1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Russian
  4. >
  5. "У нас нет тарелки для риса."

"У нас нет тарелки для риса."

Translation:We don't have a plate for the rice.

October 12, 2016



Why can this not be "rice" versus "the rice"? I realize it may not be the best translation, but is it technically wrong?


Agreed. "Rice" is a collective noun and does not need the article.


Shouldn't it be "plates"?


Can't it be "We have no plate for rice." Like in general?


Why do I have to add "the" to "rice"? I will do it so as to move on but I am completely fed up with the inflexibility of Duo's translations.


We have no plate for rice. Perfect English but not acceptable to Duo .


DL: "You need the article "the" here."

No, I don't. ))


How do I know when to use ' тарелки ' or ' тарелка ' ?


Here, the form is restricted by для, which always requires the Genitive. Each preposition has its own case requirements: some only want one case regardless of the meaning, some can use two cases depending on the meaning. Let me illustrate this for с and на:

  • с тарелки = from/off the plate / с тарелкой = with the plate
  • на тарелке = on the plate (location) / на тарелку = onto the plate (direction)

Whenever you have a situation like this, you do not have much choice, really.


Can you show me how "we don't have plates for the rice" would be different from "we don't have a plate for the rice"? Because тарелки is sometimes singular and sometimes plural, and there must be a way to tell them apart. Thanks.


нет + noun ("no something") requires the Genitive.

Now, here is the list of all forms тарелка can have:


It should be fairly clear from this table which form works.

Note how тарелки is the Genitive singular and the Nominative plural. This discrepancy between the cases means that тарелки is singular and plural in different expressions , not unlike these English sentences:

  • I removed my boots. ("boots" is a noun in the plural)
  • My PC boots extremely fast. ("boots" is a verb, 3rd person singular)

A newbie might also be confused how "-s" means both singular and plural in English. However, this causes no confusion for the most part: English has a rather rigid word order, which makes it easy to tell verbs and nouns apart.

Same here: you would expect the Genitive in "there is no" structure, so any form нет modifies should be interpreted as the Genitive (otherwise they do not stick together):

  • Дома нет таблеток
  • У нас нет еды.
  • У нас нет сыров.
  • У учителей нет столов.
  • В здании нет вентиляции.

The only nouns that have the same Nominative plural and Genitive plural are indeclinable loanwords (e.g., радио, пони, кенгуру, пюре, пальто etc.)



Спасибо for the thorough answer. (And so quick!)


Mistakes due to articles makes me sick !!


I have same question as Tatranska and Simon Brader. "We have no plate for rice" as a translation of meaning makes more sense to me.


We don't have a plate for the rice. ‧ A dining menu entree calls for rice to be presented on a plate. A bowl, tray or some other serving dish may have to substitute for the plated rice presentation because the food service providers,
"don't have a plate for the rice" ‧

Additionally, they, "don't have a punch bowl for the punch" ‧ so dispensing the punch from pitchers or creatively, using hollowed out halved watermelons serve as substitute punch bowls.


We do not have any plate for the rice. . is this translation wrong? Why?


It is not wrong. Neither is the one without "the" . It depends on the context, and there is no particular context here.


The word "any" is not implied nor used in the question.


I said, "we do not have a plate for rice." Should that be marked correct?


the system gives the answer: "wrong" before I have the time to speak!!!!!


I wondered if there might be a different word form for 'rice' instead of 'the rice.' Is it partitive, that refers to a cup of tea, a plate of rice, and so on? Or would it be риса anyway?


Here рис is in the genitive because of the preposition для, which always takes the genitive. So the sentence is a plate FOR the rice (because of для), not a plate OF rice (which is what the genitive риса without для would mean). I hope this helps. I'm not entirely sure I understood your question.


How is "we don't have plates for the rice" wrong?


I think because it's plate in the genitive not the plural, because it's a negative.


Isn't that a plural of plates?


No. It looks like the plural, but it's actually the feminine genitive singular. The fact that it's going to be genitive is indicated by нет, which is always followed by the genitive. I don't have plateS would by у меня нет тарелк (тарелк being the genitive plural of тарелка).


I put we don't have a plate for rice. Why do you require "the" before rice. Russian does not use articles, so why mark it wrong?


Why does it insist on the word "the" [rice]? Russian has no word for the. This is useless nitpicking.


Why is it one plate тарелки are plural or not!?


I also think "We don't have a plate for rice" should be acceptable


нет тарелки (gen sing) : referring to one single plate ? Would it be нет тарелок (gen plur, according to Shady) or тарелк (according to BsTMQ ) if we meant we didn't have plates (one for each of us) ? I always used gen sing so far, because DL didn't address gen plur yet, but at this point конфет (gen plur) has been introduced...

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