buy him a house. It identifies къща, the house, as the direct object. The short му represents another relationship: the person for whom the purchase is made. This example is not the same configuration as a clitic doubling the house.
That distinction matters when translating Persian accounts of buying or sending something for someone. Recover the item, the recipient or beneficiary, and the actor separately before choosing Bulgarian pronouns. A short target pronoun need not correspond to the Persian object marker, and its presence need not mean that the noun beside it is repeated. In a purchase message, confusing these relationships can turn the person benefiting from the transaction into the thing acquired. Preserve the transaction’s participants first; then let the Bulgarian construction indicate which expression refers to each one.
Language references