(no subject)

[wolfie-18.livejournal.com]

How would one saying "Take medicine before going to sleep?"

And help with translation, please: "Ты увидишь большое дерево, которое перекинуто через пруд." "Вот он какой" "А дальше - вприпрыжку." "Крошка Енот и виду не подал, что испугался." "Он скорчил рожу." "Что такое" vs. "Что это такое?" "Он по-прежнему сидел в пруду." "Не строй рож." "Крошка Енот мчался домой со всех ног, крепко держа своих раков."

When would one use "напугал" instead of "испугал?"

And where the emphasis on Енот?

And in the story, I don't understand why they didn't use instrumental in some parts, but yes in others (I've learned that you're supposed to use instr. in these cases), when saying "Крошка Енот был маленьким/маленький, но храбрым/храбрый."

Comments

[med99.livejournal.com]

Take medicine before going to sleep = Прими перед сном лекарство.

Енот — emphasis on last syllable.

[oryx_and_crake]

How would one saying "Take medicine before going to sleep?"

Прими лекарство перед сном (или: перед сном прими лекарство)

"Ты увидишь большое дерево, которое перекинуто через пруд."
You will see a big tree that lies across the pond (like a bridge)


"Вот он какой"
That's what he looks like.

"А дальше - вприпрыжку."
And then you will (run) hopping.


"Крошка Енот и виду не подал, что испугался."
Little Racoon did not show that he was scared.


"Он скорчил рожу."
He made (pulled) a face

"Что такое" vs. "Что это такое?"
The first is less formal, I think

"Он по-прежнему сидел в пруду."
He was still sitting in the pond

"Не строй рож."
Don't make faces

"Крошка Енот мчался домой со всех ног, крепко держа своих раков."
Little Racoon was running home as fast as he was able, holding his crayfishes fast

When would one use "напугал" instead of "испугал?"
They are pretty interchangeable, I think

And where the emphasis on Енот?
енОт

[yms.livejournal.com]

напугал vs испугал - it-s hard to tell the difference, but I'll try. Испугал stresses the action that occurred once. Напугал stresses the result (one imagine a frightened person), and it could be possibly stronger than with испугал.

With the instrumental case, the difference is subtle. Originally, nominative means quality and instrumental means a state that can be changed. But in fact, they are interchangeable and this difference is not felt in many cases.

[oblomov-jerusal.livejournal.com]

I think the slight difference between напугал and испугал is that испугал refers to the initial reaction to the event or story, while напугал implies lasting fear.

[apollotiger.livejournal.com]

Randomly... is your icon Hedgehog in the Fog?

[yms.livejournal.com]

surely :)

[noser.livejournal.com]

We all love it :)

[rednameless.livejournal.com]

Что такое = What is...
Что это такое = What is it.

[suku-vse.livejournal.com]

About your last question, you can use both instrumental and .... Именительный .... (sorry, I'm native Russian speaker and don't know what's English for it.)

[constpd.livejournal.com]

Using nominative case in the last question is colloquial. Not perfectly correct but possible.

[dyrbaglyz.livejournal.com]

I would say that
question "Что такое?" usually means "What happens (with you)?"
question "Что такое (предмет)?" usually means "What is (item)?"

"Крошка Енот был маленьким/маленький, но храбрым/храбрый." - sounds completely interchangeble for me.

Use of Nom. and Instr. in predicative constructions

[solito.livejournal.com]

It is a complicated part of the Russian grammar. Briefly, in the composite predicative constructions (CPC; "составное именное сказуемое"): быть (казаться, являться, становиться, делаться, называться, считаться etc.) + noun (in nominative or instrumental case) the use of instrumental case is becoming predominant in the modern language since XIX century.

The use of instrumental case in the CPCs marks that the characteristic is applied to the certain period of time, while the nominative case means a constant feature not related to the time periods. Still the use of nominative case may sound archaic in some situations.

Мой отец был врач (archaic) - My father was a doctor
Мой отец был врач Вишневский - My father was doctor Vishnevsky (The use of instrumental is not allowed here)
Мой отец был врачом - One of the jobs of my father was a doctor.

In the present tense the CPCs with the verb быть mainly use nominative case. All exceptions are either archaic or colloquial.

In the past tense in the CPCs with the verbs meaning title, temporary state or condition, transition from one state to another (бывать, казаться, сделаться, стать, становиться, остаться, приходиться, считаться, называться, почитаться, полагаться (в значении "считаться"), слыть, смотреть (в значении "выглядеть"), доводиться, делаться etc.) the modern language insists on using the instrumental case, the nominative case either sounds archaic or is impossible at all.

In the future tense the CPCs mainly use instrumental in the modern Russian. Even in XIX century the use of nominative case in the future tense was rather limited.

[oryx_and_crake]

Not exactly; "Что такое?" is a complete phrase, while "What is?" is not.

[ob-ivan.livejournal.com]

"что это такое?" is a question with meaning 'what is this?'
meanwhile "что такое?" is rather an interjection, equivalent to simple "что?", which can be translated "what?", "why?", "what happened?", "what's the matter?" or more informal "what the hell?", depending on situation.
however "что такое?" can be also understood as unfull "что это такое?" and so translated as 'what is this?'