There was an old Soviet era poster that said as much: "кто не работает тот не ест" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_who_does_not_work,_neither_shall_he_eat#/media/File:Kto-ne-rabotaet.jpg
My grandfather is from the USSR and he says this every day. They definitely instilled that ideal.
“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” There is not much difference, eh? But it is from the Bible.
In Slovakia we say:"Bez prace nie su kolace". - Which literally translates into:"There are no pies without work". I think it's a common phrase in most languages, if not all of them. The Bible can be the source, either that or the reality of existence itself.
we say the same in italian "chi non lavora non mangia" who doesn't work doesn't eat"
We also say "chi non lavora non fa l'amore" -"who doesn't work don't make love" ..... there is something similar in russian?
Like the bible, «Кто не хочет работать, тот пусть и не ест» (CARS) or «если кто не хочет трудиться, тот и не ешь» (Synodal version) 2 Фес 3:10. The implication in context is different though
Every teacher back in primary school used to say this, although they should've starved a long time ago.
Is что required to make this statement or can потому stand on its own?
"потому что" just means "because". A comma can be inserted between "потому" and "что" when special emphasis is placed on the cause. Other examples are; "так как" - "since, because", "благодаря тому что" - "because, thanks to the fact that", "из-за того, что" - "because, on account of" etc.
I'm wondering about how что works, as well. Can anyone clarify its use for me?
что means both "what" and "that." in this sentence, it says "потому что." A more literal translation would "Because of that"
"Because of that" in English typically occurs when the cause is described before the effect. In contrast, it seems like что is connected to the upcoming clause rather than the preceding one, since in this example хочет есть is the reason он работает, so the proposition <that he wants to eat> is the "because" for his working. But the observation that he works is noticed before the reason is given, so in the sentence it comes first
I see you do Spanish, too. Think of it as "que" in Spanish to some extent. It means what and that and you can add it onto other words for new meanings, such as the phrase "Tener que..."
Can someone explain ест and есть? I thought that ест meant eat, and есть was 'there is'...
есть it is infinitive (to eat) I want to eat- я хочу есть;ты хочешь есть, все хотят есть.
Yes, and sometimes for 1st, 2nd, plural. Я такая, какая есть. У нас есть возможность.
Can the он appear in the second clause? Such as "Он работает, потому что он хочет есть."
Yes, but it's usualy omited. In Russian it's considered bad form to repeat the same word in one sentence, even if it's just a pronoun.
I learnt that the construction "хотеть есть" is often used to mean "to be hungry". I understand that that's not really the point of this sentence, but could it mean that technically?
потому in this sentence could be also translated as "since" not only "because" He works since he wants to eat.
In Argentins we ssy it differently: El que no llora, no mama. The baby that does not cry is not fed. I guess our culture doesnt really appreciate work....
:D sometimes it's pretty difficult to guess the right translation when you can't grasp the meaning behind
Standing on it's own, it seems to be an adverb.
Are the examples inspired by Russian literature, or are they as gloomy in all languages?
Each course is developed by volunteers who speak the languages. Therefore each language tends to lean in vocab and phrases toward the culture of the language involved. They are all different.
By itself потому means "why", but followed by что the two words together mean "because".
No! "Потому" does not mean "why". "Почему" means "why".
"Потому" means "because" but it is rarely used by itself; the standard combination is "потому что", which is the proper Russian "because". The only example of "потому" used by itself, that comes to mind is this exchange, whereby the second person brushes the first one off:
which is the exact equivalent of English
Thanks...that's something I apparently remember incorrectly from my self-teaching days. It was a risk posting that but I figured a real Russian-speaker would correct me if I were wrong. :)
I think I already asked on another part of the course but can't remember, what is the difference between потому что and из за?
"'Cause" is considered an informal shortening of "because" in English and is not used in writing. It's not uncommon for a speaker to say, "X happened 'cuz y," but in writing the full word is required.
The last word in English Duolingo suggested in my phone was MOM. It would be a funny nasty sentence (Он работает, потому что хочет есть "Mom") LOL
Why есть here means to eat (I know bc it's "to eat") and not "there is" like у меня есть?
No, because есть means "to eat" (as part of хочет есть = "wants to eat"). ест would mean "eats" (as in "he (or she or it) eats").
Stalin took tons of material from the Bible but in an atheistic and communistic spin
Somehow this assumes that the Bible was the ultimate source of this piece of wisdom. I am sure this particular concept (among many others) has dawned on the humankind well before the Bible was written and did not require any divine intervention.
I think "ect" should be without the "miaxki znak" "ь" because this "miaxki znak" changes the whole meaning "есть" to have "ест" eat This is something I've noticed through this course and my dad knows Russian language so he made me pay attention to this difference.
Ест means eats. Есть either means to eat or there is. У меня есть literally means by me there is.