General Linguistics > Linguist's Lounge

(The) Three trifles in/of/about Russian

(1/3) > >>


Russian is just an ordinary language - nothing more, nothing less. But Language is a political matter. There are political books of grammar but are there political books of mathematics?!

Trifle 1:

           Grammatical case - it is in Russian, Latin, German, English, ... But while Nominative, Accusative, Dative, Vocative, Prepositional, Locative, even Ablative are bon ton Instrumental(bad name) stands out.

Man found out the Recursion. So, what is the complementary of the Recursion. Computer scientists give Iteration, that's okay, but what actually is Iteration and is there another complement of recursion? Maybe DEFINITION?!

Anyway, that is not important. There is something which is so obvious that it is not named or named differently in different languages. Square which has a square is ... well, a recursion, but square next to square ? - what would the name be? Plus, you have 1st and 2nd square = there is an order! /welcome to Instrumetal case/

Some verbs in Russian have "object" in Instrumental case. /better say nothing than something bad - no comment/
/it will be useful once again to check out "simple sentence. zero dimensional space"/

Trifle 2:

          The verb in Russian has not a past simple form. It is past active participle(INDECLINABLE) used instead.
Which means that they use an ADJECTIVE which comes from a verb, that is an ADJECTIVE!!! Usually adjectives come after/with the verb BE. This gives 3 possibilities:

 1st: past active participle is used instead of a past simple form of the verb;

 2nd: sum/esse(BE) is missed before past active participle = have done /by meaning/
/which raises the question: DONE is what after HAVE, past active or past passive participle/

 3rd: In the 3rd conditional in Russian, the past active participle IS NOT THE MAIN VERB. It is the ADJECTIVE after the verb BE(быть/есмь) = [had]/[would have] done

//old woman young woman illusion - in grammars: what is the MAIN VERB? One would ask: what is actually drawn on the paper? There are NO AUXILIARY VERBS!!! One sees once one verb as MAIN,  the other time the other verb as MAIN. It is intentionally made the second verb after the BE to FEEL/LOOK LIKE AN ADJECTIVE.// I always take the auxiliary verb as main, but I understand and the other point of view. I look once at an OLD WOMAN and then at an YOUNG WOMAN.//

Trifle 3:

           бы IS NOT A PARTICLE!!! IT IS THE MAIN VERB OF THE CLAUSE!!! It is the past simple tense form of быть which lost its (suffixes and) verb endings and NOW it is unrecognizable as a MAIN VERB!!! In бы merged both PERFECTIVE and IMPERFECTIVE PAST FORMS OF BE(быть)!!! Which leads us to 3rd conditional:

 * in the 1st event бы is IMPEFECTIVE(if-clause);

 * in the 2nd event бы is PERFECTIVE(then-clause) - that PERFECTIVE-ness gives the FUTURE-ness according to the IMPERFECTIVE-ness(if-clause)

Thank you and have a nice day.


English - German - Russian
/white  -   gray    -   black/ or /black - gray - white/

The point is that English and Russian are similar to each other like black - white. Russian is at the beginning, English is at the end and German is in the middle of a transition/verb endings, case endings, phrasal verbs, in perfect tense: English uses "HAVE", Russian - "BE" but German "BE" and "HAVE". Definite articles:

that(the) - das - [тот] (it is even one word: th/d/т; t/s/т) /.

I did it my way   / Frank Sinatra/    -  I use "russian" logic (Instrumental case) and derive the meaning/translate.

In English one can think in terms of Nominative, Vocative, Accusative, Dative, Instrumental, Genitive. It is even better that there are no case endings. Actually it may be easier to study the three languages at the same time by one grammar than by 3 different grammars and one by one.

Isn't it an irony that German looks more messy/and heavy/(look at "WERDEN": they use it for simple future and passive voice. They cannot use "BE" in passive voice because they use it in perfect tense with some verbs and past passive and past active participles look the same. I don't like "WERDEN" in passive voice. Latin vert/ere  -  German werd/en  -  Russian vert/et' -  to turn)

Thank you and have a nice day.


"past-participle suffix of weak verbs, ... "

Maybe Russian and English verbs aren't so different after all (in past tense).


About the verb to be and conditionals in Russian I was heavily influenced by


Russian, in a sense that a word may "work like" a preposition, ... , a word-forming element, is almost the same as English. One can take any (broadly said/speaking) Russian preposition and use it as a word-forming element(= prefix (as a prefix)). English is a way ahead in that matter but Russian is not far behind. The same is with the German (and other languages).

For example:

за (preposition)(in Russian)

за- (word-forming element = prefix)(Russian)


One is inclined to notice that "real" prepositions which work as places in 3d(2d, 1d, 1d(Time)) also work as directions in that spaces (with verbs of motion/action (and maybe not)). And they are referred to as prepositions and adverbs in different occasions and languages.

But there are some/many "imaginary" axes/aspects(not visual, ... (not through senses)). Verb (as a Name of a "Situation"(actually the "Situation"-Event depends on the Observer)) has many axes/aspects/dimensions/... . Verb("Situation") is more complicated than the ordinary Thing (there is much more to describe). 
Here come(-s) Preposition(as a word/Name) (place in 3d ("through senses")) (/) and Direction (as a word/Name in 3d ("through senses")). It (they) become(-s) Handy as a (word/)verb-forming element both in "real" and "non real"/imaginary axes/aspects/... .

And this is just a simple(a simplification)/a practical approach. There is "Language"-Encoding but there isn't Language(only Consciousness at work).


Thank you and have a nice day.


I have made a mistake. I used "suffix" instead of (I meant) prefix. I am sorry.

The questions are:

 1. Why Russians use суффикс(suffix) instead of на-/став/-ка(suffix) when they use при-/став/-ка(prefix)?


наставка (suffix) = настав/ить + -ка

приставка (prefix)


 2.  Why to use -фф- when -ф- is enough? (why be holier than the Pope?)
English speakers pronounce suffix with one f.


Once again I apologize. 


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version