Thread: Imperfective vs Perfective (again)

Ok, for starters, I do know what the difference is but only "in theory." I am well aware that perfective implies the consequence (or completion) as well as the time of the verb while imperfective implies it is in the process of occurring, is being repeated, or has not happened yet.

However, a lot of the time I do not what the heck this means. For examples, I will use http://www.alphadictionary.com/rusgrammar/aspect.html and their examples.

"Завтра я буду писать весь день."
"Tomorrow, I will be writing all day"

This is imperfective future. This makes sense I suppose. The writing has not happened yet; the letters have not been written. He will be writing all day tomorrow.

HOWEVER,

"Вчера Петя пошёл в библиотеку в семь часов"
"Yesterday, Peter went to the library at seven o'clock"

According to my textbook, this is imperfective past. This is an event that has been completed, involved time, and is a one-time occurrence. I have no earthly idea how this makes sense to put it under imperfective. It follows the criteria for almost every aspect of perfective. Why isn't this perfective?!!?

I feel like once I grasp this concept, my life will be much easier

"Вчера Петя пошёл в библиотеку в семь часов"
"Yesterday, Peter went to the library at seven o'clock"

The action is not completed. It started but didn't come to an end

Perfective would be:
Петя сходил в библиотеку... (went and came back)

Disclaimer: I'm not a grammar guru. Just a native russian speaker.

Пошёл is from пойти and that's a perfective verb. Verbs of movement prefixed with по- are perfective. To illustrate the completed action in English a translation as 'left for the library' is probably better. So either the textbook is wrong, if you ask me, or you're not interpreting it correctly.

Originally Posted by Wyrm

HOWEVER,

"Вчера Петя пошёл в библиотеку в семь часов"
"Yesterday, Peter went to the library at seven o'clock"

According to my textbook, this is imperfective past. This is an event that has been completed, involved time, and is a one-time occurrence. I have no earthly idea how this makes sense to put it under imperfective. It follows the criteria for almost every aspect of perfective. Why isn't this perfective?!!?

Пошёл is perfective.

Ah, so this explains my confusion.

Just to clarify, the verb is correct in the sentence...

"Ваня, приди Антон Николаевич."

Correct?

Originally Posted by Wyrm

"Ваня, приди Антон Николаевич."

Correct?

No, this makes no sense. English version please?

Vanya, go see Anton Nikolayevich. I was going for imperative in the previous sentence... guess not

I'm afraid I don't understand what is "go see" in English. Maybe someone else does.

However, "приди" is an imperative form of "прийти" (to come). But it doesn't fit here. Even if you would say "Ваня, сходи... (go to...)", which does make sense, you can't just add "Антон Николаевич" there, without any preposition and the proper case. It should be "к Антону Николаевичу".

Originally Posted by Оля

I'm afraid I don't understand what is "go see" in English. Maybe someone else does. ...

иди увидь! "See" here is the bare infinitive (without "to").

http://cad.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua/~demch/frien ... gform.html
"...
7. Make and let

The verbs make and let are followed by an object and bare infinitive (e.g., go, work,see)

We use make to talk about something we have to do (but don’t want to do)
She wanted to go home, but her boss made her stay until the work was finished.

We use let when we talk about being given permission for something.
My boss let me have the afternoon off to go to my sister’s wedding.

The verb help can be followed by an infinitive with or without to
Could you help me (to) put these boxes in the van.

7. Verbs of perception
The verb of perception (see, watch, notice, hear, listen, feel) are followed by bare infinitive or by -ing form (present participle).

If we want to say that we heard or saw the whole action from beginning to end, we usually use bare infinitive
I saw him sign the cheque.

If we want to say that only saw or heard part of the action, we use -ing form
I saw the consultant waiting in reception.
(I saw consultant. He was waiting in reception.)
..."

Yeah, we went over this in class and I was wrong, it was "Vanya, came Anton", although this translation is terrible. Would it be "Ваня, пришёл Антон"?

This sentence structure is confusing me...

Originally Posted by Wyrm

Yeah, we went over this in class and I was wrong, it was "Vanya, came Anton", although this translation is terrible. Would it be "Ваня, пришёл Антон"?

Yes, "Ваня, пришёл Антон" as well as "Ваня, Антон пришёл" means "Vanya, Anton came / has come".

Originally Posted by Lampada

Originally Posted by Оля

I'm afraid I don't understand what is "go see" in English. Maybe someone else does. ...

иди увидь! "See" here is the bare infinitive (without "to").

I'm not sure if "увидеть" is the correct translation for "to see" in this context -- unless "увидеть кого" can be used colloquially as a synonym for "обратиться к кому"? Because the "see" in "go see someone" is typically understood as signifying "to visit, to present oneself to, to speak with," etc., but rarely has the literal meaning "to perceive visually with one's eyes."

Example:

-- Ugghh, I've been puking my guts out all day! (Ооой, я бливаю и бливаю весь день!)
-- Dude, go see a doctor! (Пацан, обращайся к врачу!)

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

-- Ugghh, I've been puking my guts out all day! (Ооой, [s:2y0d3sgd]я бливаю и бливаю[/s:2y0d3sgd] меня рвёт и рвёт весь день!)
-- Dude, go see a doctor! (Пацан, [s:2y0d3sgd]обращайся[/s:2y0d3sgd] сходи к врачу!)

The correct form from the verb "блевать" is "блюю", but this verb is VERY rude, so avoid to use it.

Originally Posted by Lampada

The verb help can be followed by an infinitive with or without to
Could you help me (to) put these boxes in the van.

In that example sentence, you should only use "to" if you want to sound like someone who's not quite ready for the TOEFL!

But there ARE times when it's a good idea (but not mandatory) to use "to" with an infinitive after the verb "help" -- particularly when there are a large number of words separating "help" from the infinitive verb, instead of just a cute little pronoun like "me." For example:

"Excuse me, but could you please help a very tired mother whose husband is deployed in Iraq and whose teething baby who won't stop crying to find her six-year-old son who's wandered away in the supermarket?"

Because the infinitive is so far away from the main verb, many native English speakers would place a to in the sentence to sort of "reconnect" the verbs help and find.

But when the verbs are only separated by a pronoun, or maybe a noun plus an adjective or two, we'd never say "to" after "help":

He helped the old Chinese woman lift the heavy box.