Один = one; час = hour. "В час дня/ночи" is a kind of 'exception', 'cliche' for time mention. Nobody would ever say "В один дня", it would always be "В час дня/ночи". But it works only for 13.00 / 01.00, respectively. For others it is ok to say: в два, в три, в четыре (часа) etc. дня/ночи/утра/вечера
Nope, it would be "я уйду в течение часа". The preposition через doesn't work here.
BTW, don't mix up the complex preposition "в течение" (= during, within) with the combination of noun+preposition "в течении..." = in the flow (в течении реки, for instance, = in the flow of a river). Even many Russian natives are confused with it but still, it's a mistake.
Я должен с тобой поспорить насчёт звук /ʌ/ в русском языке. Это акцентированный гласный. Русские не могут произносить английские слова, punk, cup, double, what, muscle правильно. Получаются панк, кап, дабл, уат, масл, и т.д. Это потому-что в русском языке, когда слог с буквой О идёт перед слогом с ударом, произносится /ɐ/. А /ʌ/ в английском языке это в слогах с ударом. По-моему этого звука вообще нет в русском языке, так как русские не могут это произносить.
Москва /mɐsk-'va/ не /mʌsk-'va/
опять /ɐ-'pʲatʲ/ не /ʌ-'pʲatʲ/.
The upside down “a” and the upside down “v” are two signs of phonetic alphabet that stand for the same sound. The only difference between them is that the former is never stressed, whereas the latter is always stressed. When I studied Russian phonetics at school and in the university, we used the upside down “v” sign in transcription for the the first degree reduction of /a/ and /o/ vowels, which occurs in the syllable preceding the stressed one. As for the upside down /a/, I had never come across that sign until you mentioned it.
"again" and "cup" are not the same sound. Russians can't pronounce "cup" properly, meaning that this vowel doesn't exist in Russian. All the YouTube Russian teachers teach ɐ for опять, Москва, etc. Maybe this has changed since you were at the university, just like щ has changed from the older official Russian language books that used to teach "shch"
Vadim, I appreciate you can hear the pronunciation difference between LA Russians and American natives, but you are not a linguist and you don’t see things right. The people from the LA Russian community pronounce “cup” as /kap/ because they don’t care to imitate natives (that reminds me of this funny guy who calls himself “a Russian dad” or something like that - you know who I am talking about: he is viral on YouTube) or because nobody pointed out the difference to them, not because they are not capable of saying “cup” properly. You can’t generalize like that about all Russians as lots of people have a good ear and saying “cup” the way natives say it presents no challenge to a Russian. It is obvious to anybody who has taken a basic course in Russian phonetics or simply has a good ear that the first two syllables in молоко have different vowels - just like the first two syllables in полотенце. Мол- in молоко sounds exactly like -mal in “decimal” and пол- in полотенце - exactly like -ple in “maple” - the vowel in both cases is a shwa which is denoted by the upside down “e” sign. For the second syllable in both words you may use either the upside down a or the upside down v sign - it is only a matter of convention, the latter being nothing but the unstressed variety of the former (i.e., provided that the speaker is not from Kirov (the Viatka valley) area where shwa is used in all unstressed syllables preceding the stressed one). To me Москва sounds like “musk-vah” coming from an American, and капкан may be pronounced as cup-cun or cup-kahn, but, in either case, the first syllable of the word will be identical to “cup”.
Lots of people speak with an accent and quite a few make fun of others’ accents. But all that is none of DL’s concern. What matters is that as native Russian speakers we must not confuse learners of our language by giving them wrong information. And, to my knowledge, the overwhelming majority of Americans are not familiar with the International Phonetic Alphabet anyway.
I never said that the first syllable of “again” and “cup” have the same vowel sound. In fact, “again” starts with the same vowel as the one that we hear in the first syllable of «молоко». The vowel in “cup” is found in the second syllable of «молоко». As a matter of fact, the word “cup” is identical to the first syllable of «капкан» (a kind of trap made of metal, which is used by poaches). So Russians have no problem pronouncing “cup”. Saying “cop”, though, the way Americans say it presents a real challenge to a Russian as the vowel in “cop” doesn’t exist in Russian language. Моск- in Москва sounds identical to “musk”, so I don’t see any point in using two different symbols for basically the same vowel. As for щ, we have never been taught to transcribe it as /шч/, but only as /ш’ш’/. The old Russian language books that you’ve mentioned are based on a misconception of the early 20th century.
I live in L.A. in the Russian community. I am surrounded by Russian speaking people. My family, friends, business associates in my industry, and entire social nightlife scene is in the Russian community. I have very few American friends. For you to say Russians have no problem saying "cup" or any other word with the short U in it, shows that you are unaware of the Russian accent. It's common knowledge that saying "F.U." with a Russian accent is /fak/, /kap/, "having /fan/," "throwing away /dʒank/," etc. That's just a fact, nothing to argue about. Obviously the longer a Russian immigrant has lived in America, the lesser the Russian accent becomes. But even then, my parents have been here 39 years and still mispronounce the short U like /a/ which is a very common thing. Why? Because there is no /ʌ/ in /mɐ-lɐ-'ko/, /mɐsk-'va/, or /pɐ-lɐ-'tʲɛn-tsə/.
If they could train their brain on капкан, then they would say "cup" properly because you are correct -the pronunciation can be either /'kʌp-'kan/ (double-accented sounds correct also) or /kɐp-'kan/ (accent on the second)
I never said that Russian can't say /ʌ/. They can if they want to. But certain things in any accent are standard, and not pronouncing "❤❤❤❤" right is a very common thing. Not just L.A. When I watch any Russian speaking English worldwide, on the Internet, that is a common aspect of a Russian accent. And CrazyRussianDad by the way, puts on the fake exaggerated Russian accent. He doesn't really talk that way.
What's the significance of the difference, if any?
In English, "I am leaving at one" and "I will leave at one" are almost interchangeable, although there are nuances of intention vs. the simple statement of a departure time. (There is also "I am going to leave at one). Which sentence is the most effective or most apropos depends to a great extent on context. Sometimes the distinctions between the sentences is of no consequence, at other times the difference in nuance can make a situation more clear.
In general, though, when something is cast in English present tense but it concerns a future event, the statement is more one of intention, and future tense applied to a future event is more an objective statement of fact (even if the fact later proves to be untrue - such as I eventually leave at two, not one.)
Does the use of Russian present tense to describe a future event have the same sort of nuance?
The difference between ухожу and уйду, ухожу is "I'm leaving," and уйду is "I will leave." The former is more an intent or plan, and the latter is more decisive or concrete.
Perfective verbs in present tense are often used for future tense.
"I'm going to leave" is Я буду уходить.
Does the use of Russian present tense to describe a future event have the same sort of nuance?
Pretty much. What Russian does not have is the English dichotomy between "preordained" future events and those planned by the subject. E.g. in English it's "I am leaving at one" and "The Smiths are having a party this Friday" but "My train leaves at one" and "We have an exam of Friday". But that's to be expected since Russian has only one present tense.
I am confused by this. "I am leaving" is the present continuous in English, meaning I am in the process of leaving as we speak. By adding "at one o'clock" it is no longer the present continuous tense but the future tense and the sentence should be "I will be leaving at one o'clock. Я ухожу в час seems like a present tense sentence which seems to me to say something more like "[It is] one o'clock, I am leaving.
I would suggest that I am leaving at one o'clock may be commonly spoken, but it is poor English and I will be leaving at one o'clock would be the preferred grammar."
I WILL LEAVE at one o'clock is correct English grammar (future). It means that at one o'clock plus a moment, I will be gone.
I WILL BE leaving at one o'clock is also correct in English (future continuous). It means at one o'clock I will be in the process of leaving. Gathering up my papers, putting on my coat, opening the door - any number of tasks that would be associated with the act of leaving.
I AM LEAVING (present continuous) means I am gathering up my papers, putting on my coat, opening the door etc right now.
I AM leaving at one o'clock is not the correct English grammar in this exercise, but I assume the developers intended to use "will be leaving" so I am still confused. I'm afraid I don't understand why the present tense is used in Russian for what is a future action in English.
Sorry for the dumb question.
I agree that we hear it all the time, but it is incorrect. I can say I am leaving now, I can say I will leave at some time in the future but I can't say I am (in the process of) leaving at some time in the future. For that I must say I will leave at one or I will be leaving at one.
But your explanation: "I will be leaving" is Я буду уходить. "I'll leave" is я уйду is very helpful. They are future events and translate directly
"Я ухожу сейчас" also works because it is happening now, but "Я ухожу в час." seems to me to be a mixed tense sentence.
Sorry to drag on with this, but I am really struggling with this one.
Accepting your premise that it's incorrect in English, it is however correct in Russian because ухожу is present-to-near-future. Some things don't directly translate from Russian to English, so one of them will be grammatically incorrect. Since this is a Russian course, it's more important for the Russian to be correct. As long as the English is understood, hypercorrect grammar can be sacrificed.
Thank you. I agree that hyper correct English is not the point of the course. What you have explained however is what I need to understand which is the concept of present to near future - something that doesn't exist in English. It was in fact the English that I did not understand, even though it is my native tongue. Perhaps it is my age but using "I am leaving at one o'clock" at school in 1958 would have got my knuckles smacked with a ruler.
Thank you again va-dim for joining me on this little adventure into grammar-land. I imagine most native speakers learn a great deal about their native language when studying another. A Russian friend told me she is learning Russian grammar from me and my questions - she just speaks the language.
I had to scurry back to my English grammar book when you said, "BTW, ухожу is also present continuous. For example, я ухожу в час каждый день. "I leave at 1:00 every day."
Without the gerund "leaving" I think "I leave at 1:00 every day" is in the present simple tense, or more specifically, present indefinite. This drives me batty because logically a repetitive action can be described as ongoing or continuing but it isn't in the present continuous tense.
Russian is so much easier and it is good to know I can use ухожу in that instance.
Thank you again. Here's a Lingot.
Час means “one o’clock” only in the idioms в час (= at one o’clock), с чáсу (=from one o’clock) and до чáсу (=to/till one o’clock). Note that in the last two idioms the word час is used in its second genitive form marked by the -у ending (instead of the common -а). The second genitive has limited use and only certain masculine nouns whose nominative singular ends in a consonant have it.
I hear it more like an addition to the end of ухожу - "uhazhuf chas". That seems to happen a lot - it seems unavoidable when speaking at normal speed. And sometimes it sounds like a "v" rather than an "f" tacked on to a word ending in a vowel sound, or to be beginning of a word starting with a vowel sound.
"Я иду" means "I'm coming/going/walking" but does not collocate with words or phrases indicating the time. Time indicators require using one of the verbs "прихожу", "ухожу", "выхожу", "приезжаю", "выезжаю", "прилетаю", "вылетаю", "прибываю", "отбываю", "приплываю" , "отплываю".
The problem is that the question "Когда ты идёшь к врачу?" does not make it clear whether you mean to say, "When is your appointment with the doctor?" or "What time are you leaving to go and see the doctor?" "иду" implies "I'm on my way" rather than "I am leaving" ( "выхожу", "выезжаю").
Although in old Russian the word час used to mean “time” ( it still has this meaning in Ukrainian and Belorussian as well as Czech, Slovak (čas) and Polish (czas)), in modern Russian it only means (1) “hour” or (2) “one o’clock”. By the way, “at time” doesn’t exist. “At the time of ...” = «во время ...», “at a time” = «за [один] раз».