1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Ukrainian
  4. >
  5. "Ми не п'ємо чай на обід."

"Ми не п'ємо чай на обід."

Translation:We do not drink tea for lunch.

September 29, 2015



I am a native American English speaker. I agree with the above comments that "drinking tea for lunch" has the meaning the tea was my lunch. Saying "We do not drink tea at lunch," feels more natural, and means I might drink tea at other times, but not with my lunch.


Is the genitive of negation optional? Dated? Regional? Example: він не має зошита. Thank you


Yes. Also somehow (at least feels so for me) Genitive in the negation is more common than Accusative, "Він не має зошит" sounds a bit strange to me, I'd prefer "Він не має зошита".

But it might be because "У нього немає зошита" is getting in my way which always takes Genitive.



Recently I tend to think "Він не має зошит" is more like "He doesn't have the notebook, some particular one"; while "Він не має зошита" is more like "He doesn't have a/any notebook".

However, in principle both can mean both and are interchangeable. Or so I think? I am really confused and not sure...


If I could bother you with one more example... :) (Let's set aside positive sentences for a moment and the partitive genitive, i.e., some tea, sugar, etc. ) How about... "I did not buy that car." Do both Acc. and Gen. sound "OK" to your native speaker ear? Any discernible difference? Or, are they basically synonymous in this example? P.S. I speak Polish and Gen. is used after negated verbs. When I read that either is acceptable in Ukrainian, it piqued my interest. Again, Дякую!


[interesting, seemed to reply from the phone but can't see the comment here...]

You are not bothering me at all, I like your questions :)

If I say "Я (не) купила цієї машини", for me it still has the feeling that I described above as if it was "Я (не) купила [трохи/мало/багато] цієї машини" which is strange because it's not a shapeless uncountable material, it is pretty specific. As in, of course you're not directly saying "трохи" but the feeling created by the "leftover" Genitive is still there.

But well, I come from Kyiv region which is, it seems, one of the least diverse about different colloquial names or ways of saying :) It might be that in other parts of Ukraine people do say "цієї машини", but for me it's odd.


Thank you for your response sagitta145. I brought up the question here because in this sentence we have a noun, чай, which is the direct object of a negated verb, не п'ємо. It is my understanding that Ukrainian uses either Acc. or Gen. after negated verbs. I wanted to hear from a native speaker if there are any factors influencing choice.


Oh, I see! You brought up a special verb "маємо", it has a pretty different feeling...

So in case of "Ми не п’ємо чай" there are two possibilities: "Ми не п’ємо чаю" (Gen) and "Ми не п’ємо чай" (Acc). In general for things/substances that are materials, kind of like uncountable in English, the first version (Gen) sounds like "We don't drink tea in general" and the second one more like "We don't drink some specific tea, this tea".

Compare to: Я хочу хлібу (I want bread in general, I want the "breadness" that bread possesses :D) and Я хочу хліб (I want bread as one of the choices in front of me, I want a specific bread)

Gen there gives the feeling of "a little of [Gen]": Я хочу [трохи] хлібу. And Acc gives the feeling of being specific: Я хочу [цей] хліб.


Корекції хліба, а не хлібу. Це виняток!!! :)


Yeah, these things always have some rules in the textbooks, but when people speak they are sloppy and lazy x) My problem is, both sound natural and OK to me, and I say both randomly, so I can never remember which one is "correct" textbookwise...


How would you say, 'We don't drink tea at lunch' then? I read this like someone avoiding caffeine. The answer wanted 'for.'


"Ми не п’ємо чай після обіду"? (after lunch)

Yeah, I find the version with "for lunch" (it literally says so in the Ukrainian sentence too, not a mistake) quite entertaining :D


Hi, this is me 3 years after, and I am confused.

I had an impression that "at lunch" means "during lunch" e.g. "Talking at lunch", and "for lunch" means "the food you eat for lunch". Am I wrong? I'm not a native speaker. Couldn't find info about this exact thing... Asking native speakers in the comments :)

"Drinking tea for lunch" is definitely strange, sounds like tea is your lunch, the only thing you had for lunch is tea. And "чай на обід" sounds equally strange in Ukrainian :D

What would "drinking tea AT lunch" mean? Is it meaningful? What are the uses of "at"?


I'm not a native speaker either, but I believe "drinking tea AT lunch" is what I would say in order to imply that I don't drink tea together with my meal when I'm eating lunch. If you told me you had tea for lunch I'd have understood that you didn't eat anything.


Why is 'we do not drink tea for luncheon' marked incorrect???? In English the full word for the meal in the middle of the day is luncheon. Lunch is an abbreviation of luncheon.


I am a native English speaker and I do not approve of "We do not drink tea for lunch". That is not colloquially correct English. Only "They do not drink tea at lunch" would be correct English.


This is ridiculous! As I indicated two weeks ago, "We do not drink tea for lunch." implies something quite different than the colloquially correct "We do not drink tea at lunch." All of these "at/for" answers should be edited by a native English speaker!

Learn Ukrainian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.