FYI: Солнечные (pronounced "Solnishne') очки = sunglasses. Солнце (pronounced "Sontse", the l is dropped) = the sun.
Actually it's not "Солнечные очки", but "Солнцезащитные очки". Of course everybody will understand what you mean if you say that way, but I haven't ever heard someone using that shortened variant.
I learned it in another learning "program". I didn't expect a version that would be even more complicated!
I'm sure of one thing: I will not buy sunglasses in Russia ever!
Plural vs Singular:
Whenever you have a question about verb conjugations, take a look at this wonderful site: http://cooljugator.com/ru/%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C
Yes, the dash in your example stands for an omitted word "лежать/находиться". But actually AFAI you may put it without any punctuation: "Очки на стуле". Putting a dash will probably mean that there must be a pause in the sentence, but you may say both with or without pause.
Now a tricky moment. In this sentence without a dash the word "на стуле" can refer both to the noun or to the verb (even though it is omitted). In pronunciation the difference will be the following:
- очки на стУле - means that the spectacles are laying on the chair. In this case "на стуле" is an object. Since the verb is omitted you have to stress its object to emphasize the predicate. (if you choose to add a dash to the sentence, then this is the only correct intonation that you should use)
- очкИ на стуле - means that you are speaking about the spectales that are lying on the chair. In this case "на стуле" is an attribute.
Please don't think that I am trying to frighten you with complex grammar. Just bare in mind that intonation and stresses in sentence are very important in Russian language.
This is the second time in this lesson I've gotten an ending wrong because of the word's gender. I can refer back to the "Where" lesson for prepositional case, but if the ending (and a lot of other things) is gender-dependent we need to know the gender of the nouns we're learning, and not just willy-nilly as we encounter them in the exercises.
It is the prepositional case used with the prepotision на to indicate location.
Quick question - why is стуле changed if it's an accusative, inanimate object? Is it even an accusative object in this sentence? Sorry for a silly question but I still get very confused by grammar sometimes, even in English.
"Лежат" is probably best translated as "lying", as in, something is lying on the ground, lying on the table, etc.
The difference is also in the stress. "On the table" would be pronounced as "на столЕ", while "on the chair" is "на стУле".
I'm on the app, so I don't have access to the notes. When exactly would one use "лежат?" I would've thought that "на стуле" would be enough.
Wouldn't it be "Очки стуле на лежат"? Since the way to talk about a position of an object its the pace first? Perhaps im being a dumby dumb
Normally I hate prescriptivism, but I'm going to insist on this one (because I spent so many years figuring that out): laying not only doesn't sound better, but it's plain wrong. Lay is transitive, lie is not. Lay is what you do to something, lie is what you do or something does.
Technically laying is the act of placing something down and lying is actually being in that position. I lay the glasses on the chair, but the glasses lie there. They've been swapped so much in common usage that it sounds correct to most of us either way.