1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "We need to cook shchi for lu…

"We need to cook shchi for lunch."

Translation:Нам надо приготовить щи на обед.

November 5, 2015



why приготовить and not готовить? Is there any reason it is used? Do they have different meanings?


Приготовить is a perfective verb meaning "to get cooked". Готовить is an imperfective verb meaning "to cook" as a process.


So, the russian literal sentence here is "we need shchi to be cooked for lunch"?


No, I'd also translate приготовить as 'to cook' but since it's perfective, it also implies/specifies that there will be a result - you'll finish cooking it. My guess is that that's what olimo meant above, but we shouldn't confuse приготовить with an English passive.


Ah, ok... I didn't know the perfective /imperfective distinction. I'll need to study the "aspect" concept.



Yeah, getting comfortable with aspect is essential. I like the summary here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/mbxeyxa ...or to have someone walk you through it, google "Russian verbs aspect" and choose video - there are several explanations on youtube (including mine on the Russian grammar channel).


So then using just готовить should work here, no? Or is приготовить always used for soup?


Does verb perfectivity/perfection exist in English?


I'm not a native Russian speaker so someone else please correct me if I'm wrong. But to try to answer your question:

Not exactly, but there are ways of communicating it with extra words. It's not built into the verb forms the way it is in Russian. In English, when we want to communicate these things, we do so by using "helper" words.

For example in English, in past tense, we use constructions like "I used to do that." to communicate repeated or habitual actions that are covered by imperfective verbs. Romance languages use the "imperfect" past tense to communicate this. In English, we use constructions like "I have done that." to communicate simple, completed actions, like the perfective in Russian, for past tense.

In future, we often use constructions like: "I will be doing that." to communicate imperfective, although in English, saying "I will do that." is a bit more ambiguous, corresponding to either future perfective or imperfective verbs in Russian.

Kind of like in German and some other languages, Russian dosen't distinguish in present tense between constructions like "I read" and "I am reading". In Russian, you can only use imperfective forms in the present, and they encompass both of these meanings.

Basically, the deep answer is...as with comparing any languages, each language makes a different set of distinctions, and there are usually some ways of communicating similar things, but they don't correspond in a 1-to-1 way.


Absolutely. English has what are called the simple and the perfect aspect, in addition to two others (not relevant).

In english, the standard construction of perfect verbs is combining a past participle (typically ends in -ed) and the verb 'have' fully conjugated.

Simple: I cook shchi. Perfect: I have cooked some shchi. (A determiner needs to be there in order to clear up ambiguity.)


In this case the true answer must have been готовит but it is not accepted as true? Why приготовить?


Готовить (with the soft sign!) is imperfective, which is used for repeated actions, or an action in progress, or when the idea of completion & result isn't important. Приготовить (perfective) is typically used for a one-time action that has been (or will be) completed, with a result. The choice of aspect is very sensitive to context, and Duolingo unfortunately doesn't provide much context. I suspect they prefer perfective (приготовить) here assuming that the щи needs to be ready for lunch – there's a result that's relevant.


Ask about the perfective and you will understand !


Нам надо приготовить щи для обеда?


Technically, yes, but "на обед" is better here and the only possible option to say "I have (something) for lunch".

What is your native language, if I may ask?


Ah, ok. I don't know Greek at all, but at least I will remember that neither English nor Russian is your native language.


Cyril and Methodius would be proud. Good for you!


Привет Сергиус! Why are you learning Russian? What's your story, if i may ask?


Why is it на, instead of дле?


It's just an expression it seems. When you have something for a meal, it's на. (Instead of для? ;)


Wait, what’s shchi?


Some kind of soup with cabbages in Russia.


Why is it на and not дла ?


"for" can mean a lot of things and only one of those meanings (roughly "to the benefit of") means для. That meaning doesn't apply here so a different word is used.


Why на rather than для?


Why на and not для ?


Because literal translations not always work. Ex: "What's for lunch?" = "Что на обед?" Literal translation in this case "Что есть для обеда?" (Not correct translation). You will be understood eventually, but with difficalty. For Russian ear it sounds very awkward.


Why not для but на?


Why do we use the pronoun нам here over мы?


"Нам надо" literally is "To us (it is) necessary".


Нам = Dative of Мы.


So far, this is what Duo has taught me regarding "for":
«Тарелка для риса, а тарелка на обед»
"A plate for rice, and a plate for lunch"

The dictionary entry for на is really long, with a large number of different translations and uses, some very particular to certain idioms. The dictionary entry for для is much shorter. The import I take from that is that для is the usual "for", while на depends on idiomatic factors which have to be memorized, although there are certain general rules about на that help narrow down this issue: at least, на is used in prepositional case for stationary (not moving) location of things, на столе = "on the table" and in accusative case for processes like engaging in a meal; the accusative на is also used for location where movement is involved - a process-oriented kind of situation. But if I had to guess, I'd probably use для for "for" if I didn't know the correct word.


Why is the verb in the perfective aspect?


When you have an infinitive often either aspect is OK, but maybe they preferred perfective here because they're specifying на обед - so there's a context where you want the soup to be finished, and perfective generally specifies completion.


We usually use "приготовить" because our aim is not in cooking, not in the process of cutting vegetables, but in the having the meal or dish done. You say "мне нужно готовить обед" if you want to specify that you need to be busy now with the process, it might be said in the situation when you letting your friend know why you need to leave. As a different example: "i need to prepare for the exams" - "Мне надо готовиться к экзаменам" you are emphathizing, that you will take time preparing for them, may be these exams are in 2 months only, so your process of preparing pretty much not gonna be done this time or today. "Мне надо приготовиться к экзаменам" will be understood as your exams are may be tomorrow already and you have only this evening to cover all the studing materials, so you're planning to be done with preparing today or this time.


Hey all, I though на implied using locative case hence на обеде.. where am i wrong ?


На is used with prepositional/locative when it expresses position ('on' or 'at'), but it can be used with accusative for other contexts. "For dinner/breakfast/lunch/dessert" etc = на + accusative. It's always a good idea to watch the context carefully - some other prepositions can also be used with different cases, depending on the meaning & context.


what form is обед in


It must be accusative. The only other possibilities after на are locative (which doesn't exist for обед) and prepositional, either of which would have an ending.


What is the difference between "для" and "на" in this context? I though "на" basically meant "on".


I love the way they spell "щи"


I thought that "на" was only used in the prepositional case. Could someone please explain to me the other uses of на?


Unfortunately it's incredibly complex like most Russian prepositions but it's always prepositional or accusative.


Why is "нам надо" and can't be "нам нужно"? Please someone explain to me


нам нужно is just as valid.


Wrote the same and it says it is wrong


приготовить means to prepare. Готовить means to cook. How then can приготовить means to cook?


Actually, both mean prepare and cook, the main difference being that готовить is imperfective and приготовить is perfective.


Isn't the stressing wrong, shouldn't it be on the syllable with the o pronounced o?


Щи and суши? Суши seems more correct for sushi.


i don't understand the difference here between готовить and приготовить, in this sentence.


Why is "готовить" not accepted?


Sooooooo to my understanding, приготовить and that perfective aspect is not really "to cook", it's more like "to have cooked". Just like the perfective aspect in English just that it's more frequent in Russian


But you wouldn't say in English "I need to have cooked...". You would say "I need to cook..." meaning I need to do it once today in order for it to be ready for lunch. In Russian used in this case is used приготовить. If you say "I will be cooking" = "Я буду готовить".

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