Still working on those participles

[david-us.livejournal.com]

I just ran across these two sentences in my text (still working on those participles):

Я увидел его отдыхающим на пляже.

Я увидел Олега, отдыхающего на пляже.

The use of the instrumental in the first sentence is a mystery to me. The second sentence makes perfect sense. With regards to the first sentence, the text has the following note, "... after a direct object pronoun, the participle is placed in the instrumental case and is not separated from the pronoun by a comma in writing." Is this accurate?

I think I'm going to try and steer clear of these participles when able. It's useful to know/recognize them when reading, however. Just for my own edification - would the following sentence be grammatically correct?

Я увидел Олега, которого отдыхал на пляже.

(ref: Modern Russian II, p.875, but I have the 1965 edition.)

Comments

[oryx_and_crake]

Я увидел Олега, которого отдыхал на пляже is wrong - который has to be in nominative (don't ask why, I have no idea, it's just the way it is), therefore Я увидел Олега, который отдыхал на пляже.

Instrumental can be used in these constructions, indeed. A similar construction is, for example, Я помню его молодым. The explanation is probably that instrumental denotes some transient state while the participial phrase (отдыхающего на пляже) makes some snapshot of a moment, so you won't really know whether this situation still goes on or has changed since. Another similar construction - Мальчиком он начал работать на заводе. (This clearly implies that he is not a boy any more.)

However, please note that all of the above is not a hard rule, just something off the top of my head, an attempt for an explanation.

[archaicos.livejournal.com]

No, it wouldn't. Я увидел Олега, которогоый отдыхал на пляже.

[david-us.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah - I knew that! :)

[archaicos.livejournal.com]

And probably to confuse you even more:
Я увидел Олега, которого (я) знал много лет. :)

[oryx_and_crake]

It actually makes sense: while in the first case Oleg is the actor (Олег отдыхал на пляже), in the second case the narrator is the actor (я не видел Олега много лет). Который agrees with Олег in both cases.

P.S. I found this place in Rosenthal where he explains the instrumental vs. nominative as transient vs. permanent!

http://www.evartist.narod.ru/text1/62.htm#%D0%B7_02, p.3

[archaicos.livejournal.com]

To me the former seems to focus on the process (отдыхающим) while the latter on the state (отдыхающего). But that's just a conjecture. I'd normally prefer the latter, but I can't tell if there's any significant difference.

[oryx_and_crake]

More on instrumental expressing the idea of transient state; my idea is corroborated by the constructions like Мой отец был немец vs. Мой отец был доктором. Немец is a permanent state while доктор is not.

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Hmm.
Его отец был дурак = Его отец был дураком. Both are correct, though this state is quite permanent.
Его отец был неграмотным AND Его отец был неграмотный BOTH sound quite awkward, and I'd recommend a third form here -- Его отец был неграмотен (though this state is quite transitional.)

[oryx_and_crake]

It's not actually my idea, it's Rosenthal's (I gave a link somewhere above).

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Ditmar Elyashevich certainly had to refine this concept a bit more thorough, then.

[ex-daniev500.livejournal.com]

Я увидел Олега, которого отдыхал на пляже is wrong
Я увидел Олега, который отдыхал на пляже is ok

[pigmeich.livejournal.com]

Don't feel bad using '65 book -- nothing really changed, as far as I know. Except for using of "ё". Current official ruling that "ё" can be used only to resolve ambiguity and substituted by "е" in all other cases.

[david-us.livejournal.com]

Is it categorically wrong to use it when there is no possibility of confusion? Couldn't the issue of ambiguity be subjective?

[pigmeich.livejournal.com]

In official use (all kind of banners, formal letters etc) it's categorically wrong. I'm not sure about precise rule, but as rule of thumb: when homonym ambiguity can be resolved by explicit "ё", it should.

There's very young rule: it decreed in 2006 y. (old rules were 1956), so it's completly neutral use or not use "ё" in informal conversation.

[pigmeich.livejournal.com]

Oh, I've forgotten, "Ё" is still pronounced as "ё" even when spelled as "е".

[khathi.livejournal.com]

This rule is so contrived and obscure that nobody bothers to actually follow it.

[oryx_and_crake]

Certainly no one will shoot you for that. Just go on and use ё wherever you think it should be.

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

+1

[archaicos.livejournal.com]

Because of the long substitution of е for ё some words have changed their pronunciation or obtained an alternative one.
See the paragraph right before this one (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%81#.C2.AB.D0.81.C2.BB.2C_.C2.AB.D0.B9.D0.BE.C2.BB_.D0.B8_.C2.AB.D1.8C.D0.BE.C2.BB_.D0.B2_.D0.B7.D0.B0.D0.B8.D0.BC.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.B2.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.8F.D1.85_.D0.B8_.D0.BF.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.B4.D0.B0.D1.87.D0.B5_.D0.B8.D0.BD.D0.BE.D1.8F.D0.B7.D1.8B.D1.87.D0.BD.D1.8B.D1.85_.D1.81.D0.BE.D0.B1.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B2.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.BD.D1.8B.D1.85_.D0.B8.D0.BC.D0.B5.D0.BD) starting with побасёнка and then read from this point (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%81#.D0.9F.D0.BE.D1.81.D0.BB.D0.B5.D0.B4.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B2.D0.B8.D1.8F_.D0.BD.D0.B5.D0.BE.D0.B1.D1.8F.D0.B7.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.B5.D0.BB.D1.8C.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.B3.D0.BE_.D1.83.D0.BF.D0.BE.D1.82.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.B1.D0.BB.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.8F_.D0.B1.D1.83.D0.BA.D0.B2.D1.8B_.C2.AB.D1.91.C2.BB) on. The whole article is quite interesting.

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

Nobody as yet had pointed that out, so I'd like to clarify that , grammatically,

>Я увидел Олега, которого отдыхал на пляже

would mean the following: I saw Oleg, whom I rested on the beach.
As the two verbs here are in the same form, the reader assumes that they both belong to the same object, i.e. the speaker. Я (the speaker) увидел Олега, которого [я=the speaker] отдыхал на пляже. As somebody definitely cannot rest someone, we assume that the relative pronoun (относительное местоимение) "который" shall be in the same form as the pronoun it substitutes for (i.e. "он"). That'll be, "Я увидел Олега. Он отдыхал на пляже". Being put into one complex sentence, those two sentences make "Я увидел Олега, который отдыхал на пляже".

[david-us.livejournal.com]

Does the verb отдыхать have transitive qualities? Is it possible for, Кто-то отдыхает что-то?

Is the following possible? (correct my grammar mistakes, please.)

Утром я обычно встаю и бегаю десять километров, потом я отдыхаю свои ноги.

(I wasn't sure about using "бегаю" or "вегу". It seems like an indefinite construction since I'm not running anywhere in particular.)

Can отдыхать have an object?

If not, what would be the appropriate Russian verb for this sentence?

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

The verb "отдыха́ть" is intransitive. You cannot "отдыхать что-то". Your sentence, when corrected, should read: "У́тром я обы́чно встаю́ и пробега́ю де́сять киломе́тров, пото́м я даю́ отдохну́ть своим нога́м (let [my] feet rest).

About "бе́гаю" vs "бегу́" (not "вегу"): I would use "бегаю" if it's modified by time rather than distance ("встаю и полчаса бегаю"); with distance, the perfective "пробега́ю" seems more appropriate. Can't tell you why; it just sounds better.

Another stylistic comment: Russian uses pronouns much more sparingly than English, so you can safely get rid of the likes of "я" and "свои" in the second clause. That would improve its style.

[wolk-off.livejournal.com]

>Does the verb отдыхать have transitive qualities? Is it possible for, Кто-то отдыхает что-то?

No, it does not.

>Is the following possible? (correct my grammar mistakes, please.) Утром я обычно встаю и бегаю десять километров, потом я отдыхаю свои ноги.

No, it is not possible.

>(I wasn't sure about using "бегаю" or "вегу". It seems like an indefinite construction since I'm not running anywhere in particular.)

Certainly бегаю, and not just because you aren't running anywhere in particular, but because it is an ongoing, continuing process that takes place from time to time and has not yet ended.

>Can отдыхать have an object?

No.

>If not, what would be the appropriate Russian verb for this sentence?

Я даю ногам отдых OR Я даю ногам отдохнуть (this one is stylistically weaker, though still possible.)

Oh boy..

[6-02x10e23.livejournal.com]

I am glad there are many helpful people around and that there are others who have better questions than I have..as I can learn from you all.

Re: Oh boy..

[david-us.livejournal.com]

There are many advanced discussions here that are way over my head. I still enjoy reading them, thought. The vocabulary and esoteric meanings are not consistent with my still attempting to grasp much more rudimentary aspects of the Russian language.

I'm just striving to be functional and somewhat literate in the process. I am so glad I stumbled across this discussion group! I have never seen such knowledgeable individuals who seem to actually enjoy helping neophytes such as myself.