Thread: Help please

It seems like an appropriate time to jump on the bandwagon of PC psychosis and rename "чёрный кофе" into "афро-американский кофе". Или, учитывая региональные заморочки, в "кофе лиц кавказской национальности".

kalinka_vinnie - подлый провокатор.

Originally Posted by adoc

It seems like an appropriate time to jump on the bandwagon of PC psychosis and rename "чёрный кофе" into "афро-американский кофе". Или, учитывая региональные заморочки, в "кофе лиц кавказской национальности".

Мне больше нравится "афро-американский кофе"

Since it was already translated I decided to try to translate what was "between the lines". So I am ready for your corrections


Дорогая Светлана,

Это Паша, студент Натальи. Для начал я хотел бы поблагодарить вас за то, что пригласил меня пожить с вашей семей в сентябри. Конечно, пока там, я попытаюсь спать с вами как можно часто потому что я должен практиковать всё время. Я же не боюсь вашего большого, уродливого российского бывшего мужа!

Я очень рад о поездке! Я никогда не был в Украине раньше, кроме того когда я ездил туда каждый месяц чтобы видеть Олгу и Марину….. и не забывай, о Кати!

Русский язык, конечно мне сами важно язык говорить хотя, я действительно только интересуюсь сексом.

У вас есть е-мейл? Мы можем написать друг к другу и я смогу послать Вам несколькые фотографий моего дома трейлера а вы можете посылать фотографии вас непосредственно .... без одежды, абсолютно гольый, совершенно голый. Вот мой е-майл.............
Если Ваш дочь тоже есть е-майл адрес было бы хорошо писать и познокомиться с ни и также получать фотографии.

Я смогу избивать вашего уродливого мужа, в любое время.
Пашаю

Originally Posted by DDT

Since it was already translated I decided to try to translate what was "between the lines". So I am ready for your corrections


Дорогая Светлана,

Это Паша, студент Натальи. Для начала я хотел бы поблагодарить вас за то, что вы пригласили меня пожить с вашей семьёй в сентябре. Конечно, пока я буду там, я попытаюсьтрахаться с вами как можно чаще потому что я должен практиковаться всё время. Я нихрена не боюсь вашегобольшого, уродливого бывшего российского мужа!

Я очень рад поездке! Я никогда не был на Украине раньше, кроме того случая когда я ездил туда каждый месяц чтобытрахать Ольгу и Марину….. не говоря уже о Кате!

Русский язык.... Конечно мне самому важно говорить на нем хотя, я действительно интересуюсь только еб*лей.

У вас есть е-мейл? Мы можем написать друг другу и я смогу послать Вам несколько фотографий моего дома-трейлера а вы можете послать ваши фотографии .... без одежды, на которых я смогу увидеть ваши большие сиськи-дыньки, белую жопу-персик и кое чего еще... . Вот мой е-майл.............
Если у Вашей дочери тоже есть е-майл адрес, было бы хорошо прислать и его, потом познокомиться с ней и также получать ее горячие фотографии.

Я могуотиметь вашего уродливого мужа по полной , в любое удобное для вас и для него время.
Yours faithfully, Пашаю

Rtyoum translation is indeed a good work; I want to correct only a few stylistic lapses. Most notable is overuse of adverbials that brings certain “liquefaction” of speech. I am marking grammatical points in red, and stylistic points in blue; superscript numbers refer to endnotes.

——— Text ——–

Я —[1] Паша, ученик Натальи. Мне хотелось бы поблагодарить Благодарю Вас[2] за то, что вВы[3] разрешили мне пожить с вВашей семьёй в сентябре. Когда я приеду, то, конечно же, буду стараться почаще буду стараться or буду почаще[4] говорить по-русски. Мне всё ещё нужно довольно-таки[5] много практиковаться. Я очень жду поездки в Украину, так как никогда до этого там не бывал. Наталья часто расказывает, как там здорово. Я ведь ещё переписываюсь с несколькими украинцами. Хм, кКонечно[6], русский будет для меня более важен там там для меня более важен[7], но я знаю кое-что и[8] из украинского. Совсем чуть-чуть! Уверен, что вы уже понимаете, что я люблю языки.

Есть ли у вас имейл e-mail or электронная почта[9]? Если да, то мы бы могли установить связь. Мой адрес: ............ Можно будет послать пару фотографий. А если ваши сын или дочь такаже имеют у Ваших сына и дочери тоже есть[10] имейлы, было бы отличным познакомиться даи[6] поболтать. Я слышал, они уже очень хорошо говорят по-английски и немного[11] по-испански. Если им нужна помощь в испанском с испанским or в изучении испанского, я буду более чем[12] рад помочь.

Я живу в небольшой испанской деревне Логроно. Что сказать... Место хорошее, но заняться особо нечем. В будущем учебном году у меня начнутся занятия по русскому в университете, поэтому моя поездка будет хорошей практикой. Думается, что я влюблюсь в Украниу, потому что все подряд[13] говорят о том, насколько же она хороша. И я полагаю, что это будет не единственная поездка.

Есть ли у вас фотография вашей семьи? Жить в украинской семье станет будет[14] большой удачей для меня для меня большой удачей[15]. Жду не дождусь.!

Пожалуйста, ответьте поскорее С нетерпением ожидаю or жду ответа.[16]
Привет из Испании.
Паша.

——— End Of Text ——–

[1] Here you have both an omitted verb, and a pause in speech.

[2] Approximates “I should have been wanting to thank...” Mushy!

[3] In any writing, when addressing one person, Вы is capitalized. Neither is, howerver, ты, nor вы when addressing multiple persons.

[4] Arguable, just sounds too incommitting to me.

[5] Mush!

[6] Russian has clear distinction between written and colloquial speech. Since an epistle belongs to the domain of writing, use of colloquialisms is not allowed. In a letter to a close friend this would be acceptable, but not in such a more formal communication as this one.

[7] In Russian, unlike English, Latin, and Romance languages, logical emphasis falls onto the end of a clause. Thus, the original construct emphasises «там», the place where Russian will be more important to you, whereas my change places “more imporant” in the end, which only underscores the importance. I think that the rule of thumb is, when a relative adjective ends or qualifies the end of a clause, it is only get amplified in the comparative degree; an absolute ending (and emphasis) is necessarily antithetical to the dependent clause. «Я вырос длинным, так что потолок рукой достаю» but «Длинным вырос я, а не ты» or «Длинным я вырос, не на заводе же меня собрали!».

[8] Conveys the sense of “also,” and therefore eliminates another possible reading, which is “instead.”

[9] «Имейл» sounds to me like a monster from a bad dream that rapes («имеет») everyone in its sight... Using “e-mail” is fine. «Электронная почта» is precise but too long. There is a neologism «электропочта» (attributable to A.Troitsky) that still makes me slip on it, go back and read it again, but which, evidently, is being adopted into the language: I googled up half a million hits of it.

[10] The verb «иметь» is to be used much more sparingly in comparison with “to have!” Certainly, a semantically neutral constructt “A has B” must be translated as «у А есть Б», not «А имеет Б»!

[11] This is not very polite in English as well, is it?

[12] 'more than happy' is idiomatic and must not be translated directly.

[13] Not only a colloquialism, «все подряд» expresses mildly negative relation of the speaker to the extent of spread of knowledge, myth or opinion; it sound like as if you are annoyed by how many people say that Ukraine is very nice!

[14] The verb «стать» is inchoactive, but you are not changing your state from being conferred with luck!

[15] See [7]. Original phrase is implying an antithese to "me", e.g. "It will be luck to me and for an envy of my foes" or "It will be luck to me but a disaster to you!”

[16] In the ending of an epistle, one expects to find a cliche: “Sincerely yours” (yeah, right, sincerely!) or a (usually humorous or sarcastic) paraphrase to one; an unusual ending is an emphasis in and by itself. The phrase «Пожалуйста, ответьте поскорее» under such an emphasis is loaded with unnecessary urgency.

Originally Posted by adoc

I don't think this explanation actually works, and I don't know why it is obvious, it sounds contrived. There has never been "на Казахстан, на Грузию, на Латвию". It is just what it is, a peculiarity of Russian grammar, like "чёрный кофе", not a political suppression instrument. It is as irrelevant and coercive as spelling "womyn" instead of "woman".

All the places you mentions, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Georgia, they became part of Russia much later than Ukraine did.

Украина is believed to come from Окраина - outskirts, which takes Na since it refers to an unenclosed, general area. It was the outskirts of Russia. Now Украина is an independant country, and not the outskirts of Russia and has it's own define boundaries.

В Украине is now most commonly used in the Russian language in Ukraine (in line with the Ukrainian В Україні). Look at these Google results:

7,000,000+ for В Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

That includes the US Embassey in Kiev

3,000,000+ for На Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

I generally recuse myself from the в/на issue, because such a discussion has absolutely no merit. If you allow me an analogy, one man studies ants, their habitat, behavior etc., while another man goes around campaigining for ants to march in another, politically correct way, writes and argues to the third one who stands solidly not to allow to change the way the ants march. Well, not only ants ignore all three, but the last two guys, to the best of the common sense, are idiots; and, since language is also a natural phenomenon just like the ants, those arguing for either side of the issue look, well, identical to the above mentioned.

Originally Posted by TATY

Украина is believed to come from Окраина - outskirts, which takes Na since it refers to an unenclosed, general area.

This is not founded on comparative linguistics. Vasmer connects край to кроить via a vowel alternation *kra—*kъro, hence *къро-ити > *о-кра-ин-а, a feminine passive participle, vpp. выкроенная “something cut by carefully designating a boundary” (this is what tailor routinely does, v. cut in a narrow sense). Therefore, the meaning "the edge, the end" is secondary to "the bounded."

Comparative linguistic does not answer from which of the two meaning the name Украина has derived, but it is highly doubtful that people living in a territory would easily come to terms with notion of living "on the edge of the unenclosed, nowhere"; it is common of humans through history to place ourselves into the center of the world, not on its edge. Anyone thinks of an edge of everything known when hearing words «край родной»? (n. fatherland)

I am not arguing for any prescriptive side of the, uh, quarrel, I only had to share what I know. Everyone is free to think that «в» or «на» is correct; I only recommend to keep it in mind that language persistently ignores what you think. As well as ants do, anyhow.

Originally Posted by kkm

Rtyoum translation is indeed a good work; I want to correct only a few stylistic lapses. Most notable is overuse of adverbials that brings certain “liquefaction” of speech. I am marking grammatical points in red, and stylistic points in blue; superscript numbers refer to endnotes.

——— Text ——–

Я —[1] Паша, ученик Натальи. Мне хотелось бы поблагодарить Благодарю Вас[2] за то, что вВы[3] разрешили мне пожить с вВашей семьёй в сентябре. Когда я приеду, то, конечно же, буду стараться почаще буду стараться or буду почаще[4] говорить по-русски. Мне всё ещё нужно довольно-таки[5] много практиковаться. Я очень жду поездки в Украину, так как никогда до этого там не бывал. Наталья часто расказывает, как там здорово. Я ведь ещё переписываюсь с несколькими украинцами. Хм, кКонечно[6], русский будет для меня более важен там там для меня более важен[7], но я знаю кое-что и[8] из украинского. Совсем чуть-чуть! Уверен, что вы уже понимаете, что я люблю языки.

Есть ли у вас имейл e-mail or электронная почта[9]? Если да, то мы бы могли установить связь. Мой адрес: ............ Можно будет послать пару фотографий. А если ваши сын или дочь такаже имеют у Ваших сына и дочери тоже есть[10] имейлы, было бы отличным познакомиться даи[6] поболтать. Я слышал, они уже очень хорошо говорят по-английски и немного[11] по-испански. Если им нужна помощь в испанском с испанским or в изучении испанского, я буду более чем[12] рад помочь.

Я живу в небольшой испанской деревне Логроно. Что сказать... Место хорошее, но заняться особо нечем. В будущем учебном году у меня начнутся занятия по русскому в университете, поэтому моя поездка будет хорошей практикой. Думается, что я влюблюсь в Украниу, потому что все подряд[13] говорят о том, насколько же она хороша. И я полагаю, что это будет не единственная поездка.

Есть ли у вас фотография вашей семьи? Жить в украинской семье станет будет[14] большой удачей для меня для меня большой удачей[15]. Жду не дождусь.!

Пожалуйста, ответьте поскорее С нетерпением ожидаю or жду ответа.[16]
Привет из Испании.
Паша.

——— End Of Text ——–

[1] Here you have both an omitted verb, and a pause in speech.

[2] Approximates “I should have been wanting to thank...” Mushy!

[3] In any writing, when addressing one person, Вы is capitalized. Neither is, howerver, ты, nor вы when addressing multiple persons.

[4] Arguable, just sounds too incommitting to me.

[5] Mush!

[6] Russian has clear distinction between written and colloquial speech. Since an epistle belongs to the domain of writing, use of colloquialisms is not allowed. In a letter to a close friend this would be acceptable, but not in such a more formal communication as this one.

[7] In Russian, unlike English, Latin, and Romance languages, logical emphasis falls onto the end of a clause. Thus, the original construct emphasises «там», the place where Russian will be more important to you, whereas my change places “more imporant” in the end, which only underscores the importance. I think that the rule of thumb is, when a relative adjective ends or qualifies the end of a clause, it is only get amplified in the comparative degree; an absolute ending (and emphasis) is necessarily antithetical to the dependent clause. «Я вырос длинным, так что потолок рукой достаю» but «Длинным вырос я, а не ты» or «Длинным я вырос, не на заводе же меня собрали!».

[8] Conveys the sense of “also,” and therefore eliminates another possible reading, which is “instead.”

[9] «Имейл» sounds to me like a monster from a bad dream that rapes («имеет») everyone in its sight... Using “e-mail” is fine. «Электронная почта» is precise but too long. There is a neologism «электропочта» (attributable to A.Troitsky) that still makes me slip on it, go back and read it again, but which, evidently, is being adopted into the language: I googled up half a million hits of it.

[10] The verb «иметь» is to be used much more sparingly in comparison with “to have!” Certainly, a semantically neutral constructt “A has B” must be translated as «у А есть Б», not «А имеет Б»!

[11] This is not very polite in English as well, is it?

[12] 'more than happy' is idiomatic and must not be translated directly.

[13] Not only a colloquialism, «все подряд» expresses mildly negative relation of the speaker to the extent of spread of knowledge, myth or opinion; it sound like as if you are annoyed by how many people say that Ukraine is very nice!

[14] The verb «стать» is inchoactive, but you are not changing your state from being conferred with luck!

[15] See [7]. Original phrase is implying an antithese to "me", e.g. "It will be luck to me and for an envy of my foes" or "It will be luck to me but a disaster to you!”

[16] In the ending of an epistle, one expects to find a cliche: “Sincerely yours” (yeah, right, sincerely!) or a (usually humorous or sarcastic) paraphrase to one; an unusual ending is an emphasis in and by itself. The phrase «Пожалуйста, ответьте поскорее» under such an emphasis is loaded with unnecessary urgency.

Да ладно брательник... Твой вариант конечно ништяк но затосогласись что моцй - это ваааще......!!!!!

Originally Posted by TATY

7,000,000+ for В Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

That includes the US Embassey in Kiev

3,000,000+ for На Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

What do I care for google? It's my language. Try and google "behavior-behaviour" and "centre-center". Why don't you use behavior from this moment on, since it is cited more often and therefore is the only "correct" spelling. Try how many times "where are you at?" is used, it qualifies for a new rule already. The other places joined later? How is this critical if we are talking about languages and rules? If you insist that this is a grammar rule, I have just proven it isn't. And if it isn't, then this argument has no grammatical basis, only political. I am not going to use the tongue-breaker "В Украине" just to please young immature aficionados of some dumb inconsequential political wave (I am not referring to you, btw, I am just surprized that you of all people can't look at this objectively) or other type of people who would agree with anything the moment they are confronted by someone with balls or someone who is smug enough. I grew up with "На Украине" and that's how I am going to say it in the future. If someone says differently, well, I am not losing my sleep over this.

Originally Posted by kkm

[...]

Excellent posts! Great effort!

Originally Posted by kkm

I generally recuse myself from the в/на issue, because such a discussion has absolutely no merit. ... Well, not only ants ignore all three, but the last two guys, to the best of the common sense, are idiots

I think you should stick to the good habit if you can't argue a point. Allow me another analogy. The fourth person who is interrupting the campaigning couple and starts calling them idiots while pretending he is not interested in the subject is an idiot as well. A vain idiot. Welcome to the party.

Originally Posted by adoc

Originally Posted by TATY

7,000,000+ for В Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

That includes the US Embassey in Kiev

3,000,000+ for На Украине
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sa ... 5%22&meta=

What do I care for google? It's my language. Try and google "behavior-behaviour" and "centre-center". Why don't you use behavior from this moment on, since it is cited more often and therefore is the only "correct" spelling. Try how many times "where are you at?" is used, it qualifies for a new rule already. The other places joined later? How is this critical if we are talking about languages and rules? If you insist that this is a grammar rule, I have just proven it isn't. And if it isn't, then this argument has no grammatical basis, only political. I am not going to use the tongue-breaker "В Украине" just to please young immature aficionados of some dumb inconsequential political wave (I am not referring to you, btw, I am just surprized that you of all people can't look at this objectively) or other type of people who would agree with anything the moment they are confronted by someone with balls or someone who is smug enough. I grew up with "На Украине" and that's how I am going to say it in the future. If someone says differently, well, I am not losing my sleep over this.

I hope you did't mean to say that "behaviour" is THE correct spelling, did you? And if you did not, why would you bother with what other people write? Would you suggest anyone to put that "u" back in "behavior", too?

I personally use "na" in speech and in places like this one, since that's what I got accustomed to. I'd probably use "v" in more serious writing.

And out of what I've seen on the Internet so far, it seems that a lot of the "na" afficionados have a political basis for it as well, it's just that they often try to pretend that it is not there.

Originally Posted by Chuvak

Да ладно брательник... Твой вариант конечно ништяк но затосогласись что моцй - это ваааще......!!!!!

Адназначна!!!

Originally Posted by adoc

I think you should stick to the good habit

Have we been introduced sir? It is infinitely considerate of you to spend your precious time in such a lowly way as deciding for me what I should do. I shall be obliged sir!

Originally Posted by adoc

idiot as well. A vain idiot. Welcome to the party.

You had to call me names to convey your point, and — um, so what was the point, besides a personal attack? Did you really really write the whole post just for the sake of a personal attack? On me??? Am I so much important?

By the way, you forgot to name the good habit to which I was supposed to stick... All in vain, oh and all in vain!!!

Originally Posted by adoc

Technically it's always been "на", I am not sure how it suddenly became "в".

да да. там какими то постановлениями утвердили теперь, что правильно говорить "в украину", я тоже помню. уже давно, лет 10 тому

тем же постановлением они, по-моему, решили, что на английском правильно будет "ukraine" а не "the ukraine"

but who cares?

Originally Posted by laxxy

I hope you did't mean to say that "behaviour" is THE correct spelling, did you?

It is in some countries, you should get out more.

Originally Posted by laxxy

I personally use "na" in speech and in places like this one, since that's what I got accustomed to. I'd probably use "v" in more serious writing.

And out of what I've seen on the Internet so far, it seems that a lot of the "na" afficionados have a political basis for it as well, it's just that they often try to pretend that it is not there.

Maybe they do have a political basis to follow the grammar they are used to or maybe they don't, you tell me. I haven't browsed the internet to find that out, I am talking about myself. And hey, laxxy, suspecting that you're from Ukraine and all, I'm whispering into your ear: "I don't really care". I must however acknowledge that the idea of manipulating the language for the sake of political ends is not particularly new and is best described in the Animal Farm. Squealer rules.

Originally Posted by Dusik

да да. там какими то постановлениями утвердили теперь, что правильно говорить "в украину", я тоже помню. уже давно, лет 10 тому

You are serious, aren't you?

Originally Posted by adoc

Originally Posted by laxxy

I hope you did't mean to say that "behaviour" is THE correct spelling, did you?

It is in some countries, you should get out more.

In some it is fine, in some it is not. Like "na".
And, even though in this particular case the Russian language authorities seem to agree that "v" is the correct usage, Russia has no more of a monopoly on the Russian language than England has on English.

Originally Posted by laxxy

I personally use "na" in speech and in places like this one, since that's what I got accustomed to. I'd probably use "v" in more serious writing.

And out of what I've seen on the Internet so far, it seems that a lot of the "na" afficionados have a political basis for it as well, it's just that they often try to pretend that it is not there.

Maybe they do have a political basis to follow the grammar they are used to or maybe they don't, you tell me. I haven't browsed the internet to find that out, I am talking about myself. And hey, laxxy, suspecting that you're from Ukraine and all, I'm whispering into your ear: "I don't really care". I must however acknowledge that the idea of manipulating the language for the sake of political ends is not particularly new and is best described in the Animal Farm. Squealer rules.

I personally have no problems with people following whatever grammar they prefer -- but oh so often they suddenly start having issues with people writing "v". And that I do have a problem with.
and you don't need classic literature to observe the language being politically manipulated -- it should be sufficient to turn on the Russian TV.

Originally Posted by adoc

Originally Posted by Dusik

да да. там какими то постановлениями утвердили теперь, что правильно говорить "в украину", я тоже помню. уже давно, лет 10 тому

You are serious, aren't you?

i am really

At least it gave us something to argue about, which means it was a good thing.