"She does not like soup, but cooks it very well."
Translation:Она не любит суп, но очень хорошо его готовит.
I'm curious as well. Other sentences seem to have had the indirect indirect object at the end.
My only thought is that maybe putting the verb at the end puts the emphasis on that because the important part is the contrast between not liking it but still cooking it well. If that's the case, having его at the end should still be grammatically correct though it might sound strange to a native speaker.
It’s just the default place of the object:
- pronoun objects are placed before the verb: Я его́ люблю́ ‘I love him’
- other objects are placed after the verb: Я люблю́ Серге́я ‘I love Sergei’
You can move it to shift the emphasis (but Duolingo probably won’t accept it):
- Я люблю́ его́ = I love him. It’s he whom I like.
Да, ello or eso. We have genders, and conjugation. At the beginning I thought Russian will be more complicated, but even the "cases" have similes in spanish. I have learned more about my language reading papers, thesis, articles, etc where make comparison. I have done it very slow, but very deep.
«зато» is used for "positive compensation" situations. In the first part of the sentence you state the fact that you (subjectively) classify as sort of unfortunate. Зато is followed by the fact that you imply compensates for the first part. For example "We could not find the target but happened upon two spies on our way back"
«Но» has no such restrictions.
Interesting, because there is an identical sentence, with soup replaced by chicken, and in the chicken version, they want "зато" and mark "но" as incorrect, just like they marked "зато" incorrect for me in this soup sentence. That logic makes exactly zero sense, so is Duolingo just being stingy with what words we can use?
No. Duo accepted зато in my sentence, suggesting но as an alternative. It makes sense, since зато = "although" is very clearly appropriate. Но on the other hand seems somewhat appropriate, since it's kind of a contradiction that she cooks something really well that she doesn't like.
Word order in the first part of the sentence:
- When an object is a noun, it normally comes after the verb (не любит суп); other placements would make this word emphasised.
- To make the sentence negative, you place «не» before the main verb (не любит); other placements would result in positive sentences with different meanings (не она любит суп 'it's not she who likes soup', она любит не суп 'it's not soup that she likes').
- «Она» is placed in the beginning, and «не лю́бит суп» in the end because it's a sentence about 'her', 'she' is a known information (it's a reference to some person mentioned before, so it's assumed that the speaker knows 'her'), and «не любит суп» is the new information about 'her' (linguistically speaking, this is the focus of the sentence). We place known information (topic) at the beginning, and new information (focus) at the end.
Word order in the second part of the sentence:
- «Но» joins two sentences, so it is placed between them, it's its usual place; moving it is not possible, it would result in a Yoda-speak.
- «Очень» is normally placed before the word it modifies (in очень хорошо 'very well', очень 'very' modifies хорошо 'well'), moving it would result in an emphatic sentence.
- When an object is a pronoun, it normally comes before the verb (его готовит); other placements would make this word empahsised (although placing it after the verb adds a minimum emphasis, so it's not really a big deal I think).
- «Его готовит» is at the end of the sentence, because «его готовит» is a focus of the sentence, main part of the new information. When contrasting sentences, the contrasted thing becomes the focus. Here, we constrast two verbs, «не любит — готовит», so we place the contrasted verb in the end. If you were contrasting adverbs, then you could place an adverb in the end (e.g. она плохо разогревает суп, но готовит его очень хорошо 'she badly heats up soup, but cooks it very well'; well, the situation is far-fetched, but you get the idea).
See also my guide: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/13955228
Она не любит суп, но его готовит очень хорошо.
According to what I've read in this and other comments, that shifts the emphasis to the fact that she cooks it very well, which seems to me to be more important that the fact that she cooks something she doesn't like.
Thanks. Developing a feel for what's natural and what's not is a slow process, especially since some of the rules are opposite Romance languages, which I'm much more familiar with.
In another go-around, Duo also accepted:
Она не любит суп, зато она готовит его очень хорошо.
But didn't accept it when I put его in front of the verb, after она. That's very much non-Romance language, where the object would go before the verb.
PS I've met a Russian family living in our housing development here in North Carolina. One of the more interesting things I've notice is that the older brother (about 11, whom I am teaching to swim) often asks his younger brother (about 5) how do say things in Russian, when I ask how to say something.
Most important is «иметь» (the formal "have")
- Всё это не имеет значения. = All of this does not matter (=has no importance)
- Понятия не имею! = I have no clue.
It is also popular with verbs of perception and thought (not with people, though):
- Странно...Я не видел леса. = Weird... I didn't see any forest.
- Я не слышал шума. = I did not hear any noise.
- Он не понимает вопроса. = He does not understand the question.
Used in structures with some abstract nouns:
- не терять надежды = to not give up hope
- не обращать внимания = to not pay any attention
The issue is COMPLICATED. Long reaserch papers have been produced on the topic. Exercises and a lot of input are your best bet here because even a "rule" will have exceptions, i.e. some abstract nouns prefer Genitive in negative snetences, while other similar nouns strongly dislike such use and sound natural only in Accusative.
«Су́па» would add a meaning 'some soup', which doesn't work well here: she doesn't like soup in general, not some soup.
It is not that you have to use зато each time something you consider bad is compensated by something you consider good. However, you may do it to make your thought explicit. Think of these two sentences in English (I only hope they are both possible):
- I had a few hours to kill and I decided I'd have a nap.
- I had a few hours to kill so I decided I'd have a nap.
The first sentence implies the connection between having some spare time and dropping off. The second sentence is mostly the same but it explicitly says the first half is the reason for the second one—even though no one makes you use "so" every time there is some connection. However, with "so" it does not matter whether the listener agrees with you or whether the logic behind the connection makes sense at all. You message explicitly says you think there is a connection:
- Time was of the essense, so I went to my room and slept 20 hours straight.
We accept both but you should be careful with the sentence structure. It may have been what got your answer rejected.
If you use любить "love; like, enjoy", you can have «Она не любит суп, но (она) хорошо его готовит». Note that она is a subject of both halves. You can omit it in the second half, just like in English ("She does not like soup but cooks it well")
If you use нравиться, the sentence is as follows: «Ей не нравится суп, но она хорошо его готовит». No longer is the use of она parallel. Removing it is as odd as saying "The soup seems awful to her but cooks it well".
First, you’ve spelled the word нра́вится (literally, ‘is likeable, is attractive’) wrong, it should be нравится. The pronunciation is the same, but it consists of the ending -т and the reflexive part -ся, so it should be spelt together.
Second, you’ve used the wrong case-form for «суп». «Супу» is the dative form, ‘to soup, for soup’.
However, the verb нравиться requires using the thing liked in the nominative (суп, она), and the person who is liking in dative (супу, ей). So, if she doesn’t like soup, it should be «ей не нравится суп» (literally, ‘to-her not is-attractive the soup’). If the soup doesn’t like her, you use «супу она не нравится» (literally, ‘to soup, she not is-attractive’).
Also, «зато готовит она очень хорошо» doesn’t tell what exactly she is cooking, and I’d read it as a statement that she cooks well in general, not just the soup in question. Maybe she doesn’t even cook that very soup.
"Она не любит суп, но очень его готовит хорошо" is rejected, apparently just for putting хорошо at the end, instead of before "cooks it."
Note: the system says I "used the wrong word" -- it would be great if the system could note the problem is "word order" or "syntax"!
It now occurs to me I shouldn't have separated очень from хорошо... Would "Она не любит суп, но его готовит очень хорошо" have worked??
No, it wouldn’t.
Both those options are not outright wrong and might be used in colloquial speech to emphasise the word that was moved out of its usual place (here, there are several out-of-place words so it depends on the intonation which one gets the emphasis). But Duolingo generally accepts only the neutral, non-emphatic word order.
Такой порядок слов выделяет «его» как новую информацию. Но суп уже упоминался раньше, это не новая информация.
It isn't so much how it sounds, and your examples are correct; but the subject of the verb changes from one sentence to the other. I suppose one could state a rule: In two clauses with both subject of the verb and object of the verb, a pronoun used in the second clause must be in the same case.
Nouns likely had two classes, animate and inanimate. Then "feminine" diverged from the animate group. The classification Indo-European languages now have is about the word endings; they are not that stable, however, which obscured the relationship in some languages (e.g., German and French).
- this is also how Swedish and Danish got common gender where they used to have masculine and feminine. Their endings merged in the mainstream dialects; if they sound the same, you cannot tell them apart (and no one cares).
English worked that way, too: "woman" was, of course, a masculine noun.
By comparison, Slavic languages are holding up pretty well.
Remember, grammatical gender is mostly about adjectival or verbal agreement. It makes little sense to classify people into two (or more) genders but then lump everything else into "it" category. That would mean that as soon as you started talking about car parts, clothing, computers, or cooking, you might as well have no categories at all.
I think of “зато” as of “but instead” so I use it in sentences like:
“I don’t have a pencil, but (instead) I have a pen”
And so far this way of thinking works for me.
So I’d use “зато” in a sentence like: “She doesn’t like this soup but (зато) she likes that one”
I hope this helps a bit.