Oooo.... I don't know what to say.... I appreciate your tutorials so so much. Спасибо Спасибо. I was lost in this language but I have started finding my real self.
Theoretically, yes - but in normal, relaxed speech, ду́маете might sound almost like думайте, because the 2nd to last, unstressed syllable is reduced. In a word like узнаёте, where the ending is stressed, the /j/ sound will normally be pronounced much more clearly.
Hello Lyudmyla, you're welcome to assign it as homework, suggest it for review, or show it in class. (I recently spoke with someone who assigned videos as homework, then showed them in class with the volume down, asking students to narrate what was being shown and why - an interesting idea that had never occurred to me!) The copyright notice is really just to discourage anyone from copying and selling it or representing it as their own. :)
Пойдут (from пойти) is perfective, used for talking about a single action in the future. It’s much more common than будут идти (imperfective), which you might hear when the focus is on describing the action, or something else that happens during the action. For a more complete explanation, this video should help: th-cam.com/video/Xf8du2xBvN4/w-d-xo.html :)
@@russiangrammar May I ask: what about past tense of идти? How do we use that? For instance: Я шёл дому. What would this mean? I walked home? But emphasis on the fact that I was still walking?
Я шёл домой (this is a special form for the sense of 'going home') would give the sense that you "were going," "were on the way..."; there's no focus on setting out, or arriving, just the action in progress. This usage often sets the scene for something else, like English "I was on my way home..." Here's a video on using идти and ехать in the past: th-cam.com/video/fZk84UNRNFk/w-d-xo.html
1. пошёл: ‘He went to the cinema’ 2. ходил: ‘Yesterday he went to the cinema» When you are describing the location of the person you are always specifying things like: • He is still at the cinema • He is already back Is this rather rhetorical, essentially always depending on the situation? Of course, if you can ask somebody in person, they obviously have to be here with you now, but when talking about a third person? 1. пошёл: Is this person still at the cinema? To establish a uni-directional motion the answer must be YES, otherwise it would not be uni-directional. 2. ходил: The person is not at the cinema anymore because it is a multi-directional verb form, but does the person have to be back? Where is back? Where did the action start out from? I am wondering, wheter there’s a more ‘general’ way of describing what the result of a uni-directional vs. multi-directional motion means? BTW: Your contributions are brilliant. Extensive but concise, fast paced but not fuzzy, clear to the point, etc. I think I’ve been asking a lot of questions but never really said thank you 😅 But I guess, when people are engaging with your content, that’s the most flattering compliment you can possibly get, though only silent ;-) Wasn’t it you who said in another video that “Imitation is the highest form of flattery” ? I guess ‘participation’ is not far off… Thanks again!
Your thoughtful questions lead us to a point perhaps not emphasized enough: the choice (of ходить vs идти/пойти, etc) is often a matter of the context of a narrative (not just objective facts of where someone is). Где был Толя вчера вечером? -Он ходил на концерт. We use ходить since he's no longer at the concert. He may have returned home, he may be somewhere else, we may not know; but we can assume he's not still at the concert, so the multidirectional ходить makes sense. Где был Толя вчера вечером? -Сразу после лекции он пошёл на концерт, а потом - не знаю, он не звонил. "Right after the lecture he went to a concert, but then, I don't know, he didn't call." In this narrative we have in mind that he headed off to a concert (one direction!); but we don't specify where he is now (maybe at Olya's, maybe even back at home, or maybe we're worried because we don't know). |--> .... Note that пошёл specifies setting out, heading off, the start of motion - not necessarily arrival! Он пошёл в кино = he went to the movies (he could still be on his way, or still there, we may not know or care). Она поехала в Испанию could mean she's still there, or could be just be the start of a story of her trip there. We'd need more context to flesh it out. Participation with interesting, probing, challenging questions does indeed warm a teacher's heart. So thank you for this! ☺️
Your three paragraphs show exactly the ONE hard thing to understand. We do have three points of reference • The starting point where the actor heads off • The assumed target position • Everything after that Your first paragraph with ходить tells us definitely that the actor is beyond the target position, so it’s not unidirectional anymore. Check! The third paragraph says that the actor is either somewhere between the starting point and the assumed target position or after having arrived still at the target position, we don’t know. But it is definitely uni-directional because the actor did not cross the red line to go beyond the target position. Check! But the second paragraph is the challenge. If we are admitting that we don’t know where he could have gone after the concert and even caring whether something happened to him because he didn’t call, aren’t we acknowledging that he must have crossed the red line and must have stepped beyond the target position, and therefore ходить would be more appropriate, because it’s not a ‘straight-line’ unidirectional motion anymore. At least that’s what the context is telling us. I would have imagined that there is no blurry line and that you are • either between the two clearly defined points (or respectively at the target point) • or you are beyond that From the moment the actor leaves the starting point we can never know where s/he actually is because we didn’t go with them. So the actual current position will always be an unknown variable. Could be before the target position, at the target position or even after. Everything is speculation, as it were! So that begs the question which fact is eventually the real deciding factor whether to use the unidirectional or the multidirectional version of the verb? Is it our interpretation, our assumption, of whether the actor has passed the red line, the end of the concert? What else is available to us that could help us in the decision making? I don’t see any other helpful hidden hint! That would imply that as soon as we assume the actor has crossed this line we had to use a multidirectional verb.
Hoping I've understood your question correctly... In the 2nd paragraph, using пошёл doesn't acknowledge he reached (or left) the destination (if that's what you mean by 'red line'?); it states someone has "set off" in one general direction, the motion has begun, and nothing else. You can also use пойти or поехать to describe separate "legs" of a trip (я пошёл в библиотеку, потом пошёл в кафе, потом на концерт...). If we know, or assume the person has made a round trip, we express that action with multidirectional ходить. Please let me know if I'm missing something! :)
Sorry for the misunderstanding, but I wasn’t actually referring to the verb per se, but rather to your mental map: “Right after the lecture he went to a concert, but then, I don’t know… “ To me it sounded like the ‘but then’ followed up on ‘the concert’. That was what I meant by acknowledging the fact that the concert (the target destination / the red line between unidirectional and multidirectional ;-) was over or at least in the mental past, and you where thinking what could have happened to the actor afterwards. But it seems that with ‘but then’ you were referring to the point ‘he went off (wherever, it does not matter)’ -> but then, after he had left, you didn’t know… And that is clearly happening before the target position (the concert). This makes sense now ;-) So the second paragraph does actually explain the same pattern than the third paragraph. I was under the impression that the second paragraph is some kind of ‘hybrid overlap’ that is referencing both sides of the ‘red line’ (before the concert and after the concert). Thanks for clarifying. I hope I could bring across my perceived layout of the mental map you provided.
То есть, "поиду" - СВ форм глагола "иду", итак "он шёл" невозможно, потому что мы используем "он ходил"? Я знаю, что "идти" и "ходить" НСВ глагол но "ходить" для (за?) обычные веши а идти нет. Поэтому если "пошёл" для (за?) одноя раза веши, "шёл" бы использовается для обычные веши но у нас есть "ходил" (?)😮
'Ходить' обозначает действие туда и обратно, или без цели. "Мы ходили (НСВ) в театр" - we went to the theater (we're now home again). "Он ходил (НСВ) по городу" - he walked around town. Он пошёл (СВ) домой в 6. He went home at 6. Он не вернулся сюда, может быть он дома, но во всяком случае его здесь уже нет. Когда он шёл (НСВ) домой, он позвонил Маше. - While he was on his way home, he called Masha. Тут мы описываем действие в одну сторону - this is motion in progress (that's why it's НСВ), and in one direction (that's why we use past of идти, not ходить).
Do you mean the audio delivery? Yes, my narration teachers have been encouraging me to slow down, I'm working on it! Perhaps the subtitles will help. If you mean that the presentation of material is fast, be sure to watch the related videos; don't worry about mastering the entire system at once - take the concepts one at a time; and feel free to ask specific questions. 🙂
Absolutely the best channel teaching Russian grammar and nuance on YT. Thank you so much for all your videos.
Спасибо! ))
Thank you for these videos, please continue to make them.
I love your videos, thank you for making them!
Пожалуйста! )
Oooo.... I don't know what to say.... I appreciate your tutorials so so much. Спасибо Спасибо. I was lost in this language but I have started finding my real self.
Спасибо за Вашу работу! Я делюсь Вашими видео. Это лучшее, что я видела 👌!
Nice layout and animations) More complex subjects with illustrations would come in handy too
I have pronunciation question. In verb endings, like Думаете, is the unstressed Е pronounced with the (j) sound like дума(j)ете?
Theoretically, yes - but in normal, relaxed speech, ду́маете might sound almost like думайте, because the 2nd to last, unstressed syllable is reduced. In a word like узнаёте, where the ending is stressed, the /j/ sound will normally be pronounced much more clearly.
Okay thank you! Your videos are extremely helpful and professional
Great video, super clear! May I ask you what editing program do you use to edit these videos?
I record audio in Reaper, use Keynote for the slides, and then put them together & adjust timing in Screenflow. :)
This is extremely helpful to digest the differences of verbs of motion.
Спасибо за объяснение
Great video! My question: "All rights reserved"- as a teacher, how I am I to use it for educational purposes? Thank you.
Hello Lyudmyla, you're welcome to assign it as homework, suggest it for review, or show it in class. (I recently spoke with someone who assigned videos as homework, then showed them in class with the volume down, asking students to narrate what was being shown and why - an interesting idea that had never occurred to me!) The copyright notice is really just to discourage anyone from copying and selling it or representing it as their own. :)
Эти видео очень круто, спасибо большое :)
I used пошёл so much and didn't know what it meant or how to use it
I would like to ask the difference between идти and пойти, especially in the future, like "будут идти́ or пойду́т".
Пойдут (from пойти) is perfective, used for talking about a single action in the future. It’s much more common than будут идти (imperfective), which you might hear when the focus is on describing the action, or something else that happens during the action. For a more complete explanation, this video should help: th-cam.com/video/Xf8du2xBvN4/w-d-xo.html :)
@@russiangrammar Thank you. These things are hard to explain using English, but you manage to make you videos short and informative.
@@russiangrammar May I ask: what about past tense of идти? How do we use that? For instance:
Я шёл дому.
What would this mean? I walked home? But emphasis on the fact that I was still walking?
Я шёл домой (this is a special form for the sense of 'going home') would give the sense that you "were going," "were on the way..."; there's no focus on setting out, or arriving, just the action in progress. This usage often sets the scene for something else, like English "I was on my way home..." Here's a video on using идти and ехать in the past: th-cam.com/video/fZk84UNRNFk/w-d-xo.html
@@russiangrammar Ah yes, I realised I used дому for some strange reason...
But now I see how it is used. Thank you, Mr Curtis Ford!
The Best!
1. пошёл: ‘He went to the cinema’
2. ходил: ‘Yesterday he went to the cinema»
When you are describing the location of the person you are always specifying things like:
• He is still at the cinema
• He is already back
Is this rather rhetorical, essentially always depending on the situation?
Of course, if you can ask somebody in person, they obviously have to be here with you now, but when talking about a third person?
1. пошёл: Is this person still at the cinema? To establish a uni-directional motion the answer must be YES, otherwise it would not be uni-directional.
2. ходил: The person is not at the cinema anymore because it is a multi-directional verb form, but does the person have to be back? Where is back? Where did the action start out from?
I am wondering, wheter there’s a more ‘general’ way of describing what the result of a uni-directional vs. multi-directional motion means?
BTW: Your contributions are brilliant. Extensive but concise, fast paced but not fuzzy, clear to the point, etc.
I think I’ve been asking a lot of questions but never really said thank you 😅
But I guess, when people are engaging with your content, that’s the most flattering compliment you can possibly get, though only silent ;-)
Wasn’t it you who said in another video that “Imitation is the highest form of flattery” ?
I guess ‘participation’ is not far off…
Thanks again!
Your thoughtful questions lead us to a point perhaps not emphasized enough: the choice (of ходить vs идти/пойти, etc) is often a matter of the context of a narrative (not just objective facts of where someone is).
Где был Толя вчера вечером? -Он ходил на концерт. We use ходить since he's no longer at the concert. He may have returned home, he may be somewhere else, we may not know; but we can assume he's not still at the concert, so the multidirectional ходить makes sense.
Где был Толя вчера вечером? -Сразу после лекции он пошёл на концерт, а потом - не знаю, он не звонил. "Right after the lecture he went to a concert, but then, I don't know, he didn't call." In this narrative we have in mind that he headed off to a concert (one direction!); but we don't specify where he is now (maybe at Olya's, maybe even back at home, or maybe we're worried because we don't know). |--> ....
Note that пошёл specifies setting out, heading off, the start of motion - not necessarily arrival! Он пошёл в кино = he went to the movies (he could still be on his way, or still there, we may not know or care). Она поехала в Испанию could mean she's still there, or could be just be the start of a story of her trip there. We'd need more context to flesh it out.
Participation with interesting, probing, challenging questions does indeed warm a teacher's heart. So thank you for this!
☺️
Your three paragraphs show exactly the ONE hard thing to understand.
We do have three points of reference
• The starting point where the actor heads off
• The assumed target position
• Everything after that
Your first paragraph with ходить tells us definitely that the actor is beyond the target position,
so it’s not unidirectional anymore. Check!
The third paragraph says that the actor is either somewhere between the starting point and the
assumed target position or after having arrived still at the target position, we don’t know. But it
is definitely uni-directional because the actor did not cross the red line to go beyond the target
position. Check!
But the second paragraph is the challenge. If we are admitting that we don’t know where he could
have gone after the concert and even caring whether something happened to him because he didn’t
call, aren’t we acknowledging that he must have crossed the red line and must have stepped beyond
the target position, and therefore ходить would be more appropriate, because it’s not a ‘straight-line’
unidirectional motion anymore. At least that’s what the context is telling us.
I would have imagined that there is no blurry line and that you are
• either between the two clearly defined points (or respectively at the target point)
• or you are beyond that
From the moment the actor leaves the starting point we can never know where s/he actually is because
we didn’t go with them. So the actual current position will always be an unknown variable. Could be before
the target position, at the target position or even after. Everything is speculation, as it were!
So that begs the question which fact is eventually the real deciding factor whether to use the
unidirectional or the multidirectional version of the verb?
Is it our interpretation, our assumption, of whether the actor has passed the red line, the end of the concert?
What else is available to us that could help us in the decision making? I don’t see any other helpful hidden hint!
That would imply that as soon as we assume the actor has crossed this line we had to use a multidirectional verb.
Hoping I've understood your question correctly... In the 2nd paragraph, using пошёл doesn't acknowledge he reached (or left) the destination (if that's what you mean by 'red line'?); it states someone has "set off" in one general direction, the motion has begun, and nothing else. You can also use пойти or поехать to describe separate "legs" of a trip (я пошёл в библиотеку, потом пошёл в кафе, потом на концерт...). If we know, or assume the person has made a round trip, we express that action with multidirectional ходить. Please let me know if I'm missing something! :)
Sorry for the misunderstanding, but I wasn’t actually referring to the verb per se, but rather to your mental map:
“Right after the lecture he went to a concert, but then, I don’t know… “
To me it sounded like the ‘but then’ followed up on ‘the concert’. That was what I meant
by acknowledging the fact that the concert (the target destination / the red line between
unidirectional and multidirectional ;-) was over or at least in the mental past, and you
where thinking what could have happened to the actor afterwards.
But it seems that with ‘but then’ you were referring to the point ‘he went off
(wherever, it does not matter)’ -> but then, after he had left, you didn’t know…
And that is clearly happening before the target position (the concert). This makes sense now ;-)
So the second paragraph does actually explain the same pattern than the third paragraph.
I was under the impression that the second paragraph is some kind of ‘hybrid overlap’ that is
referencing both sides of the ‘red line’ (before the concert and after the concert).
Thanks for clarifying. I hope I could bring across my perceived layout of the mental map you provided.
Great =)
То есть, "поиду" - СВ форм глагола "иду", итак "он шёл" невозможно, потому что мы используем "он ходил"?
Я знаю, что "идти" и "ходить" НСВ глагол но "ходить" для (за?) обычные веши а идти нет. Поэтому если "пошёл" для (за?) одноя раза веши, "шёл" бы использовается для обычные веши но у нас есть "ходил" (?)😮
'Ходить' обозначает действие туда и обратно, или без цели. "Мы ходили (НСВ) в театр" - we went to the theater (we're now home again). "Он ходил (НСВ) по городу" - he walked around town.
Он пошёл (СВ) домой в 6. He went home at 6. Он не вернулся сюда, может быть он дома, но во всяком случае его здесь уже нет.
Когда он шёл (НСВ) домой, он позвонил Маше. - While he was on his way home, he called Masha. Тут мы описываем действие в одну сторону - this is motion in progress (that's why it's НСВ), and in one direction (that's why we use past of идти, not ходить).
@@russiangrammar теперь я понимаю. Спасибо большое!
Are you in a hurry??? Too fast....
Do you mean the audio delivery? Yes, my narration teachers have been encouraging me to slow down, I'm working on it! Perhaps the subtitles will help. If you mean that the presentation of material is fast, be sure to watch the related videos; don't worry about mastering the entire system at once - take the concepts one at a time; and feel free to ask specific questions. 🙂