1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "Здесь нет камня."

"Здесь нет камня."

Translation:There is no stone here.

November 3, 2015



What is the difference between камня and камень?


Камень - nominative.

Камня - genitive.

Нет requires genitive.


What is the meaning of nominative and genitive? And what is the different between them?


Нет requires genitive (A belongs to B, in this case This place does not have any stones) Forming the genitive case Masculine Nouns: 1. If the noun ends in a consonant, add “а”. 2. Replace “й”, with “я”. 3. Replace “ь”, add “я”. Feminine Nouns: 1. Replace “а” with “ы”. 2. Replace “я” with “и”. 3. Replace “ь” with “и”.

Neuter Nouns: 1. Replace “о” with “а” 2. Replace “е” with “я” For example, some names in the genitive case:

Собака Адама - Adam's dog. (Whose dog? lit: The dog of Adam's) Автомобиль Анны - Anna's car. (lit: The car of Anna's) Телефон Игоря - Igor's telephone. (lit: The telephone of Igor's) Это телефон Адама? - Is this Adam's telephone? (lit: Is this the telephone of Adam's)


"There isn't a stone here."

Should be correct?


Yes, this is absolutely correct. If not accepted, go ahead and report it.


Americans would, usually I think, express this thought using the plural:

"There are no stones here." is more colloquial.


Not if you go to a rock quarry. The thing that is quarried is stone, not stones. If the quarry runs out of material, it runs out of stone.

Question is: does the Russian mean the same thing, or does the exercise mean what you say it might? I don't know, but I'd sure like to.

"there are no stones here" = здесь нет камней, but can the exercise sentence mean the same thing, similar to the way that Italian and French treat grapes, using the singular to refer to "grapes" as a general thing.


Yes, in Russian "камень" may refer both to a single stone and a material, just like in English.


It did not accept: "The rock is not here", nor "Dwayne Johnson is not here".


A shame it did not accept "Dwayne Johnson is not here"


Here there is no stone?


I'll disagree with everyone else and say that is perfectly correct English grammar. If the topic of conversation is "here", it would be natural to start the sentence that way. "Here we take pride in our work", "Here is good"(when telling someone where to put something), "Here we take our shoes off when entering someones home", etc.


Yeah, I agree. "There is no stone here" is the way it would usually be written but "here there is no stone" is by no means wrong.


Here there is no blame!


If we're speaking on grammar, we might go ahead use correct grammar here too. "Here, we take pride in our work". This emphasizes the location. To say, "Here is good", is improper grammar. Here is good what? "Here, is good". But then some will argue about comma usage. Punctuation saves lives. Let's eat Grandma, vs, Let's eat, Grandma.


Pretty weird English grammar, amirite?


You could well be right. Languages knowledge has pushed English knowledge right out of my brain. I've recently joined a choir, and only after four rehearsals has someone pointed out to me that I keep saying "repertorio", which, as it turns out, isn't an English word. So much for native speaker...


I am constantly apologising to people and assuring them I am a native speaker, honest... :-/ I hear ya!


The main causative theme driving the recent movie "Arrival" is that becoming fluent in a language changes the way you think.


That sounds OK to me. 'Here' could be the key word, for example, if we are contrasting with other places which have lots of stones.


I've noticed a change in sentence structure depending on whether it's negative or positive in format, specifically the absence or presence of есть when stating "there is":

"There is stone here" - «здесь есть камень» "There is no stone here" - «Здесь нет камня»


it said (there is not a stone here) was wrong


"Here there is no rock" was not accepted either. Isn't a rock the same thing as a stone?


Usually in English a rock is larger than a stone. From small to large we go pebble, stone, rock and then boulder.


I'm a geologist. Stone and Rock are not sizes but pebble, gravel, and Boulder are.


"No stone here" was wrong; why?


"the stone is not here" was not accepted.


'Here there is no stone' wasn't accepted


вай нот there is no rocks?


ка́мень (kámenʹ) [ˈkamʲɪnʲ] "stone; calculus; weight; cliff": From Proto-Slavic *kamy, from Proto-Indo-European *h₂éḱmō, whence English hammer, Lithuanian akmuõ, Serbo-Croatian kamēn, Albanian kmesë (“sickle”), Ancient Greek ἄκμων (ákmōn, “meteor rock, anvil”), Avestan asman, Sanskrit अश्मन् (áśman).


Why is здесь не камня wrong?


From what I can understand this would be "here is not a stone" as не is Russian for not.


Why is "There are no stones here." marked wrong?


That is because it is 'Здесь нет камня.' and not 'Здесь нет камни.', therefore it is 'stone', singular, not 'stones', plural.


Can someone explain me the diference between "не" and "нет"?


'Нет' means 'no' and 'не' means 'not'. So 'Нет, это не банк' would mean 'no, this is not a bank'. So the literal translation of the sentence shown here would be 'Here no stone'.


Note English stone has two meanings: a material (uncountable) or an object. 'There is no stone here' might explain why everything is built of wood here. Alternatively, it might explain why I can't hit something with a stone. To distinguish the latter, we would employ the plural.


a lot of people are grasping for answers on this translation- why is it in here in the first place? there is no stone here? what? i mean really...i'm all about learning mastery but this sentence seems overly difficult and quite frankly useless to me. well of course unless i worked at the stone masons hut...


I thought the same, this seems like a really strange choice of word to introduce so early. I wish they had stuck to the most common everyday words.


There are no stones is better style


Why not здесь нет есть камня? I though if you are talking about the existence or non-existence of sth or somebody you have to use есть. I have this example in my mind: Is there a bathroom - здесь есть туалет. Is this there a bathroom - здесь туалет.


why is "there aren't stones here" wrong? it feels natural to me to use the plural for the absence of something in English. It has the exact same meaning as singular and isn't wrong grammatically.


Here is no stone.


"There is no stone" should be accepted right? Or is there a specific rule I'm missing why Here should be suffixed? Kinda feels double for Здесь


I would really want to write "(Is) no stone here" or "(for) here (is) no stone", but in English it isn't allowing by rules. That is why sometimes "There is/There are" constructions seems really strange for understanding in Russian, because these contructions is not necessary for speaking/writing.


What a weird sentence


There is no stone here?


The Genitive shouldn't be used here, since we haven't reached the Genitive skill yet.


The app stops listening on a second.


The app stops listening in a second.


,There is no stone.' Should be correct too


This is not correct


How about 'Here is no stone '


Im gonna use this sentence every day. Thank you.


This is helpful for Russian Age of Empires

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