1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "Он со мной не будет завтрака…

"Он со мной не будет завтракать."

Translation:He is not going to have breakfast with me.

November 23, 2015



"to breakfast" is also a verb in English and needs adding.

("He will not breakfast with me" was the example I just reported, but there are of course more possibilities)


In which dialect? I can't say I've ever heard that.


It's vaguely familiar to me, but sounds quite bookish. I believe one can lunch or dine, as well, for обедать & ужинать, but again they sound quite bookish/formal/old fashioned to my ear.


Yes, I've heard all of those. I wouldn't call them common, but they would certainly be accurate translations.


breakfast; verb;
​ to eat breakfast: She usually breakfasts alone. They breakfasted hurriedly on coffee and toast (= ate coffee and toast for breakfast).


The Oxford English Dictionary has citations of "breakfast" as a verb going back to the 1600s. Similarly, there's a song called "Here's to the Ladies Who Lunch" in Stephen Sondheim's great musical "Company." But I wouldn't dream of using these words as verbs in ordinary conversation. As other posters have noted, the words sound formal and archaic.


"to breakfast" would be understood by some, not all, since it's a highly stylized use of English. It's not even colloquial, it's not natural, and you'd be viewed as odd for saying it.

Same to "to lunch".

"to supper" and "to dinner" are never used: "to sup" and "to dine" are the verbs associated with them, but "to dine" is the only one that ever gets used, and then it's a kind of refined English which is not used in common parlance.


Could this sentence be translated as "He and I will not have breakfast" (both of us)? If not, how do we write such a sentence?


I am not a native speaker, but just someone else studying Russian and I thought the same for a moment. But then I realized that будет would have to change to будут to fit your translation.


Thanks, I had not noticed that


Thanks, that was very helpful. I was lost bc sometimes the examples would use plural verbs and sometimes singular.

That explanation really helps!


I believe you would need "Мы с ним" in that case.


That was my translation also. It seems to fit the topic notes, which say that the Instrumental case can be translated as "He and I" are, or are not, doing something, not just that he is/is not doing something with me.


"He's not going to breakfast with me" is an even truer sense of the meaning, surely.


Except that "to breakfast" is an unnatural bit of English which is not used, even colloquially. It's not wrong, it's just not good English.


Given that several of us are here saying we use it, it needed adding. It's perfectly good English, and can be found as a verb in any decent English dictionary, and yes, just because you personally / people around you don't use it doesn't mean nobody does :p


I translated as "he is not going to breakfast with me' which given that breakfast is a verb is a literal and correct translation of the Russian. I have reported it, but these kind of things are frustrating.


the translation of ne budet is also given as WON"T. so why is my translation : he doesn't want considered as being wrong ? is he won't ( he will not) and (he doesn't want) not the same in english ? it is purely a question of translation. literal or free. or is it not ?


They're similar, but not quite the same.

"He won't have breakfast with me" tells us definitely that he won't, while "he doesn't want to" doesn't necessarily, depending on context - he might have to for some reason, but he won't enjoy it.

"He doesn't want to" also tells us something about his motivation - if he doesn't have breakfast with me, it's because he doesn't want to. "He won't", on the other hand, doesn't say anything about motivation. Maybe he would like to, but he just doesn't have time.


Interesting. I appreciate your comments. Many thanks indeed


Why not: "He will not be with me for breakfast." ?? Seems to be closer to a literal translation.


It's actually farther. The literal translation is more "he with me will not have breakfast", i.e. basically the suggested answer.


Please help, people who know what they are doing. Would the above be "Он не будет со мной на завтрак."?


"he won't go have breakfast with me" not accepted...


"Go have breakfast" isn't the same as "going to have breakfast". "He's not going to have breakfast" just means he's not planning to do it. While your sentence implies we have to go somewhere else, maybe to a restaurant. There's no such implication in the Russian sentence.


I was wondering about thr same thing. If you say "he is not having breakfast with me" would be also correct?


That's present tense, and means "He is not eating breakfast with me right now". "He will not be having breakfast with me" is future tense.


"He will not be having breaking breakfast with me"

Duo has an odd habit of using "going to [verb]", a phrasal future borrowed from Spanish, instead of actual future tense "will [verb]" or "will be having breakfast", since "to breakfast" is strange and unnatural English.

I sometimes think that Spanish was the first Duo module created, and the phrasal future (used freely in Spanish) has wandered into the other language courses. It's not incorrect or even bad English - it's just not the same as actual future tense. "going to" and "will" are not exact synonyms.


Why wouldn't the sentence in Russian be "он не будет завтракать со мной"? Isn't "со мной" the important information, and as such should be at the end of the sentence? What am I missing?


Should be write: Он не будет завтракать со мной.

But Duolingo thinks it is wrong


I think the imperf verb really means he has something against ever breakfasting w me, right? If it's just one breakfast, wouldn't you use позавтраеает? Just trying to check my understanding of perf and imperf.


"He is not going to breakfast with me" marked as wrong. How is this not correct?

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