1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "The dog does not have water."

"The dog does not have water."

Translation:У собаки нет воды.

November 5, 2015



so - собаки is genitive because it is the owner, and воды is genitive because it is being negated by нет?


Great - I think I'm finally starting to get the hang of this :-)

[deactivated user]

    How would we know if its dog or dogs? Because isn't the genitive case of собакa the same as the plural form [собаки]?


    Yes, but Russian has a different form for plurals in each case. The nominative plural of собака is собаки, but the genitive plural of собака is собак.


    собака and вода both end in a; why does one take и and the other ы?


    Both are in genitive case, right. The endings are different because we don't use Ы after К.


    Wonderful, that's exactly what I needed to know. Thank you!!


    It's also still pronounced as Ы though. This is all part of Russian's few spelling rules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_rule


    At some point do you just get used to this? This seems quite difficult to master. As Russians, do y'all do this out of habit?


    This little rule is actually quite simple!

    After Г, К, Х, Ж, Ч, Ш, and Щ, you will NEVER put 'ы'. It is the seven letter spelling rule and is very easy to remember, so don't feel discouraged :)


    it must be something you learn from habit and not something you think about. I think probably after learning russian, without thinking you will notice that the word doesn't look right and not know why. You will have this feeling because you will have seen enough words to know a pattern where ы never comes after those letters. So it's not as hard as it seems it just comes with practice


    .. not only do Russians say it, they think it!


    Why are the both in genitive again? Cобаки because it's after у(?) and the other..?


    Why is singular dog identified as "sobaki" here? I was under the impression "i" at the end of the word was a designation or plurality.


    Because it is in genitive form. "у собаки" is "by the dog" and "у" will always want genitive. It is the same if you say there is no dog (or "none of dog").

    СобакА ест - The dog (nom) is eating

    МамА любит собакУ - Mum (nom) loves the dog (acc)

    У мамЫ есть собакА - Mum (gen) has a dog (nom)

    У мамЫ нет собакИ - Mum (gen) has no dog (gen)

    nom = nominative; acc = accusative; gen = genitive


    So if a noun after Нет and У become genitive, are there any other 'case signals' that we should be aware of?


    Why did dog go from nominative to genitive in your last 2 examples?


    The dog went to genitive in the last example, because there was "none of dog". When there is none of something, that something will be in genitive.

    In the subject sentence, both dog and water are in genitive, because it is "by the dog" "у собаки" and there is "no water" "нет воды"


    I don't think I'll ever fully get the hang of the grammatical rules. Like I'm at the point where I can recognise that a different form is necessary but not the overarching rules that govern what that form is.


    Does anybody know why it corrected word 《у собоки 》 and instead of it it wrote me tgat correct answer should be 《у пси》 ?


    I have the same problem. I gkt this one wrong and it said I needed to type "У совака нет воды" but when I typed that phrase it corrected "совака" to "пса"


    Nominative singular is собака: the ending "a" makes the noun feminine. Genitive rule here: а ⇒ ы. Exceptions: "In Russian we never write ы after г, к, х, ж, ч, ш or щ. That is why feminine nouns ending in а will get и at the end in genitive: книга ⇒ книги." (https://www.russianforfree.com/grammar-of-russian-nouns-genitive.php).

    Memonic: "Good King Xavier Joyously Chewed Shashlik - SCHmatz!" It makes sense ´cos the position of the mouth is completely different for the exceptions (pouty lips), as opposed to ы (wide, stretched grin). There just isn´t time to move from strained grin to pout, so you don´t: и can stay poutи!


    Please remind me, Why in this sentence the word "есть" is supressed? Is ti not mandatory to use it in this grammar structure?


    Actually it's either 'есть' or 'нет'. You can't say 'у собаки есть нет воды'


    есть means "there is" In this sentence, the dog has no water, so есть wouldn't be correct.

    But it is not a mandatory word for this structure in any case. Sentences where the focus is not on having something, but on some quality of the thing that is had, will omit есть. For example: I have a new car. У меня новая машина.

    This sentence is not about having a car, but having a NEW car, so есть is not needed.


    Исправьте, пожалуйста. Правильное ударение - водЫ.


    Собока или пса ?


    У Собоки или пса ? Что это "Пса "?


    Why instead of пса is not собоки ?

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