"Вчера я объяснял детям слова."

Translation:Yesterday I was explaining words to children.

November 6, 2015

This discussion is locked.


"...explaining children the words" sounds a little weird in English to me (to my American ears). "explaining to the children" sounds correct.


A polite way to say that you have taught your kids some nasty words


You cannot "learn your kids" anything! You can teach your kids something, but learning is something you can only do yourself: learning is the input, and teaching the output.


Oh, my mistake but thank you for your notice


in the recording of this particular sentence, i heard clearly "слово" and not "слова" where the stress falls on the "a" according to "викисловарь" This issue has been present in the whole course.


Is there a character that Duolingo will accept in transliteration for ъ? I have tried " and - and also missing it out, but none are acceptable. I am pleased that they now accept ' for the soft sign.


It sounds like the voice is saying "слово", with stress on the first syllable, not "слова" with stress on the second syllable. Just sayin'.


what is the purpose of ъ here? how is it different from ь?

  • обяснять: objasnjátʹ (no such a word)
  • обьяснять: ob'jasnjátʹ (no such a word) (ь makes a previous consonant soft)
  • объяснять: ob-jasnjátʹ (ъ makes a previous consonant hard, can be heard as a pause after об)

' indicates a soft sound

Also the stress in this audio is incorrect, it should be "слова́" (acc. plural)


Yeah, it sounds to me like "Вчера я объяснял детям слово," which of course I was marked off for transcription.


There's a video with details on the hard & soft signs here: https://youtu.be/JdoCUN6QSb4

[deactivated user]

    attn mosfet: I think anyom did not simply understand the difference between the Hard Sign & the Soft Sign. At times certain people may just think it is orthographic. In some languages using Cyrillic it sometimes is. For example the soft sign at the end of some nouns and infinitive verbs in Russian is purely orthographic. Also the soft sign is used at times for declension not palatalization.


    why is слова plural here? i got marked wrong for saying ‘the word’. isn't inanimate fem acc the same as nom? shouldn't plural be словы


    The audio here is actually wrong. The voice is saying nominative singular 'слово', but the program wants nom. plural 'словА' (accent on a). Some words that end in 'o' in the nominative have a plural ending with 'a' instead of 'ы'. For example, слОво/словА окнО/Окна.


    The audio could also be (incorrectly) interpreting слова as the genitive singular сло́ва, which sounds like the nominative сло́во. In any case, it's true that most neuters in -о have -а as the nominative and accusative plural; words like яблоко/pl. яблоки are exceptions.


    I thought that too, but the genitive singular didn't seem to make grammatical sense here


    True, it wouldn't make sense. I was assuming that the synthesized speech may not be smart enough to distinguish pairs like сло́ва/слова́ if it's working from text with no stress marks.. but I don't know much about how it works.


    Animacy is tricky in the accusative. Feminine singular accusative nouns change -а/-я to -у/-ю: Я читал книгу. Я знаю русскую девушку. Feminine nouns in soft signs stay the same: Я знаю его мать. Animacy doesn't matter for feminine singulars.

    In the plural, animacy does matter; inanimate plurals have the same endings as nom: Я читал эти книги. Animate plurals have the same endings as genitive plural: Я знаю этих девушек.


    What's up with ь and ъ ? I've ignored the latter and up till now it hadn't given me any trouble.


    ъ is not so common, but you'll see it sometimes between a prefix and a root; generally it shows that the consonant preceding it is pronounced hard, even if it's followed by a я, ё, е, or ю (vowel letters that usually show the preceding consonant is soft). This business of hard & soft consonants is actually really important; there are two quick videos on it here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrIkLgUgjNHetFNDeKqRe_wtuOy6qQ5kH


    "Yesterday, I was explaining words to children," is an odd construction in English. What is this suppose to mean in reality?


    Good that I did not pay for Duolingo plus as I planned. Just because now I understand that my English is not good enough to pass these phrases. Meaning of Russian sentences I understand somehow, but continuously making mistakes in English grammar (or something). Pity, Finnish to Russian not existing.


    Why ' Yesterday I was explaining children's words' is not correct?


    The dative ending on детям makes clear that they're the indirect object: the words are being explained 'to the children.' To say 'the words of the children/the children's words' we'd use genitive: Вчера я объяснял слова детей.


    How can we tell hearing this sentence whether it's "explaining the word" or "explaining the words"?


    Сло́во ('word,' singular) is stressed on the first syllable, so the first о sounds like о; the 2nd, unstressed о sounds like the 'a' in 'sofa.' Слова́ (words, plural) has end stress, so the unstressed о sounds more like 'ah.' Whether or not this is pronounced accurately in Duolingo is another matter, as Oinophilos points out above; the audio in this example is wrong.


    You need either an apostrophe after kids, or maybe a 'to' kids. It's a poorly written sentence anyway


    Shouldn't the accent fall on the 'a' of 'слова'?

    • 1764

    Sound has a mistake In the stress. I have sent report.


    If I use " yesterday" I must continue with simple past, according to my knowledge.


    ‘Yesterday I was [doing something]’ vs ‘... did’ sounds fine, at least in British English. It perhaps suggests a long task, rather than a short one.


    Aktivist70, not necessarily, but without a context simple past is more natural. The past continuous suggests I "was explaining" when something else was going on or happened, simple past is more natural. Speakers of French and German have trouble using the continuous tenses because the past continuous is not equivalent to the imparfait in French or the simple past in German. Maybe Russian speakers have the same problem, using the form out of context to mean an action that was repeated or took place over time, which is not how it is used in English. The issue is the meaning with respect to a "reference time," which is always expressed or implied in any English sentence. For example "When she walked in the door [explicit reference time], I brewed some coffee." Simple past in the second clause means the action of brewing started at or a little after the time of walking in. "When she walked in the door, I was brewing coffee." I was already in the act of brewing when she arrived.

    But as EdmundMcintosh points out, continuous can work like a French imparfait. Here, for example, you could add a more specific time expression: "All day yesterday I was explaining words to the Children." To my ears, though, it has a more colloquial tone, emphasizing the constant effort required.


    This course seems to jump back and forth on the question whether you can add 'my' to relationships when it's not mentioned in Russian. In this same lesson I got marked wrong when I wrote 'the parents' instead of 'my parents' when no possesive was used in russian. Now I am marked wrong because I wrote 'my children' instead of 'the children'. Is there any rule they use for this?


    "these" or "those" or "the" words to "the" children.


    Surely "Yesterday I explained 10 words to the children" should be accepted? Explained is in the past tense.


    As with other people I have tried to make the backwards ь but my computor will not accommodate it. I have wasted too much precious time on this problem and will from now on use ь or pull out of the exercise


    You mean ъ? Should be the ] key.


    Is слова here Nominative Plural or Accusative Plural?

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