Conjugation

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

I was wondering if Russian verb conjugation is anything like French or Spanish.

In French, to conjugation *most* verbs you change the ending of the "to be" form. Here's an example:

parler (to speak)

je (I) parl + e = parle
tu (informal you) parl + es = parles
il/elle (he, she) parl + e = parle
nous (we) parl + ons = parlons
vous (formal you) parl + ez = parlez
ils/elles (they) parl + ent = parlent

Basically, does Russian have a conjugation rule?

Comments

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

Russian, with, for example, говорить (to speak), conjugates:

я говорю
ты говоришь
он говорит
мы говорим
вы говорите
они говорют

As I understand it, there are two main conjugations-- -ать and -ить.

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

But is there a pattern?

I can use the endings for parler to conjugate tomber (to fall).

je tombe
tu tombes
il tombe
nous tombons
vous tombez
ils tombent

[oscar-6.livejournal.com]

In French, you can, cause those verbs are in the same group. In Russian, you can't, because "говорить" and "падать" are in different groups.

To conjugate a verb, you should detach a "-ть" infinitive ending and place there another ending (much like with 1st group's verbs in French).

When the verb end with "-ать", you should add "-ю", "-ешь", "-ет", "-ем", "-ете" or "-ют":
я падаю
ты падаешь
он падает
мы падаем
вы падаете
они падают.

When the verb ends with "-ить", you should add "-ю", "-ишь", "-ит", "-им", "-ите" or "-ят":
я говорю
ты говоришь
он говорит
мы говорим
вы говорите
они говорят (yes, there is a mistake in apollotiger's example)

Of course, not all the verbs fit in those two groups. For example, "есть" ("to eat", "manger"):
я ем
ты ешь
он ест
мы едим
вы едите
они едят.

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the info!

May I add smth?

[hitry-shmyak.livejournal.com]

In Russian:
-second conjugation form verbs are end with "-ить" in infinitive form (exceptions: брить, стелить)
-all others refer to first conjuration (exeptions: Гнать, держать, смотреть и видеть, дышать, слышать, ненавидеть, обидеть, терпеть, зависеть, вертеть)

So the first group (including before-mentioned 11 verbs) conjurates as:
-ю
-ишь
-ит
-им
-ите
-ят

the second (& брить, стелить):
-ю
-ешь
-ет
-ем
-ете
-ют

To remember exeptions (well it's not a right word. It seems like they are called samo other way. But I don't remember) we usually use some rhymes:

Гнать, держать, смотреть и видеть,
Дышать, слышать, ненавидеть,
И обидеть, и терпеть, и зависеть, и вертеть.

or

Гнать, держать, смотреть и видеть,
Дышать, слышать, ненавидеть,
И зависеть, и вертеть,
И обидеть, и терпеть -
Вы запомните, друзья,
Их на -е- спрягать нельзя.

or... What else? Ah!

Ко второму же спряженью
отнесем мы без сомненья
все глаголы, что на -ить,
исключая "брить", "стелить".
А еще: смотреть, обидеть,
Слышать, видеть, ненавидеть,
Гнать, дышать, держать, терпеть,
И зависеть, и вертеть.

Re: May I add smth?

[yms.livejournal.com]

To remember exeptions (well it's not a right word. It seems like they are called samo other way. But I don't remember) we usually use some rhymes:

Oh, indeed? Exceptions are so few? ;) What about болеть - болит? Сидеть - сидит? Стоять - стоит? Висеть - висит?
The answer is, since the endings are stressed here, it's no problem for you in writing as you hear. You don't need to remember them because you already know how to speak Russian, and all you need to study at school is how to write.

Be careful with rules we learned at school! They are not always good for foreign students!

BTW, the "conjugation numbers" (which is the 1st, which is the 2nd) are our specific school stuff too, so I always avoid using them here.

Re: May I add smth?

[hitry-shmyak.livejournal.com]

Well, I got the point;)
But as I know we have "-ить" verbs, and all other that obey the rules mentioned erlier. And also there is a number of heteroclitic verb.
By the way is the list long? I know 13 of them from school. May be I can remember more (5...6... well, even 7;)).

[oblomov-jerusal.livejournal.com]

они говорят

[happy-accidents.livejournal.com]

And there is no form of the verb 'to be' in the present!

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Является, not являеться :)))

Nope, являться (to appear, to show up) is a parasite verb which kinda substitutes for быть in present tense. It's not very good style to use являться too often :) My professor at the University had often repeated - "являются только привидения, и то в полночь" (only ghosts appear, and mostly at midnight.)

[superslayer18.livejournal.com]

Well there are, they just aren't used ^_~

[happy-accidents.livejournal.com]

Know-it-alls :-p

[yms.livejournal.com]

Strictly speaking, there is such form, in 3rd person singular it's есть. But it's used rarely and only in specific situations.

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

Strictly speaking, there's also a 3rd person plural form, суть, but it's quite bookish and thus yet more rarely used.

[superslayer18.livejournal.com]

I think your French is a little off... It has nothing to do with the verb for "to be", and everything to do with its roots to Latin.

Je suis
Tu es
Il/Elle est
Nous sommes
Vous etes (don't feel like doing accents there, but they exist lol)
Ils/elles sont

I don't see the relationship other than with the tu form. It not so much that other verbs conjugate by adding etre, but that etre conjugates like other french verbs... Anyone wanna back me up with this one/disprove me? (I speak some French and Russian, so I'm not just some random person lol)

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I was thinking specifically "-er" verbs. Hope that helps. ;c)

[superslayer18.livejournal.com]

the thing i conjugated was the verb "to be" though lol. My point is that if your theory were to hold, to say "I speak" you would say "Je parlsuis", not "Je parle". Other than the "es" for tu, I don't see any relation at all other than the fact that all conjugations have slight similarities...

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

According to my French book, "I speak" is "Je parle".

[superslayer18.livejournal.com]

I know that, thats my point lol.

Je suis = I am.

Je parle = I speak

According to your theory, you would take the verb root (in this case Parler) and add the form of the verb for "to be" (which is etre) to the end of it.

The root of Parler is Parl-
The applicable form (je) of "etre" is suis in this case.

Parl- + suis = Parlsuis.

This is quite incorrect, since we all know that it's "Je parle". Therefore, your theory (or at least what I thought you meant by it) is incorrect.

[lizinka.livejournal.com]

Gotcha! I was confused. ;c) It's all good now, I'm unconfused.

[squodge.livejournal.com]

The proto-Latin root of 'to be' is 'es', so before the language (Latin) evolved, it was something like:

es-m (sum)
es-s (es)
es-t (est)
es-mus (sumus)
es-tis (estis)
es-nt (sunt)

Eventually, the 1st person singular ending was replaced by the -o ending, which shows up in the Romance languages. From what I remember, 'parler' comes from Latin 'fabulare'.

~ squodge ~