1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "За всё надо платить."

"За всё надо платить."

Translation:One has to pay for everything.

November 9, 2015



Does this sentence literally meant that one person has to pay for everything or just that everything has to be payed for? I don't see where the one of the translation hides in the sentence.


Both are possible translations.

If you say this phrase without a context, without a specific dialogue, it sounds like an idiom: За всё надо платить! (Everything has to be payed for, one has to pay for everything)

If you say it as an answer to a specific question if could mean your first version, one person has to pay.

Customer: "За что здесь надо платить?" (What do I have to pay for here?)

Clerk: За всё надо платить, конечно. (For everything, of course)

Customer: И за воду тоже? (And for the water, too?)

Clerk: И за воду! (And for the water!)


It is because you will not learn any language by just translating literally it to your own one. It will never work out


Should "everything must be paid for" also be accepted?


they still do not accept it -.-


well, there is not such an answer there is not "be" or "paid"


I think I kind of understand.. Does за in front of всё alter the term being "everything" to "for everything"?


Well, it does not really alter the term (which term? everything?), in this case it just corresponds word by word to English grammar: за = for, всё = everything, за всё = for everything.


would it also mean "it is needed to pay for everything"?


The idea is right, but your sentence doesn't work in English. Try instead something like 'Everything must be paid for', which was accepted.


When do we use за and when для? They both seem to be translated as "for" in English, but I'm guessing there is some sort of distinction between them in Russian.


для is almost exclusively for situations when someone does something for the benefit of someone else—or when some object is intended for some particular use ("a bowl for sweets"). It is also used to judge something in relation to the norm ("pretty smart for a kid").

За translated as "for" expresses the following meanings:

  • exchange/price (which includes thanking someone for what they did)
  • supporting a person or a cause
  • responsibility for something


Thanks! That sounds like a set of differences in function that I should actually be able to remember.


Is "We need to pay for everything" also ok? It was rejected.


if it would say "Нам надо за всё платить" then yeah but in this case no, its just like over all "For everything one must pay" would be better as it is not as confusing with the person.


Isnt this sentence bad? I really cant figure anything, i dont get it much, is it really clear? Am i having the problem only


The grammar is strange to English-speakers, perhaps a little less so to European Romance language-speakers, especially the word-order, so having difficulty with this sentence is readily understandable.

Katzner's Russian-English dictionary defines надо as an "adverb" meaning "must" - but each example uses the phrase "(one) must" - which means there's an unstated subject "one" (or "you" in colloquial English, where "you" = "one" and not a person you're talking to).

One linguistic device I use to figure this things out is to translate the words one by one, then try to re-arrange them so that they make more sense - then transliterate them into good idiomatic English:
"За - всё - надо - платить"
"For - everything - (one) must/has to - (to) pay"

Re-arranged, that's "(One) must pay for everything"

You could restate that in passive voice as "Everything must/has to be paid for", though I don't know it Duo accepts that.

Or, "It is necessary to pay for everything".

Note: as an adverb, надо is invariable - it doesn't change form.


One should pay for everything?


Should be accepted, IMO (native)


To sagitta145
But it is not.


Is that native English speaker or native Russian speaker? As a native speaker of American English, I would think that you/one must/need to/have to all express a greater level of obligation than you/one should/ought to. I would expect "one should pay for everything" is most likely to show up with a following condition appended, such as "one should pay for everything, but most people don't". I don't really know enough Russian at this point to be sure where надо shows up on this spectrum, but I would guess from earlier comments in this thread that it would fall in the need to or have to range, not should. Others may well correct me!


Thanks for your explanation.


I think, the idiomatic way to translate the Russian sentence would be "Everything comes at a price". It is, however, a tricky sentence to translate back into Russian if you are a beginner.

( sagitta145 is a native speaker of Ukrainian and Russian)


Why is за "one"?


"One" here is simply the impersonal pronoun. A more common word used in English would be "you": "you have to pay for everything". Note that "you" is not referring to a specific person, but an indefinite entity.


There are no impersonal pronouns in Russia as far as I just read it...

  • 1277

There is no free lunch.

Everything needs money.

The price of honor.

They just come with a price.

За всё надо платить.


Is paid for really a phrasal verb (where the definition of paid is idiomatic and distinct from paid for)? I wrote Everything needs to be paid. Discuss.


It is "paid for" because of the "за". "Everything needs to be paid" would be said differently.



Everything needs to be paid for = За всё надо платить

Everything needs to be paid = Всё должно быть заплачено


заплачено or оплачено?


Can "Everything has to be payed" be an accepted solution?


No. "Everything has to be paid for".

There are some limited contexts under which you can omit "for", such as:
1. I paid him for the meal 2. I paid the check (but I paid for dinner by paying the check :-} )

In English, "to pay" has some idiomatic constructions which are difficult to put into rules.


Free-thinking Americans would probably translate this as “there's no such thing as a free lunch”.


Надо/нужно as adverbs or нужнен/нужна/нужно/нужны as adjectives seem to take a grammatical role which in Western languages is occupied by "modal verbs" (to be able to (to "can") / to have to (to "must") / to want to) which are "helper" verbs associated with a verb. They're not auxiliary verbs (to have, to be) which are used to create various tense (e.g., "I have gone"), but are still regard as part of the verb structure. They are almost fully conjugated.

That's a big difference in the way that the languages are conceived. Westerners are used to modal verbs, not adverbs or adjectives, performing tasks like saying that "one has to [do something]".

It probably gets even more complicated and removed when the tenses vary from present tense.


Why can't we use 'Everything should be paid'?


Everything needs to be paid. Is it that wrong?


They shall pay? Or should pay?


what the f is this sentence meaning

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