"Курица - это птица."

Translation:A chicken is a bird.

November 7, 2015

This discussion is locked.


Why is это used here if the translation is "A chicken is a bird"? Is это redundant in this situation?

[deactivated user]

    Since Russian has dropped the verb 'to be' in Present case in most cases (although you can find it in formal documents), the sentences like «X is Y» became ambiguous. «X — Y» may be mistaken for an apposition «X-Y» (e.g. «курица-птица» might theoretically mean 'a chicken bird' or 'a bird of a hen'; in this sentence it's not a viable option, but in many sentences using «X — Y» would be abmiguous).

    So, the Russian languare has resolved ambiguity by inserting это 'it'. While it originally was a means to reduce ambiguity, now sentences with это actually sound more natural.

    Compare it with Mandarin Chinese: in Classical Chinese, 是 used to mean 'this', but now it is a verb 'is'. Unlike Mandarin, Russian hasn't gone so far as to make «это» a verb, but this sentence still sounds better with «это».

    While English, since it has never really dropped 'is', doesn't usually use 'it' in such situations, so that's why we leave «это» out in translation.


    Simply put, "A chicken, it's a bird," as opposed to Курица - птица, "A chicken is a bird."


    "Chicken, it is a bird" is not deemed correct by duolingo, and I get that the translation is a bit too literal and unnatural, but shouldn't it be correct?


    U introducing them to eachother?


    It doesn't sound right in English, even though it is a very literal translation of the Russian.


    Translations should be natural in the target language. The intent of the Russian sentence is clear, and it doesn't match the literal translation. Just like the expression "Watch out!" literally means to "Observe outside!", but the intended meaning of the sentence is "Be careful!". Therefore you shouldn't translate it as "Observe outside!" in any target language, even if the literal translation matches.


    In this sentence construction " - это" means "like that". In conversation we insert "это" to speak clearly.

    For example "Курица, птица" and "курица - птица" sound exactly the same, but these have different meanings. That's because all punctuation marks sound like a pause.

    So we mostly say "курица и птица" when we see 2 birds (exept "курица, птица")

    We say "курица - это птица" when we speak about chickens (exept "курица - птица")

    The hyphen means hidden word or hidden some words. In this situation hidden word is "является" (to be in English).


    Reminds me of Курица не птица - Польша не заграница :)


    The whole saying is: "Курица не птица, Польша (Болгария) не заграница, баба - не человек". Sorry for potentional sexism, but as they say: "Из песни слов не выбросишь" "One can't throw away words from a song (there is no getting away from it)".


    only in America do people have to omit the part about being a man. silly people.


    Yep, there is mistake in that sentence. Everyone knows that куритца не птица


    Why sometimes they using CHICKEN and sometimes HEN?


    It is interchangeable word in russian, but you can use either and will be mark correct by the app! :)


    Why not "Chickens are birds."?


    That would be, "Курицы это птицы."


    That's how you say "A chicken is a member of the bird family."?


    No, I said, "Chickens are birds." Yours would be, «Курица - член семейства птиц». A chicken is a member of the bird family.


    I'm very confused. So, "Курица - это птица" doesn't mean a chicken is a type of bird.


    Yeah, it does. You asked for it in the plural, and that's Курицы это птицы. It's a minor difference between the two and you could argue they have the same meaning, but those would be the closest translations to the respective sentence.


    In addition to the singular vs. plural thing, Russian doesn't have articles. Basically everytime there's a noun, it could be either "the" or "a/an" in English. So in this case a straightforward translation is "(a/the) chicken is (a/the) bird" and other translations are dubious/technically complicated.

    But... I would also be interested in whether the sentence can have both the literal and the abstract meaning.


    I had the same question; see above...the concept is correct but apparently you have to get the singular/plural aspect correct as well.


    i heard курица, это пицца lol


    "Chicken - it's a bird" should be an acceptable translation :( there's a hyphen in the russian, why can't there be a hyphen in the english? It still makes sense


    Could you also say "This bird is a chicken"?


    That would be, Эта птица - курица.


    The pronunciation of 'Курица' in this one is different from a previous task. Which syllable is supposed to have the stress?


    The first syllable takes the stress. КУ-ри-ца


    Any etymological relation to "petit"?


    So "птица" refers to any animal in the bird family?


    птица is used in Russian exactly the same as the word "bird" is used in English


    Does someone know why курица sometimes is translated as chicken and other times as hen? I have mistakes sometimes because of this. But a hen is a chicken. So I really don't get it


    Курица may refer either to a generic chicken of either gender, or to an adult female chicken (hen), or to chicken meat. "Hen" is probably generally acceptable everywhere, so long as "hen" refers to an adult female chicken, but note that a hen is not necessarily a chicken. Adult females of all upright ground birds (fowls) are also technically known as hens, so a hen is always a bird, but it isn't necessarily a chicken.


    Sounds like an intro to a good hip hop piece.


    Their pronunciation of Птица in this exercise sounded quite a bit like Пицца


    Gave correct answer "A chicken is a bird" and correction says "correct answer would have been: A chicken is a bird"


    Звучит как "Курица - это пицца" :D


    Why is it A chicken is a bird not a chicken this a bird


    "A chicken this a bird," is not a correct English construction. In Russian, the verb "is" is omitted in the present tense, so это is often used instead.


    Is there a distinction between ''chicken" as in the animal and "chicken" as in the meat?


    Question for English native speakers: "A chicken is a fowl". is this too archaic or should it be accepted?


    Regardless of whether it's archaic or not, a fowl is a type of bird, not any bird, so why would it possibly be accepted as a translation of "птица".


    In much older English, people did use "fowl" as a generic word for "bird." Now, however, its use is limited to upright ground birds (and to aquatic birds which are frequently hunted--waterfowl). I think the use of "fowl" as a generic term for any bird is a bit too archaic for me to add it. It's really something from the era of Shakespeare. Given then that "fowl" hasn't really equalled птица in several hundred years, I don't think it's proper to add it. Now, a chicken is technically a fowl, but that's not what the Russian sentence says.


    In much older English, people did use "fowl" as a generic word for "bird."

    Thanks for clearing that up. The funny thing is that I've literally learnt about this fact two days ago (I was listening to a lecture about the history of language). I didn't know it when I posted my previous answer. But now I do, and I guess I'm going to remember it :)


    а с каких пор HEN не является КУРИЦЕЙ???


    "a chicken is this bird"


    That would be (awkwardly) "Курица, это эта птица."


    Почему правильный ответ только chicken, hen тоже переводится как курица?


    Is the real russian saying this words?


    No, it's a robot.


    Why is "chicken is a bird" incorrect?


    In English, most nouns require an article or noun determiner. Without it, you're referring to chicken as food, not an animal.


    What "это" stands for. Why does it not mean "this chicken is a bird".


    Это is used instead of the verb "is," which is omitted in the present tense in Russian.

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