Thread: страдательные причастия прошедшего времени (Very Difficult Question)

We, who deal with natural or technical sciences professionally, often feel a kind of snobbery about humanitarian and social disciplines. According to our methodological icon Karl Popper, they can not use Scientific Method consistently because due to the nature of their objects, their statements actually can not satisfy Falsifiability criterion (and thus can't be really "scientific")

Some terminology I haven't came across for some years. Just allow me to add an additional opinion, that does not neccesarilly disagree or agree with those mentioned above.
Ludwig Wittgenstein* and his theory of social games are in my opinion the most descriptive, or if you want the dominant paradigm, in Comparative linguistics.
"Ancient Greek can be compared to the lingusitic game with the most comprehend and accurate rules, which cannot be explained based on the current experimental methodolgy due to the lack of context or even understanding of that particual time being ...", "the philosophical theocracy of that time required the structure of a linguistic vehicle so complicated that lead the deliberate alternation of the intrinsic character of the language to a tool of propagandation of mere intelligence so as to exterminate the slighest margin of randomness**, which at that time of naturalism and humanitarism, was considered more or less a disease" - Philosophical Investigation, 1953***

* Perhaps the most influential philosopher of social sciences of the 20th century
** The underlying was done by Wittgenstein on his original book
***Translated from the Greek Version of 1998

Originally Posted by Soft sign

This resembles the Russian folk tale «Каша из топора» (Axe porridge).

Thanks for sharing that! In English, and in several other languages, this story is usually called Суп из камня, "Stone Soup," or less often Суп из гвоздя, "Nail soup." In the versions I'm familiar with, many people from the village add just a little bit to the soldier's soup: one gives a carrot, another an onion, another puts in a handful of dried beans, someone offers a beet, an old woman pours in a cup of rice, etc. So the soldier gets a free dinner, but everyone else gets an ALMOST free dinner!

Originally Posted by Antonio1986

"Ancient Greek can be compared to the lingusitic game with the most comprehend and accurate rules, which cannot be explained based on the current experimental methodolgy due to the lack of context or even understanding of that particual time being ...", "the philosophical theocracy of that time required the structure of a linguistic vehicle so complicated that lead the deliberate alternation of the intrinsic character of the language to a tool of propagandation of mere intelligence so as to exterminate the slighest margin of randomness**, which at that time of naturalism and humanitarism, was considered more or less a disease" - Philosophical Investigation, 1953***

So basically he thinks that Ancient Greek was a construct of philosopers rather than natural language. And the first people's common Greek was Koine after Alexander?

So basically he thinks that Ancient Greek was a construct of philosopers rather than natural language. And the first people's common Greek was Koine after Alexander?

I don't know and unfortunately we cannot ask him
Koine Greek? Very few Greeks know what even this mean I am impressed it-ogo! Honestly impressed!
it-ogo I think you should start studying less and come to Cyprus and help me with these thousand Russian millionaires who don't know how and where to spend their money
And when we make a lot of money... we can sponsor the research on Comparative Linguistics

Money avoid me. Probably because I don't show enough passion for them.

I was playing now a rally video game on the mobile phone and it says: "Chase the hunted car".
The word hunt in russian is охотиться . As I know this type of verbs (i.e. непереходный with ending -ся) don't have страдательное причастие прошедшего времени.
So in this case I must conclude that there is an adjective describing the word "hunted".
How I must translated this expression?

Вероятно, подойдут причастия выслеживаемая, преследуемая, разыскиваемая, либо сложноподчинённое определение "на которую объявлена охота". Затрудняюсь сказать, как перевести фразу в целом.

The best solution (in my opinion) would be "Преследуйте разыскиваемую машину".

Chase him! = Преследуй(те) его!
"Разыскиваемый" implies something like "wanted" here.

Originally Posted by Antonio1986

Some structural issues:
1. Страдательные причастия прошедшего времени are composed from verbs. In order to be formed the following endings are used:
-енный
-атый
-ённый
-анный
2. In some cases the ударение is transfered (increased)

Question: Is there a rule what ending to use when we form them (-енный -атый -ённый -анный )?

Possible answered to my question:
1. As I already mentioned: when the verb ends in -ать and its First Conjugation Verb you use the ending -анный
2. When the прошедшее время глагола оканчивается in any other form different that -ал then the most probable окончание is -eнный (e.g. построить > построил > построенный )
3. When the прошедшее время глагола оканчивается in - ыл then the most possible ending is -тый (закрыть > закрыл > закрытый)
4. Still now answer when to use -ённый

Prichastiya in Russian are a real mess.

убить - убитый
одеть - одетый
выжать - выжатый
зачать - зачатый

I don't see the rule to distinguish between -тый and -нный.

Казнить - казнил - казнённый (executed)
Закрепить - закрепил - закреплённый (fixed)
Лишать - лишил - лишённый (deprived)
Удивлять - удивил - удивлённый (surprised)
Изумить - изумил - изумлённый (amazed)
Поразить - поразил - поражённый
Сразить - сразил - сражённый
Заклеймить - заклеймил - заклеймённый

Расстрелять - расстрелял - расстрелянный (shot)
Забыть - забыл - забытый (forgotten)
Побить - побил - побитый (beaten)

I would like to ask something about the use of the страдательные причастия прошедшего времени, by presenting the following example:
1. Музей, построенный архитектором Антоном , самое красивое здание нашего города.
2. Музей, который был построен архитектором Антоном , самое красивое здание нашего города.

In my ears they sound totally the same. But are they in reallity?

Also I noticed that when a страдательные причастия прошедшего времени is expressed on a future or a past tense then we usuaully use the краткую форму.
For example is difficult for me to imagine where I will use the expression:
1. Музей, который был построенный (-ым) архитектором Антоном ...
2. Музей, который будет построенный(-ым) архитектором Антоном ...

Originally Posted by Antonio1986

1. Музей, построенный архитектором Антоном , самое красивое здание нашего города.
2. Музей, который был построен архитектором Антоном , самое красивое здание нашего города.

In my ears they sound totally the same. But are they in reallity?

Yes, they are.

1. Музей, который был построенный (-ым) архитектором Антоном ...
2. Музей, который будет построенный(-ым) архитектором Антоном ...

Yes, you're right.

Построенный - > построен (one "н")
Сделанный -> сделан

Эти часы были сделаны под заказ. (сделать -> сделанные -> сделаны)
Ваш заказ будет готов завтра. (готовить -> готовый -> готов)