Negative genitive
26 views
Skip to first unread message
davidemerling
May 29, 2009, 1:54:27 PM5/29/09
to Huliganov and friends
I posted this in the other forum but the 500-character limit would not
permit me to fully post what I wanted to ask.
I studied Russian from 6th-12th grade and had very good instructors.
I'm 52-yrs old now and, although I surprisingly remember much of what
I've been taught, I completely lost my comfort level with the language
that I used to have. At 52-yrs-old, I've got a new interest in the
language and I've been doing a lot of studying and I'm trying to get
it back.
One thing that has puzzled me as of late ...
When I first learning Russian, I thought I recalled that the direct
objective all negative expressions must be in the genitive. But when I
read/listen to Russian, this is frequently not the case. But then
again, sometimes I do see it. It seems to be a rather arbitrary
grammatical issue.
Let's take а look at the following two Russian sentences:
Мальчик не бросает мяч.
Мальчик не бросает мяча.
The direct object is "мяч" in both cases. In the first sentence, the
direct object is in the accusative and in the second sentence it is in
the genitive. Apparently I walked away from my early years of Russian
training with the impression that only the second method is correct.
Or, at least, that it was more common.
I'm finding out that that is not true.
I'm now wondering if both constructions are grammatically correct and,
if so, what is the difference in meaning.
I asked this to a native Russian and got an answer that may have
confused me more than helped me. I may not even do a good job of
relaying what he told me, but here it goes ...
He says that "Мальчик не бросает мяча" is grammatically correct but
somewhat bookish and that "Мальчик не бросает мяч" would be more
common.
Here's how he explained the difference in meanings.
"Мальчик не бросает мяч" would mean something like, "The boy is not
throwing the ball."
It's as if we are watching the boy play a game that is involving a
ball and we are commenting that he simply is not throwing it. It is
probably something that is presently going on and that we are
observing the activity.
"Мальчик не бросает мяча" would mean something like, "The boy doesn't
throw a ball."
It's as if we are making a general comment about something this boy
does not, or cannot, do. Maybe the boy we're talking about doesn't
like sports. In fact, with this sentence, the boy in question may not
even be present.
Given that above explanation, let's examine the following sentences:
Я никогда не помню свои сны.
Я никогда не помню своих снов.
(I'm just making these up. Forgive me if there is some other
grammatical issue that is wrong.)
Which is correct - and why?
Are they both correct? What is the difference?
Thanks!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
permit me to fully post what I wanted to ask.
I studied Russian from 6th-12th grade and had very good instructors.
I'm 52-yrs old now and, although I surprisingly remember much of what
I've been taught, I completely lost my comfort level with the language
that I used to have. At 52-yrs-old, I've got a new interest in the
language and I've been doing a lot of studying and I'm trying to get
it back.
One thing that has puzzled me as of late ...
When I first learning Russian, I thought I recalled that the direct
objective all negative expressions must be in the genitive. But when I
read/listen to Russian, this is frequently not the case. But then
again, sometimes I do see it. It seems to be a rather arbitrary
grammatical issue.
Let's take а look at the following two Russian sentences:
Мальчик не бросает мяч.
Мальчик не бросает мяча.
The direct object is "мяч" in both cases. In the first sentence, the
direct object is in the accusative and in the second sentence it is in
the genitive. Apparently I walked away from my early years of Russian
training with the impression that only the second method is correct.
Or, at least, that it was more common.
I'm finding out that that is not true.
I'm now wondering if both constructions are grammatically correct and,
if so, what is the difference in meaning.
I asked this to a native Russian and got an answer that may have
confused me more than helped me. I may not even do a good job of
relaying what he told me, but here it goes ...
He says that "Мальчик не бросает мяча" is grammatically correct but
somewhat bookish and that "Мальчик не бросает мяч" would be more
common.
Here's how he explained the difference in meanings.
"Мальчик не бросает мяч" would mean something like, "The boy is not
throwing the ball."
It's as if we are watching the boy play a game that is involving a
ball and we are commenting that he simply is not throwing it. It is
probably something that is presently going on and that we are
observing the activity.
"Мальчик не бросает мяча" would mean something like, "The boy doesn't
throw a ball."
It's as if we are making a general comment about something this boy
does not, or cannot, do. Maybe the boy we're talking about doesn't
like sports. In fact, with this sentence, the boy in question may not
even be present.
Given that above explanation, let's examine the following sentences:
Я никогда не помню свои сны.
Я никогда не помню своих снов.
(I'm just making these up. Forgive me if there is some other
grammatical issue that is wrong.)
Which is correct - and why?
Are they both correct? What is the difference?
Thanks!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
usenetposts
May 30, 2009, 5:48:18 PM5/30/09
to Huliganov and friends
Dear David,
You need to distinguish here the negative genitive of Polish with the
negative partitive genitive of Russian.
In Polish you tend to have a genitive in the noun which is the direct
object of any negated verb. "Chlopak nie rzuca pilki" (genitive) is
always correct, "Chlopak nie rzuca pilke" (accusative) is not correct.
"Nigdy nie pamietam swoich snow" (gen pl) is similarly correct, and
" ... swoje sny" would be erroneous.
In Russian the genitive with negation is an extension of the partitive
genitive. This usage is not unlike the French usage, and may also have
been influenced by French usage. In French you say "Le garcon ne jete
pas le ballon" when you mean "The boy does not throw/is not throwing
the ball". Here we have identified the existence of a ball, but he is
not throwing it. But you may be introducing the ball as a new idea,
and not having identified any balls up to that point in the
conversation, we may say "Le garcon ne jete pas de ballons". Namely
the boy isn't throwing any balls.
The first has no partitive aspect. The second has the idea of
partitiveness because you are measuring the amount of balls he is
throwing at a value of zero pieces. In the first the ball which is
described as not being thrown has already been measured previously to
that part of the conversation as one piece, and therefore the
partitive element is not featured.
Similarly, if you say "I don't remember my dreams" you are not
concerned with measuring them - you are saying you never do, and
therefore it is a question of the fact of whether you remember them or
not, and not relevant as to whether you have them or not. If you don't
remember them, you may, for all you know, not even have them. If you
say "I haven't achieved most of my dreams" then you have an immediate
partitive element, as you put in a measurement of the dreams, and a
genitive is called for. Similarly if you were to deny that you have
any dreams ("U menya net snov") then you have introduced a negative
partitive, and you have a genitive.
Therefore in the case of Russian you need to consider whether a
partitive sense is intrinsic in the sentence forst and foremost, and
not be guided by the simple fact of negation of the verb, which would
suffice for over 90% of Polish negated direct objects.
Please also bear in mind that for verbs governing oblique cases, such
as the instrumental, this pulls stronger than the genitive anyway. "Ya
nie vladeyu mnogimi yazykami" (which would be a lie, by the way, if it
were not merely an example) is correct despite the clear partitive,
because vladet' governs the instrumental, and this pulls harder than
the genitive partitive per se.
Hth,
Viktor D. Huliganov
You need to distinguish here the negative genitive of Polish with the
negative partitive genitive of Russian.
In Polish you tend to have a genitive in the noun which is the direct
object of any negated verb. "Chlopak nie rzuca pilki" (genitive) is
always correct, "Chlopak nie rzuca pilke" (accusative) is not correct.
"Nigdy nie pamietam swoich snow" (gen pl) is similarly correct, and
" ... swoje sny" would be erroneous.
In Russian the genitive with negation is an extension of the partitive
genitive. This usage is not unlike the French usage, and may also have
been influenced by French usage. In French you say "Le garcon ne jete
pas le ballon" when you mean "The boy does not throw/is not throwing
the ball". Here we have identified the existence of a ball, but he is
not throwing it. But you may be introducing the ball as a new idea,
and not having identified any balls up to that point in the
conversation, we may say "Le garcon ne jete pas de ballons". Namely
the boy isn't throwing any balls.
The first has no partitive aspect. The second has the idea of
partitiveness because you are measuring the amount of balls he is
throwing at a value of zero pieces. In the first the ball which is
described as not being thrown has already been measured previously to
that part of the conversation as one piece, and therefore the
partitive element is not featured.
Similarly, if you say "I don't remember my dreams" you are not
concerned with measuring them - you are saying you never do, and
therefore it is a question of the fact of whether you remember them or
not, and not relevant as to whether you have them or not. If you don't
remember them, you may, for all you know, not even have them. If you
say "I haven't achieved most of my dreams" then you have an immediate
partitive element, as you put in a measurement of the dreams, and a
genitive is called for. Similarly if you were to deny that you have
any dreams ("U menya net snov") then you have introduced a negative
partitive, and you have a genitive.
Therefore in the case of Russian you need to consider whether a
partitive sense is intrinsic in the sentence forst and foremost, and
not be guided by the simple fact of negation of the verb, which would
suffice for over 90% of Polish negated direct objects.
Please also bear in mind that for verbs governing oblique cases, such
as the instrumental, this pulls stronger than the genitive anyway. "Ya
nie vladeyu mnogimi yazykami" (which would be a lie, by the way, if it
were not merely an example) is correct despite the clear partitive,
because vladet' governs the instrumental, and this pulls harder than
the genitive partitive per se.
Hth,
Viktor D. Huliganov
davidemerling
May 31, 2009, 2:47:59 AM5/31/09
to Huliganov and friends
> In Russian the genitive with negation is an extension of the partitive
> genitive.
If the genitive of the direct object is caused by the partitive nature
> genitive.
of the sentence, then what does negation have to do with it? Couldn't
a direct object be in the genitive due to the partitive nature of the
meaning even if the sentence was in the affirmative?
In other words, you have stated that "Мальчик не бросает мяча" is
grammatically correct for a particular meaning (partitive).
If that's the case, is it possible that "Мальчик бросает мяча" could
also be grammatically correct in some context?
For instance, couldn't one say both "Я хочу хлеба" and "Я не хочу
хлеба" - with the direct object in the partitive genitive without any
consideration given to the fact that one sentence is in the
affirmative while the other is in the negative?
Does negation really have anything to do with these type of sentences?
It seems it's 100% about the meaning being partitive?
NOTE: I was interested in your Polish explanation. As it turns out, my
Russian instructor in high school was actually Polish. Do you think he
had the misconception that *ALL* negated sentences caused the direct
object to be placed in the genitive (as you explained is the case in
the Polish language) and he passed that on to us unwittingly?
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
davidemerling
May 31, 2009, 3:07:11 AM5/31/09
to Huliganov and friends
> Similarly if you were to deny that you have
> any dreams ("U menya net snov") then you have introduced a negative
> partitive, and you have a genitive.
Would "У меня нет снов" be a partitive genitive? Is *that* the
> any dreams ("U menya net snov") then you have introduced a negative
> partitive, and you have a genitive.
grammatical reason for placing сны in the genitive?
I always thought that constructions like "У меня нет ______" always
required the fill-in-the-blank word to be in the genitive without any
exceptions.
In the following exchange ...
<<Где мои очки? Видели?>>
<<Их нет.>>
Certainly you're not saying that "они" is in the genitive for any
partitive reason - аre you? It's 100% about the negation, just like "У
меня нет снов."
Correct?
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages