Printable View
Президент Путин вчера сказал:
"Мы делаем это и исходим из того, что мы сотрудничаем с легитимным правительством и при этом не нарушаем никаких норм международного права, никаких наших обязательств".
Мой очевидный вопрос почему он использовал родительный. The translation is: violation of any norm = Мы не нарушаем никакие нормы.
P.S. I suppose the answer is that denial which is represented with "никаких" leads to the use of Genetive.
It is because of "нарушать" is negated here.
Он нарушает правила. Он нарушает законы.
Он не нарушает правил. Он не нарушает законов. "Никаких" can be added here, but it is optional.
The accusative is still possible:
Он не нарушает правила. Он не нарушает законы. "Никакие" can be added here, but it is optional.
So, it is just another example of the "genitive of negation", which in many cases is optional in the modern language. But when possible, "genitive of negation" makes somewhat a stronger negation rather than the plain accusative.
Excellent explanation. Нет слов!Quote:
it is just another example of the "genitive of negation"
10 минут назад думаю что один русский друг сказал: "Не проходит дня, чтобы кто-то (не) раздражал меня ". So I should suppose here that дня is again a "victim" of the Genetive of Negation?
Yes, something like that. Прошёл (один) день - Не прошло ни (одного) дня.
But here we also have another phenomenon: a personal sentence with a subject (день) turns to an impersonal sentence without a subject. You can see it from the verb agreement: день прошёл (masculine), so "день" is the subject and it governs the verb. Дня не прошло (neuter) - since the sentence is impersonal now, the verb takes the neuter form.
Note the difference:
День не прошёл - The day did not pass (i.e. it still continues).
Дня не прошло. - No day passed (There was not even a single day).
Back to Genetive.
When someone enter in the shop I say to him:
Вы хотите / Вы хотели бы воду/пиво/вино?
They told my that is better to say: Вы хотите / Вы хотели бы воды/вина/пива?
The problem is that I don't understand whether this is Roditel'nyi or just Iminitel'nyi / Mnozhestvenoe chislo.
It is Partitive (which mainly coinside in form with Genitive). It is used with uncountable nouns and means "some xxx": "Дайте мне воды" = "Give me some water."
Yes, it is Genitive (родительный), but here you see its another usage - the so-called "partitive". Actually, there are traces of partitive in modern Russian where its form is slightly different from genitive, e.g. чай (nominative) - чая (pure genitive, as in "стакан чая", or "у меня нет чая") - чаю (partitive: Я хочу чаю - I would like some tea). The meaning of partitive is to convey the idea of "some": not all the tea, but just a limited amount of it. More details on this: Partitive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antonio1986
Back again to this annoying Genetive:
"Вчера вечером я звонил тебе, но тебя не было дома".
Как вы объясняете это феномен. Why we don't use Ty. It is again Genetive of negation?
не было + genetive. It's a set thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antonio1986
Не было стола
Не было денег
etc and etc
How do I explain it? Easily, one of the meanings of the genetive case is conveying absence or lack of someone of something. Here it perfectly corresponds to the absence meaning.
Just a quick heads up though. Don't confuse these two structures:
тебя не было дома vs ты не был дома.
They basically convey the same meaning but their grammatical structures are different
And yes, it's genitive of negation. But here it is mandatory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antonio1986
Нет + Gen. = There is no something;
Не было + Gen. = There was no something;
Не будет + Gen. = There will be no something.
Or somebody.
The word order can be changed. The genitive cannot be replaced by any other case.
Денег не было, нет и не будет! :-D