"Кошка ест курицу."
Translation:The cat is eating a chicken.
63 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
"Есть" is more "to be", even though the Russian way of phrasing possession uses it, implied and explicit. "У меня есть" literally means "at my [place] [there] is".
That distinction may work for some of these units, but it will not work when you take your Russian a little further.
Ест is he/she eats, but the infinitive form of the verb is есть, so the addition of the soft sign doesn't necessarily mean that there is a different verb.
The other есть is not quite "to have", although for an English speaker, it sometimes functions that way. It doesn't mean "to do" - the nearest equivalent in Russian is the verb делать/сделать - although you might imagine that from questions like "Do you have any?", but here "do" is just an auxiliary verb required for some types of English question, and I don't know of any other language that uses this construction (certainly not Russian).
Can someone plz translate what's written here? I can't understand a word as I have just started learning Russian.
"Kakoy krovazhadniy mir!" (What a bloodthirsty world!)
"S drugoy storoniy, khorosho, shto nye naobarot." (On the other hand, it's good that it's not the other way around.)
Would "кошка ест курица" not also work? In what situation would an Accusative be more appropriate?
Think of an Accusative form as of an English noun used as an object without any preposition: "I bought a car", "I killed a dragon", "I will send a reply shortly", "I cook salads", "I write books". This will not match Russian all the time but it will give you an idea. A so-called "direct" object of an action uses Accusative. However, this does not help you much because you cannot know beforehand which verbs have direct objects—you'd have to be a native speaker of a language to do that.
Still, "simple" verbs like "eat", "drink", "make", "write", "want", "see", "buy", "sell", "take" WILL interpret the object they operate on as a "direct" object, i.e. something seriously and directly affected by the action.
If you look at the list again, you might notice that "want" and "see" do not really belong there because their object is perceived by and agent but not actually affected by the action. Sadly, this is true; also, this is the reason verbs like "to like", "to listen" etc. may or may not take Accusative, and you cannot predict it. The use does not match up across different languages, and different verbs of the same language (with close meanings) may use different government.
On a brighter note, verbs like "to want", "to read", "to see", "to hear", "to know" DO take Accusative objects (such verbs are called transitive), and somehow this behaviour is quite common across languages—at least, European ones (but not only them, because they get similar treatment in Japanese).
Thank you for this, it's been so long since I've studied these forms! Very clear explanation!
The translation in english seems to be "the cat is eating the hen" but could it be "a cat is eating a hen"?
The cats eats chicken. The cat eats the hen sounds too scary. I eat beef is better than i eat cow.
Y is accusative it makes it the object of the sentence Without it, both are subjects. So either the cat is eating the chicken or the chicken is eating the cat. So y is very important to show the chicken is being eaten. Also in Russian курица is generally used to mean chicken as in the food regardless of male vs female
Is it more common to call a chicken by the correct sex in Russian? In English you would use chicken most of the time when referring to a farm bird we eat. Rooster and hen are used but I wouldn't say they're regularly used in place of chicken.
Please guide; how to differentiate present continuous tense . Why is it not the cat eats the hen
Is it me, or is Duolingo slowly becoming more gothic/metal? Is this just how day-to-day life is in Russia?
How do i know if it is past present or future tense as there is no say eat,eating,ate in Russian.Please help!
Since кошка ест курицу means "The cat is eating THE hen/chicken(the bird)"
Could кошка ест курица mean "The cat is eating chicken(the meat)?
At the first instance, I understood "the cat is chicken or hen, that's why I skipped. I did not pay enough attention that ест means eating confused with another word есть
есть as "is/am/are" is mainly used in statements of existence (e.g., «Здесь есть вода»,«Выход есть» or, as an extension «У меня есть хлеб»).
In statements equating something with something else we omit or, in certain contexts, use это (e.g., «Мой папа — программист» , «Это Нью-Йорк», «Вода — это жизнь»). You can sometimes use есть and even суть to sound dramatic but it is generally rare in texts and speech.
Another есть is an infinitive of "to eat". As such, it cannot be used as the main verb in a sentence. I mean, it is the same as using "be" where you need is, am or are (which is correct in AAVE but not, say, in the standard American English).
Why does the р sound like л? Is this an error in the app or a funny pronounciation trick?
1405
The cat is eating the hen. я перевожу это так " эта кошка ест живую, не ощипанную курицу", потому что hen это живая курица, а chicken - это мясо курицы =) как то scary
I just wish I could send screenshots somewhere.. Today it happened twice that my answer was considered incorrect and I know there were not any kind of errors :(
Next time you won't forget to close the door to the chicken coop. ;D
Anyone would expect Кошка ест курицу to be translated as "The cat is eating chicken".
If it is really "eating a hen", then the scenario is of a cat breaking into the chicken coop and killing a hen, which it then starts to eat before being caught (by the person who utters the sentence).
How do we know the difference between "the cat is eating the chicken" vs "cats eat chicken"?
It is the word for "chicken" when the animal is still alive.
Like the Spanish "pez" when the fish is swimming in the sea, but "pescado" when the fish is in your frying pan.