(no subject)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Hello!
I have a big probelm with the expression "poka ne", I just dont get the rules, when to use the future tence and when to use the past. I have two examples, and I dont know if they are both wrong or both right or if one is wrong and one is right. They both sound ok to me... (But we have concordance des temps in swedish).

Надо успеть купить молоко, пока магазин не закрыли.(future anterieure?!)
...и пока он этого не поймет, не надо с ним терять время. (future)

UpD: Thanks! It kind makes sence now! I'll print out your examples and explanations and study them well, you guys are brilliant!

Comments

[oryx_and_crake]

in the first sentence it should be купитЬ
in the second sentence it should be терять, not потерять.

I am afraid I cannot explain the usage of past and future though. Could it have something to do with the fact that we know for sure that the shop will close, however we don't know if the person in question will ever understand what we are trying to tell him?

You can construct several sentences right here and we'll tell you if you get it right or not.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

merci!!! I'll think of some!)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

"Could it have something to do with the fact that we know for sure that the shop will close, however we don't know if the person in question will ever understand what we are trying to tell him?"

Hm, thanks. But they are both grammatically correct? (except for the teryat' an kupit' words,...)

[oryx_and_crake]

Sorry, I was away for a few days, but I think all your questions got answered eventually.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Are those sentences incorrect or do they simply mean different things?
"Nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakryvaetsya"
"nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakroetsya"
"nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakryvalsya"

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Hm: like this:

"Nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakryvaetsya"
makes no sence. (We have to buy milk, while the shop is not closing)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Ill start constructing some sentences.. just one question more first: So you have allways perfect aspect after "poka ne"?

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

Hm, I don't quite see you question. Can you give more examples?

Is your question of the differences in this two phrases?

1) "I didn't want to leave until he promised he'd call me"
"Я не хотела уходить, пока он не пообещает позвонить."
(Suppose I say: "I don't leave until you promise".)

and

2) "I didn't want to leave, until he promised he'd call me".
"Я не хотела уходить, пока он не пообещал позвонить."
(Suppose I'm standing in the doors, refusing to leave. And he convinced me to go by making a promise.)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Thanks, that helps i guess. Like oryx and crake said, we know the shop will close and then be closed. but we dont know whether he will understand or not.

But does it sound funny to say:
"Nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakryvaetsya"
"nado uspet' kupit' moloko, poka magazin ne zakroetsya"
"nado uspet' kupit' moloko poka magazin ne zakryvalsya"

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

First and third phrases sound incorrect. Second phrase sounds funny, but is understandable.

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

Не закрывается sounds so me as if something is supposed to be able to close but is broken and does not close, where "close" is a physical action, not a "closed store". Like a broken door or a drawer. Пока магазин не закрывается sounds as if the store is broken and is physically unable to close, which sounds really weird.

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

Another correct options are these:

Надо успеть купить молоко, а то магазин закроется.
(..., otherwise the store would close.)

Магазин закрывается, надо успеть купить молоко.
(The store is closing, I need to be on time to buy milk.)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Merci!

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

So you have allways perfect aspect after "poka ne"?

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

In the sense otherwise something would start - I would say, yes.

In the sense something is still not happening it could be imperfective, I guess: этот е-мэйл новый, и спам пока не приходит.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

aha, thanks!

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

I wish to speak English as good as you speak English and Russian. :)

My English is barely enough to express those fine details after lots of thinking, certainly not yet enough to use them in convesations. :)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

My english sucks, but I have made one observation in the last year or two, wich is intresting: I mostly speak English with other non native speakers, and I thought that my english has deteriorated since school. But lately I've been to conferences where there has been non native speakers and Brits and Americans, and I have noticed that as a tool of communication my english is sometimes more effective than that of some native speakers.

I listen to a Pole and an American talk and I hear missunderstanding after missunderstanding. The American says "not once" the Pole's answer is kind of funny, doesent really make sence. I can hear that he probably interpreted "not once" as "many times", I mean "ne odin raz", while the american meant "ni razu", other wise he would have said "not oly once". But the American, who never studied another language and is not used to speaking to non native speakers, doesnt notice the missunderstanding, he just thinks the poles answer is strange, but he doesent understand why.

But since English is not my native language, and since I am still struggeling with Russian and French, I kind of know what it is like to communicate in a language that is not my own. And when i and a pole speak english with each other we understand each other much better thatn the english man and the pole. And it is not about difficult brittish pronounciation, and it is not about we speaking very, very, very simple English, it can be a proffessor, who writes books in english and has an enormous vocabulary - it is just not his everyday spoken language. And there ar all those littel things with order of words and wich end of the sentence you choose to start with.

So I comfort my self - my english has not deteriorated in past years. If my aim with knowing the languge is to communicate. If I want to write novels for nativespeaker, then I am screwed of course, but that is not what I need my english for.

Where do you live, in the US?

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

Yes, I do live in USA and my boyfriend is Colombian, so I'm keeping up with Spanish and he keeps up with Russian. :) And I have the strongest impression Russian and Spanish have more in common, than any of those with English.

In fact, as I think of it, English seems like a very marginal language, with it's lack of genders, cases, it's phonetics and so on. Why is it getting international then, if not only for historical reasons? I think in part because of it's unbelivably simple grammar.

I agree, that it's easier to communicate in English between the foreigners, but I disagree that this is simply because you know how the languages work. There are two reasons for that.

First, when I still had big problems communicating, it was the same to talk to just Americans and to Americans, who speak Spanish or French *very* well.

Second, now most of the time I don't have problems communicating, and yes, it's easier with foreigners, but only with *Euro/Latinamerican* foreigners. Probably because we have something in common, whether the language or how our brain works. I have several Arabic and Asian friends, and it's really, really harder to communicate with them than even with Americans. If I don't understand the Polish, the Argentinian or the French person, I can wave my hands, make big eyes, say "wife of bull" instead of "cow" or "underwear for bed" (http://crimeanelf.livejournal.com/22956.html?thread=177580#t177580) instead of "bedsheets" and it will still make it through. But with Arabic/Asian person, if you don't understand each other - that's it. Alas. Waiving hands, playing Crocodile (know this game?) and using allegories won't help. Have you had similar experience with people from that side of the globe?

Speaking of Crocodile, you're given a word and you have to express it with no words, it's fun to play in international company. Somehow international families play this game much, much better than singles or than families of the same origin.

P.S. Sorry I didn't answer earlier, I had a very fascinating RPG to play: "Help My Parents Lay Wooden Floor And Also Paint The Walls Since They Are Old, Sick And Busy, Besides, They Have No Ideas How To Do This (but there is a manual book for you to read, our only beloved dochen'ka)". :)

[kunaifusu.livejournal.com]

There are two intervals of time you can refer with "пока не" - a) from now untill some event happens and b) from the time some event happens and into the future. In your first example you are talking about A. - you are interested in the time before the event of the shop being closed and thus you use past (because it's the event in question is the point zero in time you are talking about things before it) and in the second case you have B, talking about the time after the event of him understanding something hence you use future.

For example look how the meaning changes in the same sentence:
Жарь картошку пока не почернела.
Жарь картошку пока не почернеет.

In first we command to start frying potatoes before they turn black (probably because they are already pealed) and in second we command to fry potatoes till them become charred enough to be black.

[crimeanelf.livejournal.com]

+100

It's an awesome explanation, I think.

[pensant.livejournal.com]

Very good explanation.

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

+1. This is exactly right. Just to elaborate: in case (a) the verb should be in past tense; in case (b), in future tense.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Aha!
thank you!
that makes sence!

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

let me see if I got this right:

1. poka ne + perfect passed = before
2. poka ne + perfect future = until

Like:
1. On mne nravilsya, poka on gluposti ne nachal govorit'.
= I Liked him before he started saying stupid things.
2. Ja budu dedushkoj besedovat', no poka on ne nachnët pro svoyu sobachku rasskazyvat'.
= I will talk with granpa, but only until he starts talking about his dog.

1. Ya vsegda pokupala tam moloko, poka vladelets svoego rebenka ne otravili.
2. Ya tam pokupala moloko, poka vladelets mne ne raznravilsya (hm, is there such a word as raznravit'... it is really hard to come up with examples.:-)

[kunaifusu.livejournal.com]

Yes, this is right. Although in past tense the part after "пока не" is unconditionally in past so your last two examples could be understood in either way.

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

There is the verb "разонравиться". So: "пока владелец мне не разонравился". You have a good feel for the language.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

oh, a "po" aswell? one more prefix! i love them, the more the merrier! :-)
Thanks!

[just1user.livejournal.com]

As nobody referenced any sources, I dare suppose that in first case ( пока не +past ) main clause contains perfective form of verb. In second form, ( пока не +future ) main clause can't be in perfective ( сходи в магазин пока его не закроют - wrong. ходи в магазин ( continuois ), пока его не закроют - ok.
сходи в магазин пока его не закрыли - ok )

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

You're talking about the aspect of the imperatives, I suppose. This is a good question, but first about your examples.

The problem with the sentences you gave is that one cannot put the same sentence in both the ["пока не" + past] and the ["пока не" + future] structure. One of them won't make sense. So, "сходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закры́ли" (mind the comma) is correct; "сходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закро́ют" makes no sense, and "ходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закро́ют" makes sense, sorta: you can translate it as "Keep walking to the store until they have closed it up". ("Ходи́" here expresses repeated, not continuous, motion (keep walking back and forth, keep visiting). Continuous motion would require "иди́", with which the sentence loses meaning.)

Now to grammar.

In the ["пока́ не" + past] structure, the imperative can be either perfective or imperfective. So -

1) Сходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закры́ли (perfective); and
2) Иди́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закры́ли (imperfective)

- are both okay, although 2) sounds a bit more colloquial.

"Ходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закро́ют" - as I said, is grammatically correct, but the meaning is odd. "Cтучи́ в дверь, пока́ не откро́ют" ("keep knocking until they open the door") - this works, though.

Finally, I think you're right: ["пока́ не" + future] can't work with a perfective imperative. Any sentence with this structure implies that one must keep doing something until something else happens. "Keep doing" requires action that's not completed, so the perfective aspect would be wrong here no matter what.

[just1user.livejournal.com]

>"Ходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закро́ют" - as I said, is grammatically correct, but the meaning is odd

Yes. I just tried to make them as similar as possible to emphasize this difference. And I really ment to write 'repetitive'.

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much!

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

You are very welcome. Just as a side note, I kept thinking about the difference between

1) Сходи́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закры́ли (perfective); and
2) Иди́ в магази́н, пока́ его́ не закры́ли (imperfective)

and I have finally realized what it is: 1) is a request, whereas 2) is an order. The change of aspect of the imperative leads to a shift in tone. Nifty!

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

wonderful wonders of grammar ;-)

[olydiagron.livejournal.com]

Vyaliki Dzyakuy!