- Forum >
- Topic: Russian >
- "Птицы не пьют молоко."
37 Comments
This is a very useful resource for verbal conjugations in Russian:
Heh. Anyone who's old enough to remember doorstep milk deliveries will know that this is a false statement. We were always getting birds - blue tits, especially - pecking their way through the foil lid of the bottle to enjoy the contents. Takes me back. :-)
They may not drink milk, but they must produce it. Otherwise, how do we get птичье молоко? :-)
Seeing as there is a negation, shouldnt something be wiyh like a у or something at the end? Like молока. I dont understand it :(
Since it isn't about possession, you don't need it.
It says "Birds do not drink milk"
If it's "The bird has no milk", then it uses it. У птицы нет молока.
Having a difficult time hearing the difference between... "Птицы не пьют молоко." and "Птица не пьёт молоко." I'm only getting this correct now because I now am familiar with this particular exercise. Anyone else challenged by this? Suggestions? Thanks.
1688
Sparrows certainly drink milk i'v often seen them peck their way through a foil milk bottle cap
Is there a way to differentiate this sentence from "The birds are not drinking milk" in Russian?
There are no difference between "present simple" and "present continuous" in russian. There is just present. So you can say птицы пьют молоко to describe either current action or general fact. The only way you can differentiate current action from fact is by adding сейчас(now) to the sentence.
The birds are not drinking milk
would be
Птицы сейчас не пьют молоко.
If I say "Птицы пьют не молоко", would it give the thought of "Birds drink not milk but something else", and would it be correct at all?
Out of sheer curiosity, if a sentence like this were to arise and be said only with the intent of meaning "Birds do not drink milk" (as opposed to also icluding the possibility of "The birds aren't drinking milk"), would it be better to say "Птицы никогда не пьют молоко" to remove any possible ambiguity? I know that that translation means "Birds never drink milk", but if one were to follow what I said above (about saying "Birds do not drink milk" without the intent of the other present tense as a possible translation), would saying the sentence this way be better, or am I reading way too far into semantics and just mucking things up in my head for no good reason?
Oh no, don't apologize! I asked because I had a feeling there was a strong possibility that was the case, and I wanted to know. Thank you!
