Translation:At home I cook dinner, even though it is my brother who eats it.
Sorry, this is not cruel to English speakers but cruel to mankind. I do not oppose funny sentences but this one is simply without logic and without fun in any language. The guy cooks dinner even though the brother eats it. The creator of this sentence created the sentence even though the students read it????
Why "его" if that's supposed to refer to a person. And one already known, but not any dinner had been mentioned in this sentence. And, Russians put the important and new to the end of the sentence, is a correct explanation for the choice of the word order, or do you just do that? :O
1) Him can also mean "his" in Russian , the same way "её" (her) can also mean "hers", and you just have to figure it out from the context. I was just referring here that "him" is a dinner because, in Russian , "dinner" is masculine, i.e. a "he" :-)
2) Word order isn't really that important in Slavic languages, although there is a definitely a common way to say things, especially phrases, but in general you would just change the word order to signify what is more important. You can do that because of the glorious grammar cases.
So for example,
1) "A Wolf ate a sheep" and
2) "A Sheep ate a wolf"
have to different meanings in English, but in Russian,
a) "волк съел овцу" ,
b) "съел овцу волк" and
c)"овцу съел волк"
have absolutely the same meaning because the word for sheep is in accusative case, i.e. it's the one which "puts up with" the verb :-) . To be honest the 1st way to say it is the most common one (in 90% of the situations I can imagine), but sometimes you want to underline some other aspects, for example in
b) "съел овцу волк" you would want to underline that wolf ate the sheep not for example rob her (idk. what else the wolves do ),
c)"овцу съел волк" , you would like to stress he ate the sheep, and not the goat (He ate the sheep?, no, овцу съел волк.
For a good exercise I would suggest you to try to find out how to say "(the) sheep ate (a) wolf" (hah, you got yourself a homework mister :-) )
Wiktionary is your friend btw. I wouldn't know what I would without it :-)
Also it would indicate some previous context to the situation of speaking, for example if the speaker had some doubts weather the wolf ate the sheep or it managed to escape. So by putting the verb at the begging the speaker emphasizes one of the two (or multiple) scenarios he/she previously was thinking of.
Lol what an awesome answer. You earned yourself some lingots.
I understand this now. I guess. So Russian doesn't have a word "it". Instead, personal pronouns are used, like in so many other languages.
In my native language the word order plays a big role, not precisely in semantics, but in style and nuances of an expression. Mixing the word order might make a totally ordinary sentence sound poetic, especially when breaking the usual structure where the verb is in between the subject and the object.
Since I'm proud to announce I'm already familiar with accusative case, the homework you assigned to me is a walk in the park. So, this is how it goes - "The sheep ate a wolf". (Power to the people!)
"Овца сьел волка." See, since animate objects follow the genitive, there's added "а" there following the "волк". I'm so proud of myself now.
Russian does have a word for it. A kid for example, is "it" in ❤❤❤❤❤ (Оно) .
Regarding your "homework", one small error slipped through there :-)
You've got your Accusative right, but the past tense of a verb is wrong for a sheep. Sheep (Овца) is a feminine in Russian (ends with "a"), so the past tense has to end in "a" as well. so the proper form in this particular sentence is: "Овца сьелa волка.".
If there were a herd of angry wolf-eating sheep it would be "Oвцы сьели волка" (poor wolf).
Basically, if it's the guy doing something - the past tense of a verb ends with an "л" , if it's a girl, the past tense ends with "ла" , and if it's several of them, you end it with "ли" .
Ёлки-палки. I was boobytrapped. For my defence, I haven't gone through the preterite yet. But thanks to you, I now know something about it.
I thought "это" would be something in the lines of "this", as a demonstrative pronoun or adjective. In the other hand, "it" is a singular third-person neuter pronoun. I guess "это" is used interchangeably in the meaning of "it" and "this" then, depending on the context.
Since you seem to know a bunch, would it be okay to use the accusative "(э)тот" there, instead of "эго", whadda think?
Oh, have some more lingots then for the goodwill!
In linguistics it is believed (if I'm not mistaken) that they're not originally ‘genders’ but rather categories of words. A bit like how verbs are sorted in some languages (-ER / -IR / ... in French, -AR / -IR / -ER in Spanish, ...). And probably some eventually looked like living-thing genders and concepts merged. This phenomenon may have started already back to some proto-indo-european language.
In English it's not common to say just "brother." In Russian it's not uncommon to say just "брат" (it'd be great if native speakers added more detail on when this works or doesn't). There's a "я" in the first part of the sentence, so it's implicit it's "my brother." I think it likely would have been implicit anyway, but I leave further reflections to native speakers.
Yours is a missing translation, of course. But I think it's right that the system accept "the brother," too. Some English dialects are very flexible about referencing family members with "the" (mine happens to be one); we could be talking about a monk (I think); and in any case the point is to learn Russian, so there's some space for less-than-the-most-elegant English in pursuit of that end, which I think one could fashion a reasonable case for in this instance.
My contention is not that it should not accept "the brother". Although unless it refers to a monk, its a bit obscure because the context provides no such clues. I say that whether or not they accept "the brother", they have no right to not accept "my brother". And take away another point or whatever they call it. I had four taken away that day, all for improper English they insisted was right, so I had to quit.
I agree. I totally understand the correct translation but it seems to me it could also mean 'At home I cook dinner even though his brother eats'. Would the world order be different to say so? Like '[...] хотя его брат ест.'
So if my guess is right, the fact that его follows the verb implies it's an object and not the adjective of брат. Right?
Thanks in advance!
Yep, it's fine. The context (i.e. subject of the sentence is "я") sets the default interpretation, but it's still an option to include it.
To quote my Russian friend:
The confirming [i.e. confirming the default interpretation] pronouns are likelier to appear where confusion is more possible, like in (1) longer sentences with multiple clauses, (2) in emotional sayings, often rude/negative, and (3) formal texts.
But this is the discussion for the translation from Russian into English. Did you have a type-what-you-hear question?
I translated as "I'm cooking dinner at home even though his brother eats". Now I realize that его refers to the dinner, and the correct sentence is more natural than mine. But how can you be sure that его refers to the dinner and does not mean "it's his brother that eats the dinner". Just by the context? Thank you very much