Thread: The use of Partitive Case in Russian

I was browsing викисловарь when in the entry about the word "мышьяк" (which means the element arsenic or a general pharmaceutical preparation having arsenic or its compounds as ingredients) I found that it has a Partitive Case form in the singular. I thought it was logical that other russian words for chemical elements should also have such form, but that's not what I found. Why is that so? Is it just because such form coincides with other? Later I also found such form for the word "мех" (which also have a Locative case form). Some questions:

1) What is the meaning and usage of this case in Russian?
2) Are there more words which admit a Partitive Case form?
3) Can someone give several examples of usage of this case?

Thanks in advance.

Originally Posted by Carcul

I was browsing викисловарь when in the entry about the word "мышьяк" (which means the element arsenic or a general pharmaceutical preparation having arsenic or its compounds as ingredients) I found that it has a Partitive Case form in the singular. I thought it was logical that other russian words for chemical elements should also have such form, but that's not what I found. Why is that so? Is it just because such form coincides with other? Later I also found such form for the word "мех" (which also have a Locative case form). Some questions:

1) What is the meaning and usage of this case in Russian?
2) Are there more words which admit a Partitive Case form?
3) Can someone give several examples of usage of this case?

Thanks in advance.

The partitive is the form "of sth" in phrases like "a cup of tea".

In Russian, it's the same as the Genitive except in a few cases like стакан чаю.

It's worth noting the following distinction: "дай хлеб" give me (the) bread (accusative case, referring to some specific loaf of bread).
"дай хлеба" give me some bread (partitive genitive)

This site has a good explanation:
http://russianmentor.net/gram/mailbag/topics/gen2.htm

It seems, the scientists have names for everything!

Партитив — Википедия
Местный падеж — Википедия

I had no idea, that there could be even more cases than 6 basic Russian ones.

In fact Partitive Case in Russian exists for all uncountable nouns, but its form mostly coincides with Genitive and therefore it is not listed among standard Russian cases.

It can be used for uncountable X instead of a phrase "some X" (or sometimes "a plenty of X" or "a <somethingfull> of X") where otherwise X should be in Accusative.

For example:
Дай мне хлеб. = Give me a piece of bread. хлеб is in Accusative.
Дай мне хлеба. = Give me some bread. хлеб is in Partitive.

For some words Partitive has an alternative form which does not coincide with Genitive (ending -у instead of -а for first declension words) and that is why it is still a separate case rather than one more function of Genitive.


Свари супа.
Свари супу.
= Cook some soup.

Снегу намело!
Снега намело!

= What a plenty of snow is brought by the wind!

Originally Posted by Carcul

I was browsing викисловарь when in the entry about the word "мышьяк" (which means the element arsenic or a general pharmaceutical preparation having arsenic or its compounds as ingredients) I found that it has a Partitive Case form in the singular. I thought it was logical that other russian words for chemical elements should also have such form, but that's not what I found. Why is that so? Is it just because such form coincides with other? Later I also found such form for the word "мех" (which also have a Locative case form). Some questions:

1) What is the meaning and usage of this case in Russian?
2) Are there more words which admit a Partitive Case form?
3) Can someone give several examples of usage of this case?

Thanks in advance.

Partitive is optional in the modern Russian. If you want to speak as a highly educated XIX-century nobleman you definitely have to learn the partitive. Otherwise you can safely use the regular genitive.

Originally Posted by Полуношник

Partitive is optional in the modern Russian. If you want to speak as a highly educated XIX-century nobleman you definitely have to learn the partitive. Otherwise you can safely use the regular genitive.

That's funny, I always had the sense that it was more conversational (maybe because it comes up so often in phrases involving alcoholic beverages )

But yeah много мусору/ бензину/ туману sound kind of odd to me

Well, when in Russia I heard a lot of "Хочешь воды?" instead of "Хочешь воду?". That's the partitive in action, right?

Originally Posted by fabriciocarraro

Well, when in Russia I heard a lot of "Хочешь воды?" instead of "Хочешь воду?". That's the partitive in action, right?

Yes, exactly.

Originally Posted by fabriciocarraro

Well, when in Russia I heard a lot of "Хочешь воды?" instead of "Хочешь воду?". That's the partitive in action, right?

That's accusative vs. genitive problem. You can use either accusative or genitive in a such sentence with slight difference in the meaning. There is additional complication. Some nouns have the special form of genitive which is called partitive. "Вода" doesn't have it. You can see partitive in action when you hear "сахару" for example. There are three possible variants:
Хочешь сахар? - accusative. It refers to a substance as a class. Соли нет, хочешь сахар?
Хочешь сахара? - genitive. One of the multiple functions of genitive is to refer to some amount of a substance: "стакан воды", "ложка сахара".
Хочешь сахару? - partitive. It's the special form of genitive to refer to some amount of a substance: "ложка сахару".

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Yes, exactly.

No.

Originally Posted by John_Douglas

That's funny, I always had the sense that it was more conversational (maybe because it comes up so often in phrases involving alcoholic beverages )

Well, it was used in all registers actually. It is still used. If you use it you would not sound odd. I have slightly exaggerated. On the other hand you can ignore partitive and you would not sound wrong either. Same grammarians could object but most of people would hardly notice the difference.

Originally Posted by Полуношник

No.

There are terminological contradictions among the linguists. Some define case through the grammatical function, others - through the morphology. If you like (or found in internet first) morphological approach, it does not mean that others are impossible. Don't confuse the way of description with the law of nature and formalism with the essence. If you don't like term "Partitive case" you can use "Partitive function of Genitive case". Which sometimes can have alternative morphological form (case) unlike other functions.

So, if the question was: does "Хочешь воды?" mean "Do you want some water?" than answer is simple "Yes". Independently of any smart system of cute words you prefer to describe that phenomenon.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

There are terminological contradictions among the linguists. Some define case through the grammatical function, others - through the morphology. If you like (or found in internet first) morphological approach, it does not mean that others are impossible. Don't confuse the way of description with the law of nature and formalism with the essence. If you don't like term "Partitive case" you can use "Partitive function of Genitive case". Which sometimes can have alternative morphological form (case) unlike other functions.

So, if the question was: does "Хочешь воды?" mean "Do you want some water?" than answer is simple "Yes". Independently of any smart system of cute words you prefer to describe that phenomenon.

I have three different computers. One for MasterRussian, another for Might of Magic and the third for VLC. They happen to share the same physical incarnation just by coincidence. Right.

Anyway, the phrase "Хочешь воды?" doesn't show up the existence of partitive in Russian. "Хочешь мышьяку?" makes the real difference between genitive and partitive. I mean the difference which does exist in nature rather then in descriptive approaches.



Out of curiosity: do the linguists of the "functional school" argue that English nouns have seven (or probably more) grammatical cases?

Originally Posted by Полуношник

I have...

Enjoy some rhetorics? Welcome!

Out of curiosity: If some evil hacker change on your computer the image in the shorthcut of VLC to the image of Might of Magic, will you insist on naming your VLC "Might of Magic"? The image on shortcut does exist in nature and it is definitely more important than what the program really do. Right?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Enjoy some rhetorics? Welcome!

Out of curiosity: If some evil hacker change on your computer the image in the shorthcut of VLC to the image of Might of Magic, will you insist on naming your VLC "Might of Magic"? The image on shortcut does exist in nature and it is definitely more important than what the program really do. Right?

That is exactly my point. It somebody change a label or adds another one for an object it doesn't affect the object.