Printable View
Ok, this number has really irritated me for a long time. I just don't understand how it works. I read that it essentially works as noun and not an adjective in any sense, but my book really doesn't explain this well or give any examples.
I know its a bit of a bore but I can't find the information on the internet either so could someone show me how it all works...
Cheers, I really do appreciate your help!
I think all the problems with 1000 are actualy caused by the Russian system of declension of numerals.
одна тысяча - one thousand
две тысячи - two thousand
пять тысяч - five thousand
It's the same for any other noun, like: одна книга, две книги, пять книг. And even двадцать одна (21) книга (тысяча), двадцать две (22) книги (тысячи), двадцать пять (25) книг (тысяч).
The rule is that if the numeral ends up with 1 then the noun is in singular and nominative case ("тысяча"), from 2 to 4 - singular genitive case ("тысячи"), other digits (including 0, such as 10, 20 etc) - plural genitive case ("тысяч"). There is an exception: 11 (одиннадцать) and 12 (двенадцать), a noun after these numerals are in plural and genitive case ("тысяч").
When there is no numerals in a phrase, "тысяча" is also just an ordinary noun. Here is its table of declension:
nominative: тысяча (s), тысячи (pl)
genitive: тысячи (s), тысяч (pl)
dative: тысяче (s), тысячам (pl)
accusative: тысячу (s), тысячи (pl)
instrumental: тысячей, тысячью (s), тысячами (pl)
prepositional: тысячи (s), тысячах (pl)
Examples:
Тысячам пострадавших была выплачена компенсация
Речь идет о тысячах пострадавших
http://gramota.ru/slovari/dic/?word=...FF%F7%E0&all=x
I hope I was helpful
Thanks Lux, I understand it all now.
Just a quick question about numbers in general. Am I correct in thinking that all numbers in a construction will follow the case of the object they are refering to? So, Под одной тысячей и девятьюстами пятьюдесятью восьмью облаками (all in instrumental)
...Unless the the last number is an ordinal number, in which case only the last numeral is the required case and all the rest are in the nominative.
So, я родился в тысяча девятьсот пятьдесят восьмоm году.
Is this correct?
Yes, it is (in both questions). "Восемью" sounds better, but another version is correct, too. Also the conjunction "и" is not necessary here (it's even better without it)Quote:
Originally Posted by happyclogs
Though I am a native Russian speaker, however it's not very easy for me to construct such sentence as "Под одной тысячей и девятьюстами пятьюдесятью восьмью облаками" from your example. In everyday life I try to avoid such phrases. In the informal speach I sometimes use phrases where only two last numerals are not in nominative case. It's grammatically incorrect, but more easily pronounced and understandable (beware of Grammar Nazi :) ). It's not acceptable for writing, though. IMHO.
Numerals and their declension is one of the hardest questions even for native speakers. It's a very good test for literacy :)
Ahh, that is a great relief!Quote:
Originally Posted by LuxDefensor
Because in English I think numbers and their grammar is quite easy, but whenever I have to read a number in Russian I just let out a sigh, stare at the paper for ages and then start speaking at snail pace in an awful creaky accent... :roll:
My plan is never to say a number again, and instead I'll just use my fingers!! :D
I would say "девятистами пятидесятью восeмью".Quote:
девятьюстами пятьюдесятью восьмью
I can only hope that this also is correct. :)
Actually, no, the answer is “not always.” Here's the scoop:Quote:
Originally Posted by LuxDefensor
A. If the number is one (or if a compound number ends in one), then the entire number phrase agrees with the case of the object they are referring to.
B. If the number is тысяча, миллион, миллиард, (or if a compound number ends in those numbers) then no matter what the case the number is in, the noun phrase occurs in genitive plural.
C. If the number is два, две, три, четыре, and the number is in the nominative case (or the accusative inanimate), then the noun occurs in the genitive singular.
D. If the number is an oblique (gen/pre/dat/ins) form of два, три or четыре, then the number phrase agrees with the noun phrase in case.
Those are the generalities, but they do not cover all circumstances.
The Russian number system is frightfully complex, and it's made worse by the fact that the official rules (which you might hear correctly performed by newscasters, scholars during presentations, and the incurably anal retentive) are in fact not followed in conversational Russian. In fact, in conversation Russians use a series of "rephrasing tactics" that usually allow them to avoid declining numbers except in the nominative, genitive, and sometimes accusative.
Well, your "B" point is not actually about the numerals. "Тысяча", "миллион" etc are used as nouns there, they easily can be replaced with words like "куча", "огромное количество" (and they are indeed often used in this way), and thus take the responsibility of implementation of declension. The word after such construction is object to these words, so it's in genitive case. Compare the phrases:
1) "Под десятью слоями" - "слоями" is the main word of construction, and "десятью" just describes the quantity of it, so it follows the case of the main word.
2) "Под десятком слоёв" - "десятком" is the noun itself but "слоёв" is a complement (like: "Под десятком чего? - Слоёв)
So in constructions of the first type the numeral (all its words) follows the case of the main word.
Now, about the "C" point: it's not only about 2, 3 and 4. For any number, If the entire construction is in nominative case, then the word representing what have been counted has a declension according to what I've wrote in my 1st post.
I hope I didn't tangle it comletely :)
While of course you are correct, I was assuming that happyclogs was using the word "number" in the typical English sense. We consider “thousand/million/billion” numbers because they indicate a precise quantity, thus I wanted to reinforce that numbers, particulary when the number is in the nominative/accusatuve, are in fact not followed by the same case of the noun they quantify.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuxDefensor
In essence we are saying the same thing, I just made a different assumption about what ‘number’ would mean to happyclogs.