# да так



## wonlon

Однажды сосед Ньютона сказал ему:
— Послушайте, Ньютон, как вы сделали своё открытие, о котором теперь так много говорят?
— *Да так*, обыкновенно. Просто я сидел, а яблоко упало с ветки мне на голову.

One day Newton's neighbour talked to him:
"Hey! Issac, how did you make your discovery, which is now so much talked about?"
"*??? *usually." I just sat there and an apple fell on my head from the branch."

What does  *да так*  as a whole mean?
And what do  *да  *and* так *each mean here ?


----------



## gvozd

This means something like 'nothing special'.


----------



## learnerr

wonlon said:


> What does  *да так*  as a whole and mean?
> And what do  *да  *and* так *each mean here ?


Literally, you can translate it, "but so": "да" means some kind of void "but", as in "да перестань ты шуметь!" (this is said when one loses his or her temper, unlike the title phrase of your thread, that expresses complete serenity), "так" means "so". This "да" does not refer to anything in the real word, it rather means that the speaker is about to start talking for some reason. In the whole, "да так" is synonymous with "обыкновенно", which means "in a non-special way", so the remark goes like this:
'Just so, nothing special. I was sitting, there was an apple, it fell down and struck me in my head.'
The whole text must be either a parody or a demonstration of silliness; of course, Newton would not talk like that.
P.S.: cross-posted.


----------



## Maroseika

wonlon said:


> And what do  *да  *and* так *each mean here ?



Unstressed particle *да *is used in the beginning of the answer to emphasize the next part of the utterance, often it expresses irritation or discontent. Here да emphasize так (like that), but there is no irritation.

Other examples (with irritation):
- Сколько времени?
- Да откуда мне знать? У меня часов нет.

- Да когда ты перестанешь сверлить стену наконец?

- Да зачем я только согласился на эту аферу?


----------



## learnerr

Hi,


Maroseika said:


> Unstressed particle *да *is used in the beginning of the answer to emphasize the next part of the utterance,


Just a remark: the meaning of "the word is used to emphasise ... " is the same as "the word has some meaning, it's up to you to guess what". Useful? – might very well be, but not much. In addition, emphasis is too context-dependent and, what's no less important, too individual, hardly there is any word in Russian that would make emphasis always. You never know what your listener emphasises in what you're saying.
Just some similar examples: in "Семён, не довезёшь ли до Лондона?" the word "Семён" emphasises the request, and in the sentence "мой купленный где-то за городом очень недорого автомобиль лихо обогнал велосипед" the word "обогнал" emphasises "велосипед". Hardly any use in such descriptions; and who knows if for somebody it's not the other way around, the impressive request emphasises the word "Семён".


> [...] often it expresses irritation or discontent.


Also, apart from irritation, discontent, or serenity, it may express someone's feeling irresolute in his answer:
- Почему вы не забрали из дома попугаев?
- Да я не знал...
No emphasis in this case. Or there is. You never know what happens in the head of someone you're talking to.
In case of the phrase about the affair, the word "да" might also mean someone's wondering at his own actions. No emphasis in such case. Or there is. You never know.


----------



## Maroseika

learnerr said:


> Just a remark: the meaning of "the word is used to emphasise ... " is the same as "the word has some meaning



I think the notion of emphasis is quite clear. The utternace with the unstressed particle да in the beginning is more express  than without. What is expressed? Various feelings. The utterance without it also can express feelings, of course, but all in all and all things being equal, it is more neutral.


----------



## learnerr

So, you mean that a sentence with "да" feels more expressive than one without. Now I understand the meaning of your formulation, but the consideration that it tells little about the word remains. For example, the question arises, what is the difference between "да когда ты", "так когда ты", "быстро говори, когда ты", "спустился вниз и сказал, когда ты", etc: they are all different, all similar, and all more expressive than just "когда ты".

Also, there is no guarantee that such role of any word may hold durably for many contexts; it is impossible to believe that the meaning of any such word may be "numerical", especially in relation to the feelings, as we can measure their "extent" only metaphorically, so it must work some other way. No guarantee: for example, in the "I didn't know" phrase, the "да" does not emphasise anything in the sense you described, since just "я не знал..." would sound somewhat out of place, probably because it would mean a different thing.


----------



## Maroseika

"Я не знал" is definitely more neutral than "Да я не знал". What exactly feeling is expressed by да, depends on the context.


----------



## learnerr

Maroseika said:


> "Я не знал" is definitely more neutral than "Да я не знал".


I mean the parrots. There, "я не знал..." would not mean anything (maybe he was starting to explain something about the problems with gas in his apartment, maybe he was starting to talk about MU's victory in the latest match), while "да я не знал..." means he didn't know he should have taken them with him.


----------



## Maroseika

I mean the phrases Я не знал and Да я не знал told about quite the same thing in quite the same situation. All things being the same, the latter is more expressive, the former is more neutral.


----------



## igusarov

learnerr said:


> Also, apart from irritation, discontent, or serenity, it may express someone's feeling irresolute in his answer:


It can... That's why the role of unstressed "да" is called "intensifier". It makes the sentence more emotional. Exactly which emotion is amplified - this is very context-dependent. And yes, there are many other ways to intensify some feeling. Усилительные частицы is only one of them. In the context of wonlon's example, "да" intensifies the feeling of unconcern and indifference, partially introduced by the word "так": "Oh, just so... Nothing special about it".


----------



## learnerr

Maroseika said:
			
		

> I mean the phrases Я не знал and Да я не знал told about quite the same  thing in quite the same situation. All things being the same, the latter  is more expressive, the former is more neutral.


Well, that parrots dialogue highlights both points that I meant. As a reply, "так я не знал" is possible, "да я не знал" is possible, "а я не знал" is possible, all mean different things, all with the supposed "emphatic" words. However, "я не знал" is impossible unless the speaker is so nervous that he does not control his speech ("заикается"), i.e. does not pronounce full sentences. Therefore, to say that a word is "emphatic", first, tells very little, second, can be only approximately true. I don't mean it is so-so mortally bad, just a remark for use.


			
				igusarov said:
			
		

> In the context of wonlon's example, "да" intensifies the feeling of  unconcern and indifference, partially introduced by the word "так"


As I said, for me the resulting feeling is that of serenity, "безмятежность", and also feeling proud at his own boasting.


----------



## Maroseika

We are discussing unstressed да in the beginning of the utterance. "(Да) я не знал" is just an example, no matter how often this very phrase is used. As a single complete phrase - yes, not too often. But as the beginning of a  longer utterance - very often, and the idea of the particle да imparting expression to the utterance, is quite applicable. I do not see any use to discuss here other Russian intensifiers.


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Hi there, wonlon,


> What does  *да так*  as a whole mean?


 I would say *да так* is fulfilling one or more of three functions in the context you've given:
(1) it's an interjection, and thus it expresses some kind of emotion, and here I'd say it's mild surprise,
(2) it clearly places the text in an informal, conversational register or style,
(3) it's acting pretty much as a "filler" phrase, not carrying any essential meaning (other than conveying emotion), but giving the speaker "thinking time" to formulate what he wants to say.   


> And what do  *да  *and* так *each mean here ?


As you obviously know, the words taken separately mean, at their basic level, "yes" and "so", but this is "affective" (emotional) language and it doesn't help to try and translate the individual words; you have to understand the two words together as an idiomatic expression of a particular emotion in their given context.

At a pinch, "yeah well" might be a good equivalent except for the fact that this is typical of a teenager's style of speech, and we wouldn't expect to hear Isaac Newton speaking like a teenager.

Gvozd is on the right track in post 2 with "nothing special", and that just needs padding out for conversational style: "Oh, (it was) nothing special really."  The throwaway "really" here is tagged on as an afterthought, and carries no essential meaning and no stress. It covers the mildly emphatic meaning of the да.

Since the story is about gravity, we can "improve" the joke in English by translating обыкновенно as "down-to-earth" in the sense of просто, so: "Oh it was pretty down-to-earth (stuff), really. I was just sitting there and an apple dropped onto my head." 

I don't want to go off topic, but since many readers of this forum are also students of English, I think it's relevant to point out that сказал (perfective) has to be "*said* to him" here. "Talked to" would be говорил or, more likely, разговаривал.  
"Usually" means "most often" and its use is pretty much restricted to its sense as an adverb of *time*. You can't use it here, because обыкновенно is functioning as an adverb of *manner* (каким образом?).  So you'd have to say "in the usual/normal way".


----------



## learnerr

Maroseika said:


> We are discussing unstressed да in the beginning of the utterance. "(Да) я не знал" is just an example, no matter how often this very phrase is used. As a single complete phrase - yes, not too often. But as the beginning of a  longer utterance - very often, and the idea of the particle да imparting expression to the utterance, is quite applicable. I do not see any use to discuss here other Russian intensifiers.


First, nobody was talking about how often this phrase is used. Second,  this idea was not applicable in the context I had given. Third, what's  the use in making distinction between a salad and a sandwich? They are  both food.


Enquiring Mind said:


> As you obviously know, the words taken separately mean, at their basic level, "yes" and "so", [...]


Actually, they don't. The first word is much closer in meaning to the linking "да" (this is why I said "empty 'but'"), i.e. one that is found in phrases like "Скоро сказка сказывается, да не скоро дело делается" or "Да будет твой путь удачен".
Together, these two words mean "for no particular reason", "in no particular way" and things like that.


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Actually, "да" *taken separately*, means, *at its basic level*, "yes".  

Скоро сказка сказывается, *да не* скоро дело делается" or "*Да* будет твой путь удачен" - these are both entirely different grammatical constructions from the meaning in the OP's context; *да так* is not linking anything because it's the first word in the sentence, and the phrase is an interjection. *Да* будет твой путь удачен expresses an English "wish" subjunctive, but long live open debate, may you live a long and happy life!


----------



## learnerr

Enquiring Mind said:


> *да так* is not linking anything because it's the first word in the sentence,


Not valid. The word "и", too, often appears as the first word in the sentence, linking the sentence to the previous thought: "И тогда я увидел, что [...]". The same happens with the word "да": "И многие воины положили бы жизнь свою, и обагрились бы ручьи и речки кровью, и опустела бы земля. Да не стали мы воевать, а отдали им дань, и был счастлив Ктулху". "Да так", indeed, does not link anything, but "да" alone does. Interpreting this word as 'yes' is impossible, and nothing gets affirmed at any level, basic or not, hence OP's confusion.


----------



## learnerr

For the sake of being a bit more argumentative, I would add that between the affirmative and the linking "да" there is even difference in intonation. Let's see the well-known line from Lermontov's "Borodino": «Да, были люди в наше время». This is pronounced differently than the linking "да" in the supposed «Да были люди в наше время», which could mean either "But in our time there were people who ... ", or "But what you're saying, in our time the true people there were!". The "да" in "да так" sounds as in the second, that is without any stop. In addition, the affirmative sense would sound meaningless in the "да так", it would not ring any kind of bell, but this one I already said  .


----------



## learnerr

By the way, «да» is not the only conjunction that can be used to express agreement. One example is «и» (the quote is from "Недоросль" by Денис Иванович Фонвизин):


> Правдин дает также ему деньги.
> 
> _Цыфиркин_. Да за что, ваше благородие, жалуете?
> _Правдин_. За то, что ты не походишь на Кутейкина.
> _Цыфиркин_. И! Ваше благородие. Я солдат.
> _Правдин_ (_Цыфиркину_). Поди же, мой друг, с богом.


This use is outdated now, or, at least, not widely encountered. Another example is «но», which is used in this function fairly regularly nowadays.
- Ты деньги ему заплатил?
- Но. А то б было не заплатить, он же всю душу выест, если копейки не досчитается.

But only with "да" the meaning of expressing agreement is perceived as an elementary one, that is to say not as extended.


----------



## Maroseika

learnerr said:


> By the way, «да» is not the only conjunction that can be used to express agreement. One example is «и»



I'm afraid, this is wrong. This "и" means something quite opposite to "да": 
*И* [обычно произносится удлинённо: и-и, и-и-и], межд._ Разг._
* 1.* Выражает несогласие со словами собеседника, возражение ему.
In your example Цыфиркин disagrees with Правдин, he meant there was nothing to grant him for.



> Another example is «но»


I think it is important to explain that this "но" is dialectical (Siberian?) variant of "ну", used as affirmative particle in the low-colloquial language.


----------



## learnerr

Maroseika said:


> I'm afraid, this is wrong. This "и" means something quite opposite to "да":


Okay, still similar, i.e. of the same category. ;-) One question, of course, is what this use came from, but still, the word was used that way.


----------



## Maroseika

learnerr said:


> Okay, still similar, i.e. of the same category. ;-)



Yes, both are interjections.


----------



## learnerr

Maroseika said:


> Yes, both are interjections.


Of agreement/disagreement, i.e. of a way to judge the interlocutor's words. The similarity of meaning is great, the other question, as I admitted, is the origin.


----------



## Mimino

I didn't bother to read through all previous posts, but I would probably translate "да так, обыкновенно"
with: "as usual"


----------

