"Вчера не было тумана."

Translation:There was no fog yesterday.

November 19, 2015



'Yesterday wasn't foggy' - would that then be 'вчера не было туманно'?

November 19, 2015


Don't know. It didn't take "Yesterday was not foggy" either. Also does not accept Yesterday was not cloudy.

December 14, 2015


Foggy and cloudy aren't the same. Cloudy is облачно, it means overcast.

January 14, 2017


I guess it would be correct if you add the "it" as subject: "yesterday it was not foggy".

November 11, 2018


I think if you try "Yesterday it wasn't foggy" it will be accepted

August 9, 2018


Yes, it is accepted "Yesterday it was not foggy"

November 7, 2018


I think it's looking explicitly for the word "fog", i dont know what foggy would be, but it seems like currently the only possible translation is "there was no fog yesterday"

January 31, 2016


the word "Duman" also means fog in Turkish,

I don't why but there is an obvious connection between the words туман and duman

June 24, 2016


17th century borrowing (maybe from Tatar?) Ironically, likely originally an Indo-European word: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD

June 25, 2016


Fun Fact: туман is a loanword from turkish 'duman' meaning steam or fume.

October 8, 2017


foggy is actually туманный

March 14, 2016


but, that is not what they want.


April 21, 2016


Туман is a masculine noun, right? So it seems to me like this should say, "Вчера не был тумана." Does был become было because of some genitive thing?

May 11, 2016


не было is the fixed expression for not having (which corresponds to a noun in genitive)

May 13, 2016


I see it as being similar to the English construction "there was none of it" (the impersonal "there was" explains "было" and the "of sth" accounts for the genitive case)

July 3, 2017


The answer doesn't accept 'Yesterday there was no fog', which I think should be a correct answer. It only accepts 'There was no fog yesterday.'

April 20, 2016


Works now

August 13, 2016


Why "There wasn't fog yesterday" is wrong?

February 16, 2016


I agree with your question. This US native speaker tried exactly this, and it was rejected two years later, 7/3/2018. Why??

July 3, 2018


Fun fact: in Swedish, туман is called ‘dimma’. The first time I heard the abbreviation of Димитрий, i.e. Дима, I thought of a fog.

August 15, 2016


It's interesting that nobody asked till now.. Why 《Тумана》 and not 《туман》? I can't predict when to use genitive or nominative when the sentence is negated...

June 26, 2017


не было is just the past tense of the verb нет (= не есть) Non-existence calls for genitive.

General rules are tough to come by. This is actually an area of Russian grammar that's experienced noteworthy change in the past century or so. Genitive used to be more common in negative sentences than it is now.

June 26, 2017


Thank you for the "не было" AND нет (= не есть) information, that now makes a little sense :)

In my opinion, generally, Russian grammer is not so strict when we compare it with English (also a foreign language). I know that genitive is not mandatory here, but I have to give a little care to use the language correctly

June 27, 2017


Looks like there might have been a small misunderstanding. Here genitive is mandatory; it's in other kinds of negative sentences where there might be a choice.

June 27, 2017


"Yesterday there was no the fog" Неправильно?

April 25, 2019


It would be grammatically correct without the "the."

April 25, 2019


Why "It was no fog yesterday" is wrong?

March 7, 2016


Because that's poor/unnatural English. "It was not foggy yesterday" or "There was no fog yesterday" would both work (although I think in this instance, they are after the noun fog, so I don't know if both are actually accepted), but "It was no fog yesterday" does not.

March 7, 2016
Learn Russian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.