# All Slavic languages: Subject vs auxiliary



## Dzimi

I am doing a paper on the distribution of subjects and auxiliaries in Slavic languages and I need help from the native speakers.
I will write a few sentences in English and I ask of you to write all the possible realizations (regarding the existence of an overt subject and an auxiliary) of it in your mother tongue (write which one it is).

I was outside.
I am a doctor.
I am at home.
I fixed it.

Your help would be appreciated.


----------



## Awwal12

Russian:
I was outside. - context, please?..
I am a doctor. - 
Я врач. (Lit. "I doctor", the linking verb "to be" is normally omitted in the present tense.)
Я являюсь врачом (extremely formal; the verb "являться", "to be", demands an argument in instrumental case).
I am at home. -
Я дома. ("I" + "at home" (adverb))
I fixed it. - any context? Fixed what exactly - a broken radio, a problem, or something else?..


----------



## Orlin

Dzimi said:


> I am doing a paper on the distribution of subjects and auxiliaries in Slavic languages and I need help from the native speakers.
> I will write a few sentences in English and I ask of you to write all the possible realizations (regarding the existence of an overt subject and an auxiliary) of it in your mother tongue (write which one it is).
> 
> I was outside. (Аз) бях навън.
> I am a doctor. Аз съм лекар/доктор.
> I am at home. Аз съм вкъщи.
> I fixed it. Поправих го./Аз го поправих.
> 
> Your help would be appreciated.


 
Zdravo, Dzimi, dobro došao na WRF! I ja ne razumem šta tačno pitate, ali pretpostavljam da je pitanje koji slovenski jezici (ne) koriste pomoćni glagol i (ne) stavljaju nominativnu zamenicu za subjekat. Dao sam bugarski prevod plavom bojom - za 1. i 4. rečenicu ima još mnogo drugih varijanti.
Prevod Vaše 1. i 4. rečenice jako zavisi od konteksta, ali bih ipak rekao da:
- Vaš 2. i 3. primer su strukturno potpuno identični svojim srpskim ekvivalentima: kopula se u prezentu isto izražava enklitičkim glagolskim oblicima koje ne mogu da stoje na početku rečenice i zato gotovo uvek stavljamo inače nepotrebnu ličnu zamenicu (makar bismo mogli reći npr. "Вкъщи съм/Лекар съм", ali ne radimo tako mnogo često). U 1. rečenici je kopula u aoristu (vidi dole), što je naglašen oblik, i zato je nominativna zamenica fakultativna i često se ispušta.
- Engleski Past Simple se obično ne prevodi na bugarski perfektom već aoristom, i lične zamenice za subjekat skoro uvek su nepotrebne u takvim konstrukcijama. Inače je bugarski perfekt strukturno izuzetno blizak srpskom, i mi isto normalno ne stavljamo nominativnu zamenicu osim u slučajima logičkog akcenta: mi bismo rekli "Поправил съм го" značajno češće od "Аз съм го поправил".


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

Slovenian:

I was outside. *Bil sem zunaj.*
I am a doctor. *Zdravnik sem.*
I am at home. *Doma sem.*
I fixed it. *Popravil sem ga.*

As you can see, while the copula is always present, the subject (the pronoun *jaz *in this case) is typically omitted. It's only included to indicate contrast or emphasis:

*Si v trgovini? Jaz sem doma.* = Are you in the store? I'm at home.

*Bil je pokvarjen. Jaz sem ga pa popravil.* = It was broken. However, I fixed it.


----------



## nonik

Czech

I was outside. Já jsem byl venku. (Byl jsem venku) (Venku jsem byl)
I am a doctor. Já jsem doktor/lékař (Jsem doktor) 
I am at home. Já jsem doma (Jsem doma) (Doma jsem)
I fixed it. Já jsem to opravil/spravil. ( Opravil/Spravil jsem to)


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

Nonik's post reminded me to include examples of alternative world order, which is also possible in Slovenian:

I was outside. *Bil sem zunaj. (Zunaj sem bil.)*
I am a doctor. *Zdravnik sem. (Sem zdravnik.)*
I am at home. *Doma sem. (Sem doma.)*
I fixed it. *Popravil sem ga. (Sem ga popravil.)*


Also, here are all these sentences with the subject included. Remember, this form can be used *for emphasis and/or contrast only*:

I was outside. *Jaz sem bil zunaj.*
I am a doctor. *Jaz sem zdravnik.*
I am at home. *Jaz sem doma.*
I fixed it. *Jaz sem ga popravil.*


----------



## Azori

Slovak:

I was outside. *Bol som vonku. / Ja som bol vonku. / Vonku som bol.
*I am a doctor. *Som lekár. / Ja som lekár. / Som lekárom. / Ja som lekárom.
*I am at home. *Som doma. / Ja som doma. / Doma som.
*I fixed it. *Opravil som to. / Ja som to opravil. / To som opravil.*


----------



## Dzimi

Awwal12 said:


> Russian:
> I was outside. - context, please?..
> I am a doctor. -
> Я врач. (Lit. "I doctor", the linking verb "to be" is normally omitted in the present tense.)
> Я являюсь врачом (extremely formal; the verb "являться", "to be", demands an argument in instrumental case).
> I am at home. -
> Я дома. ("I" + "at home" (adverb))
> I fixed it. - any context? Fixed what exactly - a broken radio, a problem, or something else?..



Context for the first would be something like : "Why haven't you answered the phone? -I was outside"
And for the 4th, I meant the radio, or something similar. Russian doesn't have auxiliaries, so it is not central for my research, but I will be sure to include it. Thank you.


----------



## Dzimi

Orlin said:


> Zdravo, Dzimi, dobro došao na WRF! I ja ne razumem šta tačno pitate, ali pretpostavljam da je pitanje koji slovenski jezici (ne) koriste pomoćni glagol i (ne) stavljaju nominativnu zamenicu za subjekat. Dao sam bugarski prevod plavom bojom - za 1. i 4. rečenicu ima još mnogo drugih varijanti.
> Prevod Vaše 1. i 4. rečenice jako zavisi od konteksta, ali bih ipak rekao da:
> - Vaš 2. i 3. primer su strukturno potpuno identični svojim srpskim ekvivalentima: kopula se u prezentu isto izražava enklitičkim glagolskim oblicima koje ne mogu da stoje na početku rečenice i zato gotovo uvek stavljamo inače nepotrebnu ličnu zamenicu (makar bismo mogli reći npr. "Вкъщи съм/Лекар съм", ali ne radimo tako mnogo često). U 1. rečenici je kopula u aoristu (vidi dole), što je naglašen oblik, i zato je nominativna zamenica fakultativna i često se ispušta.
> - Engleski Past Simple se obično ne prevodi na bugarski perfektom već aoristom, i lične zamenice za subjekat skoro uvek su nepotrebne u takvim konstrukcijama. Inače je bugarski perfekt strukturno izuzetno blizak srpskom, i mi isto normalno ne stavljamo nominativnu zamenicu osim u slučajima logičkog akcenta: mi bismo rekli "Поправил съм го" značajno češće od "Аз съм го поправил".



Pitam jer se u Rusinskom, mom maternjem jeziku javlja odstupanje od generalnog pravila koje sam zapazio u primerima koje ste mi svi poslali. Naime, ukoliko postoji izgovoreni subjekat, bilo imenica ili zamenica, pomocni glagol se izostavlja. Ukoliko nema izgovorenog subjekta, pomocni glagol сом, ши se ubacuje. Za sada nisam zapazio nista tome slicno. Hvala.


----------



## Orlin

> I am at home. Аз съм вкъщи/у дома.


Dodatak: mi imamo i takvu varijantu sličnu nekim izrazima u drugim slovenskim jezicima koje sam primetio gore i podsetio sam se na nju.


----------



## Selyd

Ukrainian:
I was outside - Я був відсутній (Мене не було, Я був на вулиці, Я був крайній і ...) контекст????
I am a doctor - Я лікар
I am at home - Я вдома (Я в хаті) 
I fixed it - Я це закріпив (вирішив, призначив, запримітив, зафіксував, визначився і ....) контекст????


----------



## Dzimi

Selyd said:


> Ukrainian:
> I was outside - Я був відсутній (Мене не було, Я був на вулиці, Я був крайній і ...) контекст????
> I am a doctor - Я лікар
> I am at home - Я вдома (Я в хаті)
> I fixed it - Я це закріпив (вирішив, призначив, запримітив, зафіксував, визначився і ....) контекст????



The first contexts of the sentences are just fine. Thank you. If I understand the last example correctly it is [I it fixed], without the auxiliary, right? Can you also say it without the overt subject? Ukrainian and Slovakian are the closest relatives of Rusyn, and I found that Slovakian uses auxiliary regardless of the existence of the overt subject, while Rusyn uses one or the other...


----------



## marco_2

In Polish:

1. I was outside - *Nie było mnie w domu / Byłem poza domem / Byłem na zewnątrz *(it depends on the context)
2. I am a doctor - *Jestem lekarzem.*
3. I am at home - *Jestem w domu.*
4. I fixed it - *Naprawiłem to / Ja to naprawiłem *(and not anyone else - logical stress).


----------



## Leox10

Selyd said:


> Ukrainian:
> I was outside


One  more translation 
Я  був надворі


----------



## Sobakus

Awwal12 said:


> Russian:
> I was outside. - Я был на улице
> I am a doctor. -
> Я врач. (Lit. "I doctor", the linking verb "to be" is normally omitted in the present tense.)
> Я являюсь врачом (extremely formal; the verb "являться", "to be", demands an argument in instrumental case).
> I am at home. -
> Я дома. ("I" + "at home" (adverb))
> I fixed it. - Я починил/исправил его/это



Missing translations added.


----------



## Selyd

leox10 said:


> one more translation
> Я був надворі


Я був на вулиці (Не в хаті).
Наприклад ти дзвонив зі стаціонарного телефона,
а я не відповів.


----------



## werrr

Dzimi said:


> I will write a few sentences in English and I ask of you to write all the possible realizations (regarding the existence of an overt subject and an auxiliary) of it in your mother tongue (write which one it is).
> 
> I was outside.
> I am a doctor.
> I am at home.
> I fixed it.


These sentences are not well chosen with respect to Czech, because the situation in Czech depends on person.

In standard Czech you can't skip auxiliary in first person (_já jsem byl venku = I was outside_), but it is common in colloquial Czech provided you use the subject (_já byl venku_).

Skipping auxiliary in second person is practically non-existent. (We have non-syllabic clitic auxiliary which is more practical than skipping auxiliary.)

Skipping auxiliary in third person is a must in the past tense regardless of the presence of subject (_byl venku / on byl venku = he was outside_).

In other words, whenever you skip both subject and auxiliary in Czech, the verb is supposed to be in third person.


----------



## nonik

(_já byl venku_).

Are you sure? I never heard it.
I wouldnt say it is not possible, but surely very strange.
I am from western region, Karlovy Vary and nobody would say that (except of russians living there
Maybe you can say it in your part of Bohemia, where are you from?

Of course, it is gramatically correct in 3.person...on byl venku (insted of... on je byl venku...south slavs), but I am very doubt that anynobody will use it in 1. person.


----------



## iobyo

*Macedonian*:


 I was outside — јас бев надвор; надвор бев

  I am a doctor — јас сум лекар/доктор; лекар/доктор сум

  I am at home — јас сум дома; дома сум
  I fixed it — јас го поправив; го поправив


----------



## werrr

nonik said:


> (_já byl venku_).
> 
> Are you sure? I never heard it.


It's substandard, but common.

This is exatly the case where Google is good servant. The phrase "já byl venku" itself gives 25,500 hits. Phrasems like "já to říkal" or "já to tušil" give even more hits.



> Maybe you can say it in your part of Bohemia, where are you from?


From Eastern Bohemia, but I don't think it plays big part here.


----------



## nonik

já to říkal.......yes, it is normal and comon

já to tušil.....the same

já byl venku......I had to imagine litle bit a situation, in what I would use it, and you are right, there is one (more)........Kdo tu udělal ten bordel crucifix ?.....Já ne, Já ne, Já muzikant, já byl venku


----------



## francisgranada

Some *eastern Slovak *dialects:

I was outside.  *Ja bul vonka /Mi bul vonka 
*I am a doctor.  *Ja doktor / Mi doktor
*I am at home.  *Ja u chiži **/ Ja doma / Mi u chiži 
*I fixed it.  *Ja to zrobil  / Zrobil mi to

*1. The usage of *mi *instead of _*ja*_ depends on the concrete dialect/region
2. I'm not sure if *zrobic *is the best transalation of "to fix", but as far as I understand the question, it's not important in this case 
 3. In some dialects, instead of _zrob*il* _we have _zrob_*el*
4. In some dialects, the verb "to be" appears too, especially in the second person:
You are a doctor. *Ty śi doktor*/*Vy sce doktor
*


----------

