Persian to French: a person referred to as u can become le, la or lui for different reasons
Persian does not make u choose he or she
The Texas pronoun lesson gives Persian u as both he and she. Its example u man rā did means that this person saw the speaker. French translation therefore needs to establish the person’s reference independently before choosing il or elle as the subject. The Persian pronoun itself does not supply that gender distinction.
This can matter in a report mentioning two colleagues. A translation that selects il simply because u lacks a visible feminine ending has invented a distinction rather than recovered it. Use an established name or the person’s known reference where the message provides one; do not make Persian’s shared form into evidence that the referent is male.
French lui does not automatically mean the same job as il
The OQLF’s table of object pronouns distinguishes French third-person direct le and la from indirect lui. The relevant decision combines reference with grammatical function. Once the person referred to by Persian u appears as a participant affected by a different predicate, the appropriate French pronoun may differ even though the real person remains unchanged.
This is especially important for a sequence that first identifies someone as an actor and later mentions that person as a recipient. A subject choice such as il or elle cannot simply be repeated in the recipient position. Nor does the form lui, when functioning as the indirect object in the cited paradigm, prove that the person is male.
Persian independent pronouns can function as subjects or objects without changing their basic form, as the Texas lesson explains. French clitic choices therefore require analysis of the clause’s roles rather than substitution of a single French item for every occurrence of u. What remains constant in the story is identity, not necessarily surface grammar.
A continuing person can require a continuing grammatical distinction
The OQLF further explains that pronouns generally need to be retained when successive verbs require different complement functions. This is useful when a Persian account compresses several actions involving one person. A French translation should not suppress a needed complement merely because the reader already knows who the person is.
For example, seeing someone and addressing something to that person are different relationships to the predicate. Even if a Persian narrative keeps referring to the same individual, the French direct-versus-indirect distinction may still need expression. Omitting it can make the second action sound unfinished or attach it to a different participant.
The practical task is thus twofold: recover the intended person behind u, then preserve that person’s changing role across the account. Gender reference resolves il versus elle or le versus la where those forms are required; complement function resolves direct versus indirect choices. Neither decision can safely be inferred from the unchanged Persian pronoun alone.
Language references