I still don't see the difference between the perfective and the imperfective. I mean, since the beggining we've used imperfective, and it seems that all sentences fit into its sense. Now it's more confusing. How would читал impact here?
Читать - (imperfect) to read as an action, a process. - Я читал - I read (in the past), I was reading, I've been reading. It tells us about an action in the past, but it doesn't tell us if the process has a result. Is the book finished? Did we read an entire book? Who knows, may be yes, maybe no. It doesn't matter. There was just some action in the past. A result? Not sure.
Прочитать - (perfect) to read an entire something (a book, a letter, a caption), or an entire part of something (the first half of the book, the second chapter etc). There is a result of reading.
- Я прочитал книгу - I('ve) read an entire book, the book is finished, there's nothing to read more.
That's why perfect verbs can be in the form of the future and past tenses (something will be done, something is/was done). The present tense action is always not finished.
- Я читаю (imp.) - I read, I am reading. The action of reading is still going on, the book is not finished. Let's say by the moment, I've read half of the book, that's my result: Я прочитал половину книги. (perf.)
- Я уже читал эту книгу - I already read this book (once in the past)
- Я уже прочитал эту книгу - I've already read this book (in the recent past)
- Я читал эту книгу 5 раз. - I read this book for five times (maybe entire, maybe not, it's more like English Past Simple)
- Я прочитал эту книгу 5 раз. - I (have|had) read this entire book for five times (5 results from the beginning to the end, the emphasis is on the result)
Ok, it's clear now. I think I can make more sense from now on. Thank you for taking your time to help me with this!
Your explanation of the difference between perfect and imperfect is fantastic, RomanRussian! I have just one cavil - you don't need the "for" in "for five times" - "I read this book five times" sounds better.
this is indeed a very, very good explanation. i gave you a lingot. you helped me a lot.
Знаете, я редко говорю Прочитал, обычно Прочёл! Прочитал - более формальное, мнится мне, пафосное, вот Прочёл как-то скромнее!
'Я уже прочитал эту книгу' - 'I've read this book already' (ie. I've finished reading it) 'Я уже читал эту книгу' - 'I've been reading this book already' (ie. but I haven't finished it yet)
Я уже читал эту книгу - может вполне означать, что я уже ПРОЧЁЛ эту книгу, от начала до конца. Обычно это и имеется в виду!
"I've been reading this book already" seems odd, as if the already had no place in the sentence.
It could be 'I've already been reading this book' if that seems better. But the difference in the verbs is the important think to note. прочитал - completed action in the past; читал - uncompleted, continuous action in the past. RomanRussian's explanation is better than mine.
Читал (в русском понимании!) может означать и Прочитал! И Прочёл! Запросто!!! Да, читал я её уже сто раз!!! :) Пример: Мама написала сыну записку и ушла на работу. А вечером спрашивает? Ты читал мою записку? И это вполне означает: Ты прочёл (прочитал) мою записку? The same, как говорят французы.:) (Да читал я её сто раз и ничего не понял!)
The word order in your translation is unnatural. 'I have already read' is by far more common. Not sure it's incorrect, but to me 'I already have read' sounds very odd.
It sounds OK to me here in the midwest, although I myself would use "have already" . I'm sure I've heard people use this "already have read" construction as an equivalent alternative to "I have already read." Is there any reason why DL should not accept all three answers?
Hm, okay then. In Britain though it would sound a bit Yoda-ish, unless you put stress on the 'have'. And (I think..) in formal language it's bad form to split pronouns from unstressed auxiliaries. Which is maybe why DL doesn't accept it - in the Russian the focus is on 'эту книгу', whereas 'I already have read' puts it on the verb.
I recognize that the Russian word order suggests an emphasis is on 'эту книгу,' but I'm having trouble thinking up a context where that makes sense.
In English, adding emphasis to either "already" or "have," with either word order, sounds reasonable to me and I can think up contexts for each case. I just imagine arguing with a kid. Likewise for emphasis on "read," ("I've already READ the/this book," "I already HAVE read the book," I HAVE already read the book," "I've ALREADY read the book," "I've read the book ALREADY," "I read the book ALREADY," "I've READ the book already," and "I READ the book already.") Maybe for emphasis on "book"....."Have you read the fourth chapter yet?" "YES! I've already read the BOOK!" (meaning "the WHOLE book.")
Now... which of these cases, of different stress, would be handled in Russian by word order and which by vocal emphasis? Lacking context makes translation infinitely more difficult.
I'm not a native Russian-speaker so please don't take what I say as gospel, but I'll have a go at answering your question (if any native speakers want to chip in that would be grand).
To the first part, showing that the emphasis is on the book in English could be done by vocally stressing 'this': 'I've already read THIS book' - i.e., 'and not THAT one', or something like that.
Secondly: vocal stress and word order in Russian aren't really the same thing. Russian likes to put its sentences in topic-comment order, and because it's an inflected language this can be done much more freely. The sentence in question here isn't stressing 'эту книгу' per se, but saying that the particular book I have read is the "new" information (the comment), and that the fact that I have been reading is the "old" information - the topic. If, on the other hand, you and I were discussing one book in particular and I wanted to say that I had in fact read it, the Russian would be something like 'я уже эту книгу прочитал(а)' (I think...). This is not to do with stress, but really to do with topic-comment structure based on context.
The trouble is that Russian can be very nuanced in this regard, whereas in English we would have a lot of trouble expressing the same nuance in so few words, and without vocal stress or italics.
In English we use helping/auxiliary verbs to express various tenses - although you might say "I already have read the book", it would be proper to say "I have already read the book", putting the adverb next to the verb it's actually modifying.
I wrote the same thing too, I think it's likely to occur if you want to emphasise "already"
"Прочитал" means that you have read the entire book from the beginning to the end. "Дочитал" means that you (finally) reached the end of the book.
There is a professional term "вычитывать/вычитать" что-либо, meaning reading through in order to check or correct it. For example, "вычитывать книгу, статью, сайт, презентацию и т.д." - to read through the book, article, site, presentation etc.
But out of the professional printing production it means to find something out by reading.
- Я вчера вычитал в газете, что Земля - круглая!
- Yesterday, reading a newspaper I found out that the Earth is round!
- The scientists wrote that cows like classical music
- Учёные написали, что коровам нравится классическая музыка
- (ironically) Where did you read that?
- (иронично) Ты где это вычитал?
A little confusing having a woman using the masculine form! (at least on the audio I heard)
Are there specific rules for what to add to make the verb perfective or is it loose enough that почитать is a real verb?
I hope you'll get a more authoritative reply than mine, but here goes:
There are some standard ways that regular verbs use to switch from imperfective to perfective, but I can't always count on them. If I try, I'm wrong half the time. The "rules" are more useful at helping you recognize the aspect of a verb you've encountered, but again, not always. There's no substitute for memorizing the verbs and their aspects.