"I have a bicycle."
Translation:У меня есть велосипед.
есть is the equivalent to the verb "have" (but not its literal translation). In Russian this is a replacement for signaling possession. It does not need further conjugation, as it is a generalized conjugation that can be applied to any present form. If you wanna be specific, then есть would mean "is/are", implying that an object is with you. So, "у меня есть" would literally mean "at me is", and for non-Russian speakers this would mean "I have".
If you don't use "есть", then it will imply that "The bicycle is with me".
«Есть» is not the equivalent to “have”, neither it is an infinitive (its infinitive is «быть»). Originally, it used to be the 3rd person singular form, now is used for all present conjugation. Another surviving form (however found rarely nowadays) is «суть» — which is the 3rd person plural form.
If all infinitives end with ь, it doesn't mean that everything with ь is an infinitive :)
Please tell me where I said that everything ending with ь is a verb is an infinitive :)
Well, it looked like you implied that.
it is an infinitive mode (all verbs in infinitive end with ь).
You should use "есть" whenever you state the existence of something (which is otherwise not obvious). On the other hand, you drop it if you simply indicate that you have the object with you (nobody doubts is existence in your posession in general). Hence,
У меня есть велосипед. - I own a bicycle. (There is a bicycle in my possession.)
У меня велосипед. - I have a bicycle with me. (I indicate my mode of transportation.)
Pay attention to the articles - they are not that useless ;-)
Your sentence would correspond to "I have the bicycle".
Whan someone asks you! Do you want to come with me Or something like that.
I said, "У меня велосипед." And it said I was right. Is this a mistake? If not, why is it that I can leave out, " есть"?
The phrase "У меня велосипед" has some different meaning that "У меня есть велосипед"
That is simply wrong. "У меня велосипед" is no more colloquial than "У меня есть велосипед" - they simply mean different things. I have described it in more detail elsewhere in this thread.
I typed "u menya est' velosiped" and it was wrong. Do I need to capitalize the first letter?
No, you don't get marked wrong for not capitalizing the first letter. There was probably some issue with the transliteration (which we are not able to control) , so I suggest using Cyrillic instead. Happy learning! :)
Duo accepts "u menya velosiped" as a transliteration, without the "est'".
I wrote "У меня есть велосипед" but I was thinking if "У имею есть велосипед" correct too or if there is a difference between these two?
The first sentence is absolutely correct but the second is absolutely not. The second one sounds like "Have have have a bicycle" :))))) "У...pronoun" = have "имею" = have now "есть" = have (or eat, because spelling is the same)
I'm confused about this есть - l thought it meant to eat, but now that same word is used for possession/ have. Is this just a phrase, or are they the same word w/ two separate meanings?
It's two different words. Есть - to eat, you're correct. But it's also the present tense form of быть - to be. Russian indicates possession with "у меня есть..." - with me there is.
Есть means "there is". "Меня" means "me". Russians say "By me there is" - "у меня есть" - to mean "I have".
As I move on to Basics 2, this sentence threw me off as I thought I'd start the sentence with Я, but it started with У. Huh, that confused me. Anyone help me out, please?
У - is preposition of possession in this sentence design. "У" + "genitive pronoun" + "есть" = I have, We have, e.t.c. Is it clear? But you can say "Я имею велосипед", it is correct, but sounds awful :)