"Tady už jsme byly!"
Translation:We have already been here!
19 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
"Už" is an impressively flexible inconstant clitic. When it is used as a clitic, it can go in the fringe of the clitic cluster (its end), or it can go all the way in the beginning of the cluster. The mid-cluster positions are more unpredictable.
Would you like to read more about this? Be warned: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/38369227.
Neuby, a sentence like this is where I really get into the weeds with "clitics". It seems from your very fine and definitive 9 page post "Uz" is a "floater", beginning or end of cluster. But If I were presented with this sentence in English and asked to translate it into Czech (which I'm sure I will have to do sometime VERY soon), following your notes and my instincts what I most likely would put down would be "Uz jsme tady byly" OR "My jsme uz tady byly" because I was under the impression that although some words can be moved in the order, the auxiliary is RIGIDLY in the 2nd position. But as written above, that doesn't seem to be the case. So... Comment? Anyone?
nueby will probably answer too, but as you also called to anyone else:
"Už jsme tady byly" OR "My jsme už tady byly" is indeed correct. So is "My už jsme tady byly."
The auxiliary must be in the second position. That means in the clitic cluster. But within that clitic cluster all the words are in the second position. Conceptually, we first decide to put the word into the clitic cluster and only after we order them inside. All of them are second position though. And regarding the order inside, už and jsme can be switched around, už is extremely flexible.
Dekuji! Hmmm... More to think about... I think (until I become a bit more "fluid" in the language) I'll attempt to stick with the auxiliary in the ACTUAL second position in the sentence just to keep it clear in my head. But it's good to know "uz" can "slip around" in position.
I have answered as "Tady už jsme byli" but I am being told that byli is not correct. Is there an audible difference between byly and byli?
I attempted to report my answer as valid, but that is not a choice I'm being offered.
Thanks for all of your help. You guys are the best.
There is no difference. I suppose that it was a listening exercise...there are some issues with them, unfortunately. I've disabled them for this sentence now.
1160
Stumbled onto this problem again, "tady uz jsme byli" was marked as incorrect for this listening exercise.
See my reply to Tom307502.
There seems to be an unusual number of these complaints in the past week. Like 10x more than usual. Did they increase the amount of listening exercises or just some sunspots?
Mine was a listening exercise. The male voice spoke the sentence. I wrote "Tady uz jsme byli". It was not accepted, and "byly" was offered as the correct verb. Yet in a comment below, Endless Sleeper says there is no audible difference. So, what up?
There is no audible difference in Czech, it is a purely orthographical difference. The right course of action is to report these sentences so that the audio exercise is disabled.
What actually happened that the introduction of the new voice re-enabled all those exercises and we had no free time to go through all of them again. Bugger.
Thanks. And now VladaFu, since we are talking about the new voice, tell us. Is the new voice you?
could I had already been here be also acceptable. I had put in we were already here. it was accepted as another version to we have already been here. BUT the two sentences have a differnt meaning . If the past perfect is also correct then I can understand that.
I do not understand. What exactly was not accepted? You certainly cannot use I, it must be we.
I put in we were already here.. was accepted as an alternative to we have already been here. But I don't think both sentences mean the same thing... whereas .. we were already here .... could be colloquial for we had already been here. so my question is if we had already been here is also an alternative answer.