1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "Он работает, потому что хоче…

"Он работает, потому что хочет есть."

Translation:He works because he wants to eat.

December 7, 2015



That's one happy sentence.


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,bit is not as harsh as the soviet one, it implies that every creature has its job to do and has to do it if they want to keep on living. A children work on their development, either by play or by studying, others work or take care of family, it's all work. Just like children should help around the house, it's their work. Essentially we all work so that we can afford food. It always annoys me on the job applications "why do you want to work here" - mate, I applied to 50 places, I need money to pay for food and shelter so I can keep myself alive.


in poland it is "bez pracy nie ma kołaczy"


In Poland we say: Bez pracy nie ma kołaczy. Means the same thing.


Same in Japanese: 働かざる者食うべからず (Hatarakazaru mono, kuu bekarazu)


Heck, the immortal James Brown said, "If you don't work, you can't eat."


But what about children? They don't work, but they study.


Studying is technically invested work that pays off later.


Being a student is a full time labour.


Children do work in many cultures.

  • 1008


  • 1008

there is a saying just like this one in my langue, it says: "um dia sem trabalho, é um dia sem comer" which means, "a day without work, is a day withot eating".

[deactivated user]

    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?


    Here in the U.S., we say, "He who does not work gets welfare."


    Nah, that's Sweden.


    Ah it's the same in all of the weird liberal countries lmao


    This is why we look like idiots now ugh x[

    [deactivated user]

      "Кто не работает, тот ест" :)


      That is from a Russian movie


      What is the name of the mivie?


      "Учись, студент!"))


      Interesting! I saw a soviet-era movie (Операция ы) that made a joke of this phrase, saying "He who does not work eats well". I did not know that it was a reference. :)


      Leonid Gaidai! A fan.


      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


      In Javanese: "Ora et Labora. Ora labor, ora mangan." Ora: not, mangan: eat


      Every teacher back in primary school used to say this, although they should've starved a long time ago.


      Paul Winchel? is that you?? 久しぶりです!


      Hahaha, that's sad and funny at the same time. :(


      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.

      [deactivated user]

        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..."


        It seems to work like the French "parce que". Italian and spanish have the same structure with "perché" and "porque". It is very interesting how Russian sometimes seems so close to latin languages !


        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.


        So the infintive of to eat is the same as the 3rd p. sg. of to be?


        Yes, and sometimes for 1st, 2nd, plural. Я такая, какая есть. У нас есть возможность.


        That is a really good reason to work


        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?


        I wondered that, too...


        I heard that too, that's why I put "he is working because he is hungry", but it was not accepted.


        interesting reason why someone would work :-)


        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....


        The squeaky wheel gets the grease.


        Yet that saying is still very true in many situations


        потому in this sentence could be also translated as "since" not only "because" He works since he wants to eat.


        Meanwhile, in French:

        "Je suis nu?"


        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.


        Just another day in Russia!


        Is потому always in front of что?


        By itself потому means "why", but followed by что the two words together mean "because".

        • 2373

        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:
        - Почему?
        - Потому!
        which is the exact equivalent of English
        - Why?
        - Because!


        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. :)


        Someone can give a work? I need to eat


        Poor дима must work


        :D sometimes it's pretty difficult to guess the right translation when you can't grasp the meaning behind


        is the preposition потому always followed by что ?


        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?


        good enough reason lol


        "He works cause he wants to eat" - What's wrong?

        Почему не принимается?


        "'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.


        "Кто не работает, тот не ест"


        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


        Wow... That is my life right there...


        Why есть here means to eat (I know bc it's "to eat") and not "there is" like у меня есть?


        Yeah, thats how it works.


        hey wow calm down duolingo!


        Why Because he is willing to eat is not accepted??


        That's why I work too


        I just don't get the translation. I'd translate it this way: "He works, therefore he wants ro eat" -meaning, he's hungry because he's been working all day long.

        However, in the given translation the feeling of hunger was first, followed by the action (work). Could someone explain that to me?


        The problem is that you interpret "хочет есть" as "is hungry", which, as you said yourself, makes no sense here. However "хочет есть" also means "wants to eat in general", as in "he wants to keep being able to have food on his table". I.e. he works because he wants to provide for himself.


        Он работет = He works, потому что = because, хочет есть = [he] wants to eat.

        You incorrectly translated потому что as therefore, which is why the translation doesn't make sense to you. If it were just потому alone then your translation would be right.


        tie a carrot in front of a mule to pull the mill around translates in to this phrase for any dumb beast of burden.


        1) Хотеть есть == want to eat

        2) Хотеть есть == to be hungry

        What is the rule for understanding when to use 1) and when to use 2) for any sentence?


        According to what I have understood so far (but please correct me if I am wrong), "хотеть есть" is the idiomatic expression for "to be hungry", which, to me, makes sense since I usually want to eat when I am hungry. The context would supply more information about which meaning it would take in each particular situation, and often the meanings, although slightly different, could be used interchangeably. For example, if I walk into the kitchen and aim for the fridge saying "я хочу есть", it could both mean that "I am hungry" and that "I want to eat" and the resulting action is the same. There is also another expression, я голоден/голодная, which is closer to the literal meaning of being hungry.

        A similar idea can be used with "я хочу спать", where the expression carries both the meaning of wanting to sleep and being tired; you can also say "я устал/устала" for "I am tired" if you needed to make that distinction (saying, for example, "я устала но не хочу спать"; or, in the case of being hungry, "я голодная но не хочу есть".)




        Is потому что pronounced like it was just one word? Something like потомушто?


        Why can't you use "он" twice in this sentence? In the English translation of the word he is used in both parts of the sentence


        It's possible but less common. In general it's better not to repeat the pronoun if the subject hasn't changed between clauses. However, doing so is not a mistake.


        Does potomy go WITH shto as a unit or expression?


        Yes, "потому что" is a fixed expression and it means "because". "Потому" on its own means "therefore", though it's not too common. Usually people use "поэтому" for "therefore".

        • 1008

        "um dia sem trabalho, é um dia sem comer" "a day without work, is a day without eating"


        Well he is obviously not an American.


        shouldn't it be ест instead of 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").


        Это настоящая борьба


        Is this more literally translate as "because that he want to eat."?


        at first I thought it was есть meaning have LOL


        I thought ecTb meant have and ecT meant to eat


        See comments above...есть is also the infinitive "to eat".


        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.


        This was super helpful. Спасибо!!! :)


        I swear to god these questions are infuriating. Every single time I go through I answer the question completely right except for the idiotic, pointless, worthless, SOUNDLESS ь at the end of the sentence.

        How the hell am I supposed to keep this straight?! And even worse is that there's another question in the SAME LESSON that marks you wrong if you write готовит instead of готовить AND requires that you DON'T have that infuriating little ь at the end. I am going to flag this question every SINGLE time I go past it AND downvote because there is ABSOLUTELY no reason to be this exacting and precise for something that has no effect on the pronunciation or meaning of the sentence!

        On a less angry, but still related note, how would you say "He works because he likes to exist"? Because it was my understanding that есть meant roughly "to be" or "exist".


        bit / bite
        sit / site
        by / bye
        at / ate
        This soundless "e" that has no effect on the pronunciation or meaning, eh?..

        "He works because he likes to exist" - Он работает, потому что ему нравится существовать.
        "He works because he wants to exist" - Он работает, потому что хочет существовать.


        Interesting point. I am still very angry.


        Well, the letter ь is not really pointless. Among other things, it marks the difference between if a verb is in the infinitive or third person. So, as mentioned in the comments above, this word есть means "to eat". Without that last letter, ест would be "he/she/it eats". If you left off the ь, your sentence would be "He works because he wants he eats", which might be understood because of context, but it adds a lot of unnecessary confusion. (Also, it's not correct.)

        Same deal with готовить/готовит. The former is the infinitive form and the latter is third person. To cook vs he cooks.

        It also has an effect on pronunciation, but I haven't come that far yet so I still get confused with spelling what I hear too. My rule of thumb is that it's almost always at the end of infinitive verbs, and if it's in the middle of a word it is often after a л or п. Someone more advanced than I would have to supply the actual rule for it, but that's just something I've noticed. Hope it helps :)


        It would be nice if the spoken sections of the course could communicate that difference. I have a very difficult time intuitively grasping what words are in what case and the course doesn't mark which is which, so I've found it extremely difficult to learn. Finally, as someone who tends to care a lot about pronunciation and spelling in English, I get that it's important, but it's just so frustrating to get so close to the right answer and be withheld my virtual cookie for a minor spelling error, especially when other questions will just give it to you and point out your typo... Between this, the various cases, and the grammatical gender, I think I might be going insane.


        I understand what you mean about the cases; I have the same struggle. Something that helps me is to learn from many different sources. For example, I watch movies in Russian (see the reference in some of the other comments for this thread) even though I might not understand everything. It helps to hear the language spoken for a while and without interruption. Even though I wouldn't say I learn anything concrete, it's fun and I get a sense of how the language flows. There are also some great websites out there that explain how cases work (since, as you mentioned, Duolingo doesn't seem to dwell on that). russianlessons.net is my favorite. It gives a brief description of each case and then breaks down the endings that correspond.


        Maybe Russian language is not for you, if you find our spelling rules so infuriating. Imagine if I exploded every time English requires using "c" instead of "k" or "s". I'd be a nervous wreck by now!

        something that has no effect on the pronunciation or meaning of the sentence!

        It has an effect on both.


        As I understand it, English is even more infuriating to learn, so I would think that you would be justified...


        The USSR was atheist but this phrase is from the bible, wow haha


        Stalin took tons of material from the Bible but in an atheistic and communistic spin

        • 2373

        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.


        Unfortunately this particular piece of wisdom seems to have gone out of fashion lately.

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