# Ukrainian: бути



## arhall2

I'm just starting out with Ukrainian and am having some trouble with the verb *бути. *I have found a conjugation of it as follows:  я єсьм, ти єси, and so on.  I have also read that this is not used much and that people tend to only use "є" for all of them.  I have also read some things that just leave out the verb.  For example, I am happy would be Я щасливий or I am tall would be Я високий:  subject and adjective only.  Could anyone explain to me how this actually works?  I basically want to find out how the verb is used in simple present tense statements like I am__________, she is ______________, we are ____________.  Thanks for any help!


----------



## Orlin

Yes, Ukrainian doesn't normally use copula in the present tense (in fact I don't speak Ukrainian and only know something about it and can understand it being a Russian non-native speaker) and thus we have _Я_ _високий/висока _(male/female speaker), _Вона висока_, _Ми високi_ etc. (only sublect and predicative, the predicative agrees with the subject in gender and number). As far as I know, this model is the same in all East Slavic languages. Please correct me if necessary.


----------



## arhall2

Thank you so much for the response.  Is бути the only common verb that does this, or are there others that are only subject/ predicate with no linking verb?


----------



## Orlin

arhall2 said:


> Thank you so much for the response. Is бути the only common verb that does this, or are there others that are only subject/ predicate with no linking verb?


I don't understand what you're actually asking but I'd say:
1. I don't know about Ukrainian, but in Russian there are other verbs that can serve as copulas (like in English, where _to be_ is *not* the only possible linking verb) and these verbs are conjugated normally. It probably applies to Ukrainian.
2. In all constructions other than subject-copula-predicative, all *imperfective *verbs can be used in the present tense (valid for all East and West Slavic languages).


----------



## Selyd

Вітаю, *arhall2*!
Щодо дієслова *бути*. Покажу на прикладах.
Теперішній час:
_Не_ _вживається_ - *Я (є) математик. Ти (є) лікар. Вони (є) старанні.*
В поезії _вживається_ - *Ми є народ, якого правди сила ...*
В мовленні _вживається_, якщо акцентується - *То є таке стерво!*
В звичайній функції - *У мене є книга з української граматики. В тому магазині є багато свіжих фруктів.*
В інших часах опускати не можна:
*Він був гарним лікарем. Цей хлопчина буде неабияким математиком.*
Щодо *"я єсьм, ти єси"* - в побуті ніколи не вживається, тільки в поезії чи художніх творах. *Що ти за сила єси? - питали.* Здається в Карпатах (гори)
є вираз *Не суть (*_Не є_*) - *Тобто* немає.*
Може згодиться, перемагай! До послуг.


----------



## oleksii

я єсьм, ти єси - are rather old-Slavic forms, and they are not used in modern spoken or written language. The only exception perhaps is usage in poetry or religious texts, just like old-English "thou art" or "thou beest".  As for бути (infinitive) and є (present), sometimes (very rare) it does not get omitted in constructions like "Я є письменник" (I'm a writer), in particular people in Western Ukraine sometimes do use  it in such context. The rule of thumb here is - simply always omit it, you won't be mistaken. BUT, as Selyd said, it can be omitted only in present tense.


----------



## Deem-A

Right,in contemporary Ukrainian remained only the form є


----------



## Selyd

Deem-A said:


> Right,in contemporary Ukrainian remained only the form є


Не так категорично.
Див. 
В мовленні _вживається_, якщо акцентується - *То є таке стерво!*
*Та справа є доведена до такої плутанини, що й годі.*
Або повчально - *Він є вчитель - мусиш його слухатися.*
Українській властиве використання різноманітних ресурсів мови, не нехтування ними. Це свідчить про те, що мову використовує автохтон. А не той, хто її сприйняв.
(Ukrainian use of various resources of language, not neglect by them is peculiar. This certificate that language is used by the radical inhabitant. Not the one who it has apprehended.)


----------



## ectuohy

My Ukrainian teacher explained the dropping of "to be" in the present this way:

When the cartoon character says "Me Tarzan, you Jane," we understand exactly what he means. It sounds "weird" to us, but the addition of the linking verb (or "copula" to use the technical term) doesn't really add any new information. So Ukrainian just skips it altogether. "Я Тарзан, а ти Джейн" is a perfectly grammatical sentence.

The forms you mention  did in fact once feature in the language, but have (except for the rare examples cited by the above commenters) dropped out of the language entirely. It should be noted that Polish, Slovak still DO use "to be" in the present tense, and it's no coincidence that one can hear these or similar forms in the dialects spoken in rural parts of Ukraine near the borders with those countries.

Great to see another American learning Ukrainian--definitely come back and ask more questions!


----------



## jazyk

> that Polish, Slovak still DO use "to be" in the present tense,


Among Slavic languages, probably only the Eastern ones (Russian, Belorussian and Ukrainian) don't use the verb to be in the present tense, all others do.


----------



## Selyd

ectuohy said:


> my ukrainian teacher explained the dropping of "to be" in the present this way:
> 
> When the cartoon character says "me tarzan, you jane," we understand exactly what he means. It sounds "weird" to us, but the addition of the linking verb (or "copula" to use the technical term) doesn't really add any new information. So ukrainian just skips it altogether. "Я Тарзан, а ти Джейн" is a perfectly grammatical sentence.
> 
> The forms you mention did in fact once feature in the language, but have (except for the rare examples cited by the above commenters) dropped out of the language entirely. It should be noted that polish, slovak still do use "to be" in the present tense, and it's no coincidence that one can hear these or similar forms in the dialects spoken in rural parts of ukraine near the borders with those countries.
> 
> Great to see another american learning ukrainian--definitely come back and ask more questions!


 
На мою думку випадання в теперішньому часі дієслова  *бути*  відбулося із-за декількох причин
 -ламає мелодику
 - щодо першої особи надає надлишкової пишноти висловлюванню, а це зазвичай не властиве пересічним людям
 - напливає двозначність висловлювання (означення та наявність).
*Ще раз підкреслюю, що залишилося у вузькому використанні.*


----------



## Tjahzi

arhall2 said:


> Thank you so much for the response.  Is бути the only common verb that does this, or are there others that are only subject/ predicate with no linking verb?



No, _to be_ is the only verb that's omitted on a regular basis. As such, whenever you see a pronoun followed by a noun (both in the nominative case), it means _x is y_. When the first word is also a noun (and not a pronoun), Russian uses a — in between (_мальчик _—_ студент, the boy is a student_), but I'm not sure if that goes for Ukrainian as well.


----------



## Selyd

tjahzi said:


> but i'm not sure if that goes for ukrainian as well.


 Для мальчика быть студентом круто.
В украинском тоже *Він - студент.*


----------



## tyhryk

Orlin said:


> Yes, Ukrainian doesn't normally use copula in the present tense (in fact I don't speak Ukrainian and only know something about it and can understand it being a Russian non-native speaker) and thus we have _Я_ _високий/висока _(male/female speaker), _Вона висока_, _Ми високi_ etc. (only sublect and predicative, the predicative agrees with the subject in gender and number). As far as I know, this model is the same in all East Slavic languages. Please correct me if necessary.


Орлін правий. 
Дякую за гарне пояснення, Орліне.


----------



## francisgranada

jazyk said:


> Among Slavic languages, probably only the Eastern ones (Russian, Belorussian and Ukrainian) don't use the verb to be in the present tense, all others do.



I agree. But the proper phenomenon, at least partially,  exists in the western slavic languages, too (in dialects but also in the colloquial speach).

Examples from an eastern Slovak dialect:
_Ja učiteľ _  (I am a teacher)
_Vun ňedobry čľovek_   (He is not a good man)
_My tyž ľudze_  (We are also people)
_Mi (ja) bul_ (I was, instead of the standard Slovak _ja som bol_)

Similar constructions can be found also in the Polish and Czech languages (though I don't know whether they are "officially" considered incorrect or not).


----------



## savetier

francisgranada said:


> Similar constructions can be found also in the Polish and Czech languages (though I don't know whether they are "officially" considered incorrect or not).



Yes, also in Polish you can drop the copola, but in literature language it is only allowed in constructions like: 

 Piotr jest dobrym człowiekiem = Piotr, to dobry człowiek.
[Peter is a good person]


----------



## Ukrainito

I believe the omission of the copula *быть/бути* in the present tense found in modern East Slavic languages may have to do with that fact that, for centuries, our ancestors had a lot of contacts with various Turkic-speaking peoples (Tatars, Turks). The *to-be *copula is not found in the present tense in either Turkish or Tatar.


----------



## er targyn

It's unlikely.


----------



## iobyo

Do East Slavic languages allow for inversion?

Could _книга хорошая _also be interpreted as 'a good book'?


----------



## Ukrainito

iobyo said:


> Do East Slavic languages allow for inversion?
> Could _книга хорошая _also be interpreted as 'a good book'?



Theoretically, it's possible. However, in practive, the *noun+adjective*, as in the above example, is percieved as a phrase with the omitted copula rather than a simple word combination.

*хорошая книга = добра книга = (a) good book

книга хорошая = книга(та) е добра = (the) book is good
*


----------



## jazyk

> Similar constructions can be found also in the Polish and Czech  languages (though I don't know whether they are "officially" considered  incorrect or not).


I hear this in Czech only in the past tense with an expressed subject: My tam byli. Já nebyl spokojený, etc. It's not considered standard, though.


----------

