Thread: shouldn't be

Good morning to everyone!

- It should not be excluded the labour cost from the subsidy.

- Нельзя быть исключена оплата труда работника из субсидии.

Please tell me that I am correct!!!!

Зарплату труда нельзя исключить из субсидии.

Originally Posted by wanja

Зарплату труда нельзя исключить из субсидии.

My version is wrong grammaticaly?

(first of all, "зарплата труда" is tautology. "Оплата труда" = "зарплата" = "заработная (о)плата)".)

I do not even sure that english version is correct.
Why not "Labour cost should not be excluded from the subsidy"?
"Нельзя быть исключена" is wrong anyway.

Correct variants:
"Зарплату нельзя исключать из субсидии" (на мой взгляд самый простой перевод)
"Зарплата не должна исключаться из субсидии" (страдательный залог, я думаю именно его вы хотели ввести словосочетанием "быть исключена")
"Зарплата не исключается из субсидии" (констатация факта)

Why russian are so difficult? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?
Why my brain cannot adjust to this language after three year? .Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?

Ι hope that I speak and write better than the guy on this video!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D76Wacyrp2M
Btw: Никогда я не сдавал экзамены по русскому языку

Why my brain cannot adjust to this language after three year?

I believe, partly because of frequent distractions to English. Russian demands full dedication!

BTW, your sentence with быть исключена is
Оплата труда работника не может быть исключена из субсидии.

So, Нельзя is a special word, it requires infinitive!

It should not be excluded
Нельзя быть исключена

Ошибка возникла из-за того, что Вы попытались сделать перевод по аналогии с английским языком. В русском слово нельзя является "частью" "запрещаемого" глагола. В общем случае конструкция со словом нельзя выглядит так: нельзя [что делать/сделать?].
Примеры:
1) Здесь нельзя курить.
2) В больнице нельзя шуметь.
3) Нельзя садиться за руль пьяным (запрет для автомобилистов).
4) Нельзя сбросить большой вес всего за один месяц (о диете).

Разберём Ваш случай.
1) Нельзя [что делать?] -> Нельзя исключать.
2) Нельзя исключать [что?] -> Нельзя исключать зарплату (оплату труда) работника.
3) Нельзя исключать зарплату работника [из чего?] -> Нельзя исключать зарплату работника из субсидии.

Звездочёт

Don't want to sound patronizing, but trying to explain Russian grammar with Russian questions is hardly helpful to foreigners. You, of course, know that

нельзя исключать что?

but foreigners don't have this knowledge for obvious reasons.

Trying to explain Russian grammar with Russian questions is hardly helpful to foreigners

I know. However how should they understand our cases and don't use them like we do? When we study english verb tenses, we try to think in these categories, not in our.

Originally Posted by Звездочёт

I know. However how they should understand our cases and don't use them like we do? When we study english verb tenses, we try to think in these categories, not in our.

Do you think of questions to conjugate words into their correct forms when you speak? No, you don't. You just do it from your experience and from intuitive knowledge of what each case/verb tense/preposition etc. means. That knowledge comes from hearing, remembering and then repeating the familiar constructs over and over again. Over time your brain makes out similarities between different constructs facilitating your understanding of them even further and making it easier to apply them in a wider varity of situations. This is how you learn a language.

Conjugation questions are irrelevant.

I don't know how our brain works with cases. It is mystery for me. Of cause you are right: russian questions is hardly helpful for foreigners.


However:

Originally Posted by iCake

Do you think of questions to conjugate words into their correct forms when you speak?

Yes, sometimes, when I doubt. And it works greatly. Why?

I know what should I do!

Antonio1986, could you say, what part of my explanation was helpful for you, and what was not. I'll try to take into account your answer in future.

Originally Posted by Звездочёт

I know. However how should they understand our cases and don't use them like we do? When we study english verb tenses, we try to think in these categories, not in our.

Originally Posted by Звездочёт

I don't know how our brain works with cases.

Sorry, but those two are contradictory.

First you express a thought that asking conjugation questions is how native speakers proccess cases. So there is some use in those questions to foreigners as they help them think as we do when composing Russian sentences.

Then, you state that you don't know how our brain proccess cases.

As to why I asked if you use conjugation questions when speaking Russian. Well, that's entirely because of your question that is quoted in this message. To be more specific, the first quote.

Originally Posted by Звездочёт

I don't know how our brain works with cases. It is mystery for me. Of cause you are right: russian questions is hardly helpful for foreigners.


However:

Yes, sometimes, when I doubt. And it works greatly. Why?

Explanation was fine. I understood everything.

Sorry, but those two are contradictory.

Я могу объяснить, что имел в виду, когда писал первое сообщение, и когда писал второе. Вот только я боюсь, что мы зафлудим тему офтопиком. Я и раньше слышал, что очень трудно объяснить иностранцу склонение по падежам, используя систему вопросов, которой нас обучают в школе. Думаю, Вы правы: подобными объяснениями лучше не злоупотреблять. Но иногда очень хочется показать структуру предложения, взаимосвязь его частей. Ума не приложу, как это сделать, не прибегая к помощи падежных вопросов.

Originally Posted by Звездочёт

Я могу объяснить, что имел в виду, когда писал первое сообщение, и когда писал второе. Вот только я боюсь, что мы зафлудим тему офтопиком. Я и раньше слышал, что очень трудно объяснить иностранцу склонение по падежам, используя систему вопросов, которой нас обучают в школе. Думаю, Вы правы: подобными объяснениями лучше не злоупотреблять. Но иногда очень хочется показать структуру предложения, взаимосвязь его частей. Ума не приложу, как это сделать, не прибегая к помощи падежных вопросов.

I understand what you mean even without your clarifications that might, as you said, flood this topic. The thing is I think you're mixing up apple and oranges here. This is what caused this lengthy and, I'm pleased to say, civil argument. But back to the apple and oranges.

I firmly believe that conjugation questions are very deceptive. A native speaker might easily fall to the feeling that they're a perfect tool to express how different parts of a sentence interact with each other. But they're not, they're just shortcuts to constructs you, as a native speaker, heard and repeated thousands upon thousands times in your live.

писать (чем? )ручкой/угольком/пером... and any other possible word that will make sense in conjuction with писать, granted you put it in the instrumental case. But let's think about what чем is. Чем is nothing more than the word что conjugated into instrumental. As you can see there is a pattern here that strongly points at this:

Use instrumental after the verb писать when you want to say that you write using the thing the conjugated word means as a tool.

You can do the trick with any other Russian case. The conjugation questions are just indicative of a pattern and you, as a native speaker, has encountered such patterns throughout your life, you have a lot of experience with them, that's why they make so much sense to you.

But anyone devoid of this experience will never put 2 and 2 together here. That's why they need help building their experiece with the patterns of the Russian language. We need to explain them to learners.

But you don't explain a pattern with a pattern for obvious reasons. But you might just achieve that by explaining what the reason we use this pattern in a particular situation is.