не было, нет, и/а не будет

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

When is it appropriate to use не было, нет, and не будет? Would you say "Экзамены не было трудных" or just "Экзамены были нетрудные?" I'm aware that using these three would mean using the genetive, but I dunno whether or not to use (or if it is allowed) those terms for plural. The same thing with "У меня." Would it be "У меня нет (не есть) машины?"

And another thing, I'm still confused when to use "и/а, но/а." I tried looking at the previous post (in the archive on this topic) but it ended up confusing me more. Thanks in advance.

Comments

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Не было - there was no;
нет - there is no;
не будет - there will be no.
BUT you do mix up не было and не были: Экзамены не были трудными OR Экзамены были нетрудными/нетрудные is correct, Экзамены не было трудных is just nonsense.
У меня нет машины is correct: I have a car (literally, at me there is no car). У меня есть машина (literally, at me there is a car) would mean the opposite: I have a car.
Note that "у меня" might have another meaning: at my place. "Где вы встречаетесь? - У меня." (Where do you meet? - At my place.)
As for и/а но/а, I'll come back in a few minutes...

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Whoooa... why did you use трудными for the first example you gave?

[welgar.livejournal.com]

That's because you use "(не) быть кем/чем" and, accordingly, "(не) был кем/чем", "(не) будет кем/чем".

[constpd.livejournal.com]

“Экзамены не были трудными” (Genitive - the verb is negated) and “Экзамены были нетрудные” (Nominative - the verb is not negated) are both equally applicible. And the number doesn't matter.
“У меня есть машина”, “У меня нет машины”. Here “нет” should be used as the negative form of “быть” (“не быть” is valid only as infinitive, otherwise “нет”). Again, the verb is negated - use Genitive.
“И” is used as “and” when you tend to express some kind of similarity.
“А” is used as “and” when you want to show some difference. For instance “Я пришел вовремя, а ты нет” (I came in time and you didn't) or “У Тани синее платье, а у Маши зелёное” (Tania has blue dress and Masha has green one).
“Но” is used almost exactly as “but”.

[noser.livejournal.com]

трудными is not Genitive. I did not exactly understand what rule you are trying to state, but it is obviously wrong.

[constpd.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm terribly sorry. It's Instrumental, of course.

[zloizloi.livejournal.com]

"не было/нет/не будет" means also "had no/have no...", as in:
У меня не будет экзаменов" - I will have no exams

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

OK, constpd was a bit quicker...
и/а pair is explained really good. A few examples:
Я вошёл, и он вошёл, а она не вошла.
I came in, and he came in, but she didn't.
Я вошёл, но она не вошла, и он почему-то не вошёл.
I came in, but she didn't, and he didn't for some reason.

Does this make any sense for you? ;-)

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Yes it does, thank you. But as for "У меня нет машины," what I actually meant to say "У меня нет машин." Would that be the equivalent of "I don't have any cars?"

[welgar.livejournal.com]

Exactly.
У меня нет машины - I don't have a car.
У меня нет машин - I don't have any cars.

This one just for fun...

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

>When is it appropriate to use не было, нет, and не будет?

Imagine a scene from "The Lord Of The Ring". A mighty warrior from Gondor draws his sword and shouts:
"There was no orc, there is no orc and there will be no orc on the walls of the White City!"
Which in Russian overdubbed version would sound as:
- На стенах Белого Города не было, нет и не будет ни одного орка!

:)))

Re: This one just for fun...

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Haha! Oh you're such a geek, but I'll keep that in mind anyway, just in case I find myself one day in that same exact situation.

Re: This one just for fun...

[lexabear.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the last time I had to chase orcs away from Osgiliath, all i could think of was my Russian conjugation...

(/tongue-in-cheek)

Re: This one just for fun...

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Right man, Osgiliath fell anyway, and this was only because there was no Russian soldiers inside :) They should have at least one, in his torn and muddy гимнастёрка and with a Калашников in hand; he might have shouted "За Родину! За Сталина!!!" - this alone sould scare the nazgul away :))))

[welgar.livejournal.com]

Right except for "экзаменов не было трудных". I can't figure out a situation when you could use such a phrase.

[simonff.livejournal.com]

Eg,

- Как прошли твои зачёты и экзамены?
- Было несколько сложных зачётов, а вот экзаменов не было трудных.

Though I would probably say
... экзаменов трудных не было.

The logical emphasis is on экзаменов as opposed to зачётов.

Зачёт is actually a lighter form of a test in Russian colleges (exam being the more difficult one), but once or twice in my life I had a situation when зачёты required more work than экзамены.

[nodarius.livejournal.com]

Well, smth like this:
- Сдал сессию?
- Сдал.
- Трудные были экзамены?
- Нет, экзаменов не было трудных, зато трудные были экзаменаторы :))
A bit literary, nevertheless I can easily imagine such a conversation

[vladon.livejournal.com]

It's more poetically :)

[noser.livejournal.com]

And make sure you don't confuse "не было" as an expression meaning "there was no", that is, "нет" in the past sense, with regular "не был/была/было/были" ("was not").

E.g. там не было света -> there was no light there
vs. небо не было ясным -> the sky was not clear

btw ясным is Instrumental, because the object of the verb "быть" in past and future tense (as in "was happy" or "will be a pilot") is either Nominative or Instrumental, and Instrumental is used more often. But this does not apply to "есть", the present tense and to infinitive itself! The object of "есть" is always Nominative and the object of infinitive "быть" is always Instrumental. Russian is surprisingly weird even to native speakers. :)

[noser.livejournal.com]

typo: sense -> tense

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

When you say "The object of есть is always Nominative," give me an example. I am used to (or trying to get used to, LoL) "Я ем яблок." Or did you mean something like "Он есть здесь?" Although I think that usage is archaic/not used. Or did you mean subject? Or direct object? Ok... now I'm just confused...

[noser.livejournal.com]

I mean "есть", the present tense form of "быть" (to be), the one that is usually omitted. Not the one that means "to eat" :)

To be happy -> быть счастливым (Instrumental)
He is happy -> Он счастливый (Nominative)
He was happy -> Он был счастливым (Instrumental)
He will be happy -> Он будет счастливым (Instrumental)

[noser.livejournal.com]

btw, what's the difference between "object" and "direct object"? Are there any indirect objects, or is it just customary to say "direct object" vs just "object"?

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Well you don't want to cause confusion in just saying "object." You'd have to specify. If you said "Identify the object of the following sentence: Сергей бросил мяч Коле," I'd say "...what?"

Subject: Сергей
Direct object: мяч
Indirect object: Коля

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Oh, and what also confused me is the fact that you referred to счастливый as an object. Wouldn't it be considered just an adjective or what?

[noser.livejournal.com]

Good one. I wish I remembered Russian grammar they taught me in school better.

Btw, I searched google, and found that we also have direct and indirect objects in Russian ("прямое дополнение" and "косвенное дополнение").

So I think "happy" is considered to be a direct object in Russian, even though it's an adjective. You see, it gets declensed just as if there was a word "person" afterwards ("he was a happy person").

Someone who remembers Russian grammar rules better, please feel free to correct me :)