Learn Russian

Could one mean "I am not buying bread" (at this moment) whereas the second sentence means "I don't buy bread" (as in, "I never buy bread.")
Yes, this is correct.

If not, how would a Russian express these different connotations? Perhaps, to convey the difference, in Russian, you must use the word никогда.
никогда can make the phrase clearer if it isn't already.
For example, you can answer the question about your shopping habits without никогда, but when you start the discussion you would use никогда.

As for your second example: the second form isn't incorrect (I can imagine it in a book), but it doesn't mean (the child never drops the ball), because "мяча" would mean the, maybe also because мяч can't be used as uncountable (хлеб can be).
It can be used to indicate the boy is not dropping the ball (at this moment) even though he is supposed to, in a book, not in speech.

From:

khathi.livejournal.com

because мяч can't be used as uncountable (хлеб can be).
It is called "mass noun" in English.

From:

Thanks, didn't know that.

From:

As of хлеб, I agree with alamar.

As of the child and the ball, the second sentence (ребенок бросает мяча) can never be used in literary language. This pattern is only used with animate objects (including animals). Ребенок бросает кошку
but
Ребенок бросает мяч

From:

I agree it can't be used as "Ребенок бросает мяча" :)
But I think that "Ребенок не бросает меча" can be used in literary language.

I've pretty sure I've seen such constructs when reading Oldie (Олди) books, and they did never seem incorrect to me. It's weird, yeah.

From:

qwertyflo.livejournal.com

It is same. If you can't say "ребенок бросает мяча", then you can't say "ребенок не бросает мяча". There is not change a case - accusative.

From:

You can't say so (мяча) in this particular example, but you can imagine similar grammatical constructs with other words and other situations where мяча would be quite acceptable in negatives.
Я не отдам вам своего пистолета!, for instance.
As I wrote in another comment below, пистолет is still more recommendable for foreign speakers.

From:

Yes, you're right, it's sometimes acceptable in negative sentences, but I still think мяч is more recommendable than мяча even in negatives. The former form is always correct, while the latter has some nuances that can't be described in grammar rules.

From:

I understand what you're saying, but you're example sentences are not negative. Specifically, I'm only talking about negative sentence construction where "не" is used, not "нет".

More examples:

Я не хочу сочувствие.
Я не хочу сочувствия.

Are both these sentences grammatically correct? And, if so, do they convey different meanings?

Maybe the first one means:
"I don't want the sympathy." as in you are currently giving me sympathy and I don't want it.

Maybe the second one means:
"I don't want sympathy." as in "I don't ever want any sympathy - not from you, not from anybody - never!"

Apparently there is some confusion on this matter since I found a book written on this topic alone.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/304861

I found another example of what I'm trying to address:
http://people.umass.edu/partee/docs/Barcelona%202005%20Gen%20Neg.pdf

Он не получил письмо.
Он не получил письма.

The author says that the first sentence means, "He didn't receive the letter" whereas the second sentence means, "He didn't receive a letter."

I'm starting to think that the genitive construction for the direct object in a negative sentence depends on whether it is a specific statement (i.e. the letter) or a general statement (i.e. a letter).

Oddly, it seems that this is only an issue in negative sentences.

Он получил письмо, for instance, could mean either "He received the letter" (the specific letter he was waiting for) -or- "He received a letter." (No specific letter) This makes me wonder how a Russian would convey the difference in meaning.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

From:

malim-praedari.livejournal.com

Я не хочу сочувствие.
Я не хочу сочувствия.

Are both these sentences grammatically correct? And, if so, do they convey different meanings?

The first of these, while technically correct, sounds weird. I would say "я не хочу сочувствия" pretty much in all cases. If an additional word imparted the sense of specificity to "сочувствие" (e.g. "ваше сочувствие"), I'd use a slightly different construction: "Мне не нужно ваше сочувствие".

Он получил письмо, for instance, could mean either "He received the letter" (the specific letter he was waiting for) -or- "He received a letter." (No specific letter) This makes me wonder how a Russian would convey the difference in meaning.

It can indeed mean both. You figure out which one it is from the context. If I wanted specifically to convey the difference, I'd add modifiers, such as "его письмо", "это письмо", "какое-то письмо" etc.

From:

Я не хочу сочувствие.
Я не хочу сочувствия.

First variant is unacceptable and is never used.

You can imagine it this way: when in genetive case, the word is treated by its general, collective or background meaning, while in dative case the word means exactly the object. That's why you can use both variants when it's possible, e.g. you can say

Он не опустит меча (meaning - He will not surrender) AND
Он не опустит меч (meaning - He will not lower his sword),
or

Он не получил письмо (He didn't receive THE letter) AND
Он не получил [ни одного/того самого] письма (He did not receive [a]/[any/that] letter
(you can use first only if you have some information on contents: ...которым его приглашали на свадьбу его друзья).

But if the subject means exactly what it is, then you have to use dative case only:
Он не вынес мусор
Он не почистил картошку (Still, there are half-official, popular forms 'начистил картошки', 'нарубил дров', etc.)

Opposite, when the word cant be treated in direct meaning, only genetive case is used:
Я не хочу позора
Я не хочу вашего сочувствия (because you can't deliver me 'сочувствие' in a box),

but don't mess this up with a 'Мне не нужно сочувствие/сочувствия' where both variants are actual, because the word 'сочувствие' is subject here.

From:

Sorry, I messed up dative and accusative cases, but all other is correct.

From:

You can imagine it this way: when in genetive case, the word is treated by its general, collective or background meaning, while in dative case the word means exactly the object. That's why you can use both variants when it's possible,

devitor,

When you say "dative", don't you mean accusative?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

From:

devitor,

You seem to have a firm handle on this grammatical nuance.

Is this all unique to negative sentence structure?

In other words, are both these correct?

Он опустит меча
Он опустит меч

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

From:

No, only the second one.

From:

Yes, this is unique to negotiations. Meaning, "Он опустит меч" is correct, while "Он опустит меча" is not.

From:

You know, "Он не вынес мусора" would be pretty correct too, "He couldn't stand the garbage" :))

From:

ex-desbaraj.livejournal.com

"He couldn't stand the policeman" even.

From:

kunaifusu.livejournal.com

The articles are the right way to approach this I think, as you know Russian does not have articles yet there is a need to express their function. However it's tricky. For once, even though generally you would think "Он не получил письма" is indeed "He did not receive a letter" in the sentence like "Ему послали письмо, но он не получил письма в срок" it is definitely "the letter". Or consider this:
"Он не получил это письмо" and "Он не получил этого письма" both mean "the letter" explicitly however the meaning is slightly different, the accusative still convey sense of a singular object, so the former sentence has a tone of "He did not receive this letter only, we don't know about the other letters" while genitive gives sense of "one of many" thus the later sentence could mean "He did not receive this letter as well as any other letters". It's only a tone though, nothing concrete.

From:

Sorry, bold was not intended:

In a general statement, you should use plural - Он не получал писем. The sentence Он не получил писем, however, is a specific statement again (the letters).

From:

kunaifusu.livejournal.com

I agree, if you are talking about not receiving any letters at all you should be using plural but this is besides the case of distinguishing between accusative and genitive cases.

From:

About 'the letter' case, I think it's a complicated one and can be treated as an exception, where both variants are actual. Articles are right, I think.

Also, there is another nuance: when the action is not to stretch or not to throw smth. away, you can also use both form, and accusative case used as 'cold and formal' informing while genetive used to bring emotions inside and generally is more preferable:

Он не бросил мяч [generally, any carriable object] / Он не бросил мяча (meaning 'he still holds it tight')
Он не подал руку / Он не подал руки (meaning: he ignores person intentionally)

From:

I'm only talking about negative sentence construction where "не" is used, not "нет".
I'm also talking about "не".

Я не хочу сочувствие.
Я не хочу сочувствия.

You can only use the second version. The first one can never be used.

Он не получил письмо.
Он не получил письма.

The first sentence is correct. The second is not. The correct construction for the second sentence is Он не получал письма. Both statements are specific.
In a general statement, you should use plural - Он не получал писем. The sentence Он не получил писем, however, is a specific statement again (the letters).

From:

I'm sorry, Он не получил письма is also correct, though. But I would avoid it in literary language (in this sentence at least).
Он не получил письма sounds clumsy, while Письма он так и не получил, for instance, sounds absolutely OK. But IMHO details like can scarcely be studied at the level of grammar rules.

(deleted comment)

From:

You mix up the genitive (не бросает мяча) and the accusative (бросает кошку).

No, I don't. Он не бросает мяч and Он не бросает кошку are the only correct sentences, and both are accusative.

From:

qwertyflo.livejournal.com

If you have not a context, you can use both versions. But if you have it you must be careful) For example:
Я не покупаю хлеб, потому что я на диете.
Я не покубаю хлеба больше, чем мне нужно на один день.

Ребенок не бросает мяч. - use it, it right in any case)

But if there is "нет" in sentence, you can and must say "мяча"
У ребенка нет мяча. The child have not a ball.

From:

У ребенка нет мяча is an absolutely different case.

From:

ennuiescapist.livejournal.com

Perhaps you're confusing the genitive circumstance a little bit, in this instance? You always use genitive in the absence of something, i.e., with the word "нет". "Не" is a bit different.

Нет хлеба.
Нет красивых девушек.

From:

http://users.livejournal.com/antiquer_/

It has to do with animate and inanimate. The ending "a" would have been used if хлеб and мяч were animate. And if you want to be literate, you should stick to the rule

From:

You're only half right - I mean, one can safely use accusative form. See my posts above.

From:

nadyezhda.livejournal.com

Also, be careful to not get tripped up by partitive genitive: I am buying some bread, etc. The classic example is "would you like some wine?" and you need to know the difference between "some" (a glass) vs. the whole bottle.

From:

firebottle.livejournal.com

In most cases you need the accusative case - "я не покупаю (кого? что?) хлеб".

From:

ex-desbaraj.livejournal.com

In negative sentences with abstract nouns we use the Genetive more frequently. Чувство, разница, гордость, любовь, смысл.

And we use the Genetive when something was expected, but in vain, there is no (or "I don't buy" or "I didn't receive") such thing. The Genetive shows that the thing could be expected. ABSENCE.

Ребенок не бросает мяча. The focus is not on the absence of the ball. So, it's incorrect.
If you said "Ребенок не видит мяча, не получил мяча" и т.д. - it would be correct, but it's an option here.

Ребенок не взял мяча.- Sounds weird, as if the ball were animate. Because the ball must exist, and there can't be absence of the ball. The focus is on the boy's fault or choice or sth like that...

(sorry for my English)

From:

You can say "Боец не бросил автомата" - this will enforce the meaning, "he carries it at any price". So, except for this enforcing purpose, I think you are right.

From:

ex-desbaraj.livejournal.com

Thank you. I forgot about this. To be honest, I hardly remember anything about negations with the Genetive. This 2nd case is a dark area :)

From: