Глаголы движения

[giantantattack.livejournal.com]

Okay, so my class is finally at the point where we are beginning our steady spiral down into the world of verbs of motion, and it looks to be a rather interesting journey. However, I've already run across a small stumbling block that I hope the community here might be able to shed some light on.

Today my instructor outlined some different instances in which the unidirectional, multidirectional, and perfective forms are used. Most are pretty straightforward and understandable to me, but one use is a little confusing: the future tense of unidirectional verbs in non-idiomatic expressions (e.g. "Завтра я иду к зубному врачу."). Aside from trying to remember not to use быть before the infinitive, I'm having trouble understanding the difference between that usage and the perfective future tense. In our text, my teacher noted that using a unidirectional verb in the future tense without быть places emphasis on the destination, but failed to note how this differs from the perfective future tense (e.g. "Завтра я пойду к зубному врачу."). Does it place emphasis on the act of going to the destination? If someone could clear up when to use one and when to use the other it would be greatly appreciated.

Спасибо!

Comments

[noser.livejournal.com]

There's no difference, in my humble native speaker opinion. Use whichever comes to your mind first. :)

[lena-supercat.livejournal.com]

In my opinion, the difference is exactly the same as the difference between "tomorrow I am going to the dentist" and "tomorrow I will go to the dentist" - that is to say, not much!

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

Yeah. (points above) What they said. I'm a native speaker too and I can tell you that the difference in this case is purely aestetic. Sometimes it's easier for your ears to say Я иду and sometimes Я пойду. I'd say the second is more grammatically pure, though.

[kyty3ob.livejournal.com]

Moreover.
Ну, мы пойдем.
Ну, мы идем.
Ну, мы пошли.
3 different tenses with generally same meaning. .-)))

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Yup:) We only haev to explain to the non-natives that all three roughly mean "well, let's go" :))

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Yes, there is no significant difference between those two. The only difference would be that in colloquial speech one would say, most likely, "Что ты делаешь завтра?" rather than "Что ты будешь делать завтра?"; the answer to "Что ты делаешь завтра?" would be, quite naturally, "Завтра я иду к дантисту-садисту" rather than "Завтра я пойду к дантисту-садисту" :))))))) Therefore, this "present in the future" is relatively more colloquial, OR simply more usable in everyday speech that the regular future tense form.

[onodera.livejournal.com]

«Ой, как зуб разболелся! Завтра пойду к дантисту.»
'Gee, my tooth really started to hurt! I'll go to a dentist tomorrow.'
«Нет, я не смогу с тобой пойти в кино завтра. Я иду к дантисту.»
'No, I won't be able to go with you to the cinema tomorrow. I'm going to the dentist.'

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

What about сделаешь? Would it be appropriate to say "Что ты сделаешь завтра?" Does it sound like "What WILL you do tomorrow?"

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

сделаешь is perfect, not from делать (impefrect form) but from сделать (perfect form,) so "что ты сделаешь завтра" means approximately "what exactly are you going to do in this particular case tomorrow?" -- so "что ты делаешь завтра" or "что ты будешь делать завтра" suit better for the simple "what are you gonna do tomorrow". Сделаешь means a brief and finished action. Compare these two:

- Что ты делаешь завтра?
- Ничего особенного. Посижу, почитаю.

(What are you going to do tomorrow? - Nothing in particular, just sitting and reading..)
Those two discuss ongoing, continuing processes.

- Что ты сделаешь завтра?
- Что я могу сделать? Позвоню ему, объясню ситуацию...

(What will you do tomorrow? - What can I possibly do? I'll call him and explain him the situation...)
Those two discuss a single, brief action.

[nbuwe.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I wonder if it's methodologically correct to put the emphasis on tenses when teaching Russian. The category of aspect is equally, if not more important, so presentation of Russian verb system might be better served by basing it on aspect rather then tense. (This is probably true for most Slavic languages in general).

The fact that "Завтра я иду к дантисту." is technically present tense, while "Завтра я пойду к дантисту." is technically future tense is absolutely secondary to the aspect choice (imp. "иду" vs. pf. "пойду").

Reminds me of Tibetan grammars that were modeled after prestigious models (Sanskrit in case of grammars written by Tibetans, Greek/Latin in case of grammars written by westerners) and described that language using such categories as "case" which were totally inapplicable.

It's not *that* bad in case of Russian, but the emphasis on aspect vs. tense is real and causes problems for both English speakers learning Russian, and Russian speakers learning English.

In this particular case I'd say that the choice of imperfective "иду" is a *neutral* choice that doesn't put emphasis on the action itself, and so something else gets more emphasis. E.g. destination "Завтра я иду к дантисту.", time "Я иду к дантисту завтра.", or the actor "Завтра к дантисту иду я."

OTOH, a choice of perfective "пойду" would stress the fact that you are sure that the action will indeed happen.

Also compare "Ты ходил сегодня к дантисту?" (Did you visit your dentist today?). Imperfective "ходил" is neutral. But in "Ты сходил сегодня к дантисту?" perfective "сходил" indicates that I know you *had* an appointment today, and I wonder if you kept it.

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

I second that.

[neoshi.livejournal.com]

I'm a native speaker too. And in my opinion this example is very good =)

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Sounds tricky but true :)