(no subject)

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

I know the verb быть is never used. Except sometimes есть. But what about in situations where it is absolutely VITAL, such as "I know you are, but what am I?" Or "I am!? I didn't know that" *chuckle* or perhaps "Are you?" These questions sound very loaded, but it's actually not. It's just now that I realize that, and find it quite funny.

EDIT: I'm sorry to have said this so late, but I meant the present conjugated form of быть is never used.

Comments

[vladon.livejournal.com]

It depends [on context].

"I know you are, but what am I?" - "Я знаю, кто ты, но кто я?"
"I am!? I didn't know that" - "Я?! Я этого не знаю"
"Are you?" - "А ты?", but, again, it depends.

Russian is tough

[trurle.livejournal.com]

I know the verb быть is never used.
You are wrong. Basically, the verb быть can be used.
For instance, Hamlet monologue "to be or not to be" is translated, quite literally
Быть или не быть - вот в чем вопрос.
At the same time, the verb "to be" is indeed omitted in most cases while translating into Russian.
В то же самое время, глагол "to be" опускается в большинстве случаев перевода на русский язык.
As you can see, "is omitted" lose "to be" in translation.
There are grammar cases where the verb "быть" is used in Russian:
Я хочу быть летчиком
I would like to become a pilot.

Below is Ivashenko and Vasilyev song, demonstrating extensive use of the verb "быть"

Я жил забыл уж сколько тысяч лет,
Немало в жизни перевидел.
Не раз рождался я на свет,
Знавал победы, беды и обиды...
И как умел, уразумел: конца у жизни нет.

Я жил, я был задолго до меня.
Свой путь осилил я не сразу.
Я дух и тело обронял,
Терял рассудок свой и разум.
Я жил да был, менялся сам и все вокруг менял.

   Я себя другим не помню,
   Я себя другим не знаю,
   Только верится легко мне
   В то, что был и до меня я,
   В то, что жил и до меня я...

Я был, я был, я был, я был...
Я буду, буду, буду, буду...
Хоть все, что было я забыл,
А то, что есть, родившись вновь, забуду,
Я быть назначен отрывным календарем судьбы.

Мне быть и в старом быть и молодом -
Во всех потомках понемножку.
С гармошкой быть и долотом,
С бутылкою вина и с ложкой.
Мне жить да быть и не тужить и после, и потом.

   Жить я буду после смерти
   Жить я буду непременно.
   Вы поверьте, вы поверьте:
   Я к себе приду на смену,
   Сам к себе приду на смену...

Я кадр в многосерийнейшем кино,
Снежинка в бешеной метели...
Те я, что умерли давно,
И те я, что родится не успели,
Все вместе - человечество единое одно.

Re: Russian is tough

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

I think that what he meant was that the verb быть is never conjugated. In Present tense, you generally leave it out with the Я -- счастливый or whatever...

Re: Russian is tough

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Um... when you say "Я- счастливый..." are you trying to say "I'm happy?" What you said sounds like "I'm pleasant..." If you want to say I'm happy, you have to use the special adjective рад. Я рад/рада, Вы рады.

Re: Russian is tough

[noser.livejournal.com]

Correct Russian:

I'm happy -> Я счастлив
I'm glad -> Я рад

Re: Russian is tough

[solito.livejournal.com]

You mean - it is incorrect to say "Я счастливый"?

Re: Russian is tough

[noser.livejournal.com]

It's grammatically correct, but has a hidden meaning: "I'm not a native speaker".

Re: Russian is tough

[solito.livejournal.com]

Mmm... I would disagree. It depends a lot. I am a native speaker (and in native speaking environment) as you could have guessed already and it sounds absolutely fine for me: "Я счастливый, я такой счастливый, знаешь... Меня даже пугает немного это чувство" - "I am happy, I am so happy, you know... This feeling even scares me a bit". So it depends on the context and intonation.

If you want to say just "Я счастливый" and full stop, then I agree the shortened form is better: "Я счастлив".

Re: Russian is tough

[solito.livejournal.com]

> И те я, что родится не успели,
> Все вместе - человечество единое одно.

...родиться...

[zloizloi.livejournal.com]

Well, the verb быть is used quite often, the most common example is "может быть" = may be.
But the questions you mentioned could be translated without быть, may be with a possible exception for the second question, depending on context.

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

I always thought that есть was used, regardless to the person being expresed... e.g. "Я есть," "вы есть." But I could be (and probably am) wrong.

[paul-s.livejournal.com]

I don't think I'd ever say that. I think you can say byt' is rarely used in a present, conjugated form - I'm sure a native can come up with some cases where it is. But it's quite commom in the future budu, budesh etc and the past byl, byla, bylo, byli.

I've just had a thought that I hope a native can answer: does this mean that byt' has a past (byl), present (the really obscure ones where the 3rd person plural is sut') and a future conjugation? That's unlike other verbs which denote their time based on aspect - each having two conjugations.

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

Not all verbs have a perfective and imperfective aspect; любить for example. You see this in English all the time. It's not proper English to say, "I'm loving," because love isn't a progressive verb. Likewise, "I'm being" is an English idiom, which really means, "I'm acting."

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

It's not proper English to say, "I'm loving," because love isn't a progressive verb.

McDonald's slogan: "I'm loving it".

[simonff.livejournal.com]

Another reason not to visit McDonald's.

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

McDonald's slogan is actually "i'm lovin' it." They didn't capitalize the I either. Trust me on this one, I'm the son of two English majors.

[paul-s.livejournal.com]

Oh I know that. What I meant was that byt' has three ways of conjugating it: past which is byl, byla, bylo, byli; present which is something like Polish jem, jesz, jest, jetesmy, jestscie, son (in almost 7 years of learning Russian I've never come across them which is why I only know the Polish); and future which is budu, bud'esh, bud'et, bud'em, bud'ete, budut. These three ways denote past, present, and future but normally verbs (whether perfective or imperfective) only have two ways of conjugating them: take igrat' (to play) and it goes igrayoo, igraesh, igraet etc; it is then conjugated in the past, igral, igrala, igralo, igrali. There is no future conjugation; you have to conjugate cigrat' which only has two ways as well. It just doesn't seem 'very Russian' to have a verb that is capable of representing three tenses in one word; I guess the byt' thing is a leftover from Proto-Slavonic.

I know I should write in Cyrillic by the way, but I'm lazy.

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

Aaand, that would be an incorrect assumption. Любить most definitely has a perfective and an imperfective. Например: "Я люблю мужчин." What you're trying to say is that not all verbs have a present progressive and a present continuous aspect. But that's English, silly. It's not appropriate to say "I'm loving" as you said, but it IS appropriate to say "I love," both of which are covered by the imperfect present case of любить.

A verb that does NOT have a perfective aspect in Russian would be: знать.

[solito.livejournal.com]

In this regard Ozhegov (a well known author of Russian grammar manuals) says: "The verb "быть" has no present time except for the 3rd person in singular "есть" and archaic 3rd person in plural "суть"".

It means that the verb "быть" as well as a large number of other verbs (e.g. победить - to win, убедить - to persuade, очутиться - to get, to find oneself, ощутить - to sense, чудить - to behave eccentrically, дудеть - to play the pipe, пылесосить - to hoover (to vaccuum), басить - to speak in a bass voice, etc. etc.) is defective.

From a native speaker point of view if for any reason you need to use the verb "быть" in conjugated forms in present it sounds quite normal if you use "есть" for all the forms.
Ex.
Как хорошо, что ты есть у меня, а я (есть) у тебя! Here the second "есть" could be omitted.
Все мы (есть) один великий русский народ! :) Here "есть" could be omitted.
Эти открытия (есть) величайший прорыв в современной науке. Here "есть" could be omitted.

The conjugation of the old slavonic verb "быти" -
азъ есмь, ты еси, онъ есть, мы есмы, вы есте, они суть
азъ Есмь, ты Еси, онъ Есть, мы Есмы, вы Есте, они сУть (The capital letters show stressed vocals)

[solito.livejournal.com]

In addition to that a list of some defective Russian verbs:

1. Победить, убедить, очутиться, ощутить, чудить, дудеть, пылесосить - do not have 1st person in singular in present and future
2. Басить (башу), галдеть (галжу), гвоздить (гвозжу), ерундить (ерунжу), преградить (прегражу), соседить (сосежу), шкодить (шкожу) - the forms in parentheses are used very rarely (but exist however)
3. Бузить (бужу), дерзить (держу), тузить (тужу) - the forms in parentheses are not used because they coincide with conjugated forms of other verbs (будить, держать, тужить accordingly)
4. Умертвить has a special form for 1st sing. present - умерщвлю; роптать has a special form for 1st sing. present - ропщу

[noser.livejournal.com]

Are you sure about all this? I mean, "убежу" and "ощутю" do sound funny, but that does not mean they don't exist!

[solito.livejournal.com]

Yes, I am! And I am not alone. :)

See, for example, one of the most competent sources - Ditmar Rozental: Розенталь Д.Э. Справочник по правописанию и литературной правке / Под ред. И.Б.Голуб. - 3-е изд., испр. - М.: Рольф, 2001 ISBN 5-7836-0393-7
and particularly: "Раздел XL. Употребление форм глагола, стр. 238"

Regarding your example - I am afraid it's not correct:
"убежу" not only sounds funny, it does not exist at all, the correct form is "убегу";
"ощутю" does *not* exist in literary Russian, though any native speaker will recognize the verb and catch what you wanted to say (and notice sotto-voce - "That's a mistake!")

[noser.livejournal.com]

Why убегу? Утверждать -> утвержу, so убеждать -> убежу?

Google lists 155 occurrences of ощутю (OK, wrong), but also 551 of ощущу, including in some literary works.

[solito.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, if we are speaking about literary language - not "ощутю", and not even "ощущу" or "ощущю" as I saw once. There are some rules - if you follow them you speak and write correctly, if you don't - you don't. That's easy. And Google is the latest place I'd use to prove up.

"Убегу" - since you did not give the infinitive form, I've thought that we were speaking about "убегать".

[noser.livejournal.com]

I took "убедить" from the list that you came up with, I thought that was pretty obvious. Oh well.

Anyway, you aren't exactly convincing about both "ощущу" and "убежу".

[solito.livejournal.com]

OK - again, this is your choice - speak gramatically or not.

What you think would be more convincing for you - not the ghost of Rozental please... May be it is a good idea to try and open the book I mentioned earlier (or any other grammar reference book)?

[noser.livejournal.com]

http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ushakov/918786

[solito.livejournal.com]

ОК - that is convincing, I'd agree. From my point of view the presence of two opposite opinions in two different academic sources is a sign that the phenomenon is not stable.

My personal experience is however - the word "ощущу" sounds weird for me, and I know Russian good enough to re-word the phrase.

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

It was used: at least I have heard a Rock band in the 1980s that sung--

Сейчас я что-то ощущу! Сейчас я что-то ощущу!

The word has been used as a purely phonetical phenomenon, anyway -- it sounded like "а-щу-щу" with notable pauses between syllables :))

[noser.livejournal.com]

Whoops! The first line should be:

Утвердить -> утвержу, so убедить -> убежу?

[paul-s.livejournal.com]

In that case, apologies go to apollotiger.

[madrumos.livejournal.com]

yeah, i think what he meant was that быть isn't conjugated in the present tense.

i know what you mean, but there are ways to get around the present tense of 'to be' in each of your examples. it just all depends on context, but there's no reason that the meaning can't be conveyed by other devices, tone of voice, or other grammar.

very rarely, like in some literature (i've seen it in Dostoevsky), you can find first-person singular of 'to be' used in normal speech. it has a place, but it is archaic and shouldn't really be used in modern russian. the form is 'Я есмь', a remnant of the former present conjugation.

oh, and i'm not sure есть is generally even regarded as a conjugated form of быть nowadays. its use is a bit more nuanced than just 'there is a...' or what have you. for example 'у меня...' vs. 'у меня есть...'.

[yms.livejournal.com]

I know you are
I am!? I didn't know that

In this situation to be substitutes for another word (known from the context), noun or adjective. In Russian you simply put this word instead of быть.

Instead of Are you? you may say Действительно? (Indeed?) or something like this.

[psa-98.livejournal.com]

The Verb "быть" in present is usually omited, and the sentence like "Я есть американец" sound weird.

It is still normal to use "есть" in some situations:

1. It can be used and don't sound strange in very scientific texts.

"Давайте докажем, что 137 есть простое число."
Let's prove that 137 is a prime number.

2. It cannot be omited when it has meaning "smb/smith is present", "there is", "smb/smith have".

"В комнате кто-то есть"
There is somebody in the room.

"Есть тут кто-нибудь?"
Is anybody there?

"Есть в этом доме доктор?"
Is any doctor in the house?

"У меня есть спички."
I have some matches.

"В гостинице есть телефон"
There is a phone in the hotel.