Russian Speakers?

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by St Leo

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
gdyé moy vyelsipyed?

Prover svoyu zadnitsu.

Unless that means "the giant shrimp ate it", then I think you are incorrect.

[The Vagabond]

Good mastering of Russian, Namaste

Originally posted by Namaste
And yep, you're right. The "is" and "are" are implied by position.

True. But sometimes "est'" is used for "is" or "are". For example:
Kto est' kto = Who is who
Eto i est' tot samyy chelovek.

Russian has no definite articles. In that sentence Dogs would be in the nominative, and cats in the accusative, showing what the subject "dogs" is doing to the direct object "cats". It should give flexibility in the placement of those words in the sentence to have the same meaning (Russian is fairly lax about that in general), but I'm not entirely sure how proper it would be. I'm only a student of the language myself so maybe if there are any native speakers around they can clarify that.

You are right. "Dogs chase cats" can be said in the following ways:

1) Sobaki gonyayut koshek.
2) Koshek gonyayut sobaki.

The first form is the standard one. The second form somehow accentuates the word "sobaki" (especially in the written text!), and perhaps should be translated something like "it is dogs that chase cats", or "cats are chased by dogs". It answers the question "Who is that bastard who chases cats?".

On the other hand, note that in the oral speech any word can be accentuated by intonation already in the standard form. And the same is true for the second form.

However, in a poetic context (imagine you write a poem) the second form would be equivalent to the first one. Furthermore, in a poem, practically any placing of words is acceptable, even the one that may sound awkward in the ordinary speech.

3) Gonyayut sobaki koshek.
4) Sobaki koshek gonyayut.
The third form would be appropriate as an answer to the question "Whom do the dogs chase?". The fourth form would answer the question "What do dogs do to cats?".

Other forms are possible too.

Thus, it is the last word that is usually meant to be accentuated in the written text (except for the standard form). However, when you speak, intonation can override this. In a poem, the placing of words is rather arbitrary.

I hope this is not too confusing and I am not confused myself


PS1. "Cats chase dogs" would be "koshki gonyayut sobak" (cf. form 2 above).

PS2. By the way, perhaps it would be better to say "sobaki gonyayutsya za koshkami", "za koshkami gonyayutsya sobaki", etc. But I chose a form that doesn't involve the preposition "za".

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
incidentaly, if there is no definate article, is there an indefinate? And how would one emphasise something? (the boat, as apposed to a boat)??

If there is a real need to emphasize that, then you can say "this/that boat", "one boat", "some boat".

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Here's the only Russian I know

Vodka - Life

[Napoleon I]

Good luck Andy-Man!

I may somewhat biased but I really love Russian as a language - I think once you get into it, the beauty will pull you along.

The definite and indefinite articles do not exist in Russian, but their absense is somewhat compensated by rather generous use of demonstratives (such as this/that/which etot/tot/kotoriy etc.) And, as had been mentioned, word placement is the major vehicle of emphasis.

Generally speaking verbs tend to be somewhat harder, especially if you already understand the noun declension system. I would focus more heavily on the verbs and variaties of their meaning - subjunctive, completed vs continuing aspect and so on. But don't let the details overcome you It'll all come together.

I speak Russian fluently, so if you have any questions, feel free to contact me.

Udachi (good luck)

[The Vagabond]

Great to see lovers of the Russian language around, Napoleon I

The definite and indefinite articles do not exist in Russian, but their absense is somewhat compensated by rather generous use of demonstratives (such as this/that/which etot/tot/kotoriy etc.)

You are right in using the word "somewhat". The absence of the articles can be compensated only partly.

[The Vagabond]

A useful demonstrative for substituting "the" could be "tot samyy".

Ta samaya lodka = that same boat

[The Vagabond]

To the discussion of "is" and "are" in the Russian language. Clinton's famous "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" can't be translated into Russian.

[Napoleon I]

Well, the difference in the usage of 'is' and 'are' is more a question of semantics in my mind. There is a word that formally means is - est, but it is not used the same way. You could theoretically say "What is life" "Chto est zhizn" but it would sound awkward. Generally the state of being is implied rather than said, as in "On visokiy" "He tall" which means, of course, "he is tall". But, on mature reflection, that is a rather minute detail for a person who is just starting out Doubtlessly he is already or

[Sikander]

Russian is a highly inflected language that doesn't use articles. High inflection is tough for an English speaker, as we only use inflection in our pronouns (I, me) and only have two cases compared to the six in Russian. No articles is IMO an advantage, as they rarely do much but take up space and confuse students of the language in question. One interesting aspect of a highly inflected langauge (as Vagabond gives a good example of) is that it doesn't rely on word order to define the parts of speech in a sentence. Inflection and the form of the verb do all of that for you. This means that word order can be used in a variety of ways to impart slightly different meanings, or even to make the sentence more melodic. Finally, the difference in the usage of the verb "to be" in English and Russian is that the Russians don't use it nearly as much as a helping verb (ie verb compounds).

[muxec]

"Fignya" - wery useful word that can mean almost everything

[Saras]

Alternatively, xuynya.

[The Vagabond]

Saras as impolite as always

[Saras]

Ebal

[Gangerolf]

Originally posted by Pekka
I know RUKI VEER! which is not the correct way to type it, but it means 'hands up!'. The only one you need to know when dealing with the commies

another useful one I learned in the army is STOY!! it means freeze! (I think).