# мог vs смог



## Anita hk

I know there is another thread on the same topic quite recently, but since the discussion is in Russian, I could not really follow it (even after using Google translate).
These sentences are from my book:
1.она не *могла* найти такси
2.он хотел открыть окно, но не *смог*.
Both means failed to do something, why 1 is imperfective and 2 perfective?  The only difference I could see is that an infinitive verb follows мог but not so for смог.  Could this be the reason?


----------



## Ruukr

Anita hk said:


> These sentences are from my book:
> 1.она не *могла* найти такси
> 2.он хотел открыть окно, но не *смог*.
> Both means failed to do something, why 1 is imperfective and 2 perfective?  The only difference I could see is that an infinitive verb follows мог but not so for смог.  Could this be the reason?


1. Описывается действие, где она, возможно, всё ещё пытается найти такси.
2. Описывается действие, где он уже оставил попытки открыть окно.


----------



## Awwal12

Anita hk said:


> I know there is another thread on the same topic quite recently, but since the discussion is in Russian, I could not really follow it (even after using Google translate).
> These sentences are from my book:
> 1.она не *могла* найти такси
> 2.он хотел открыть окно, но не *смог*.
> Both means failed to do something, why 1 is imperfective and 2 perfective?  The only difference I could see is that an infinitive verb follows мог but not so for смог.  Could this be the reason?


1. Indicates that she *was unable* to find the taxi during some period.
2. Indicates that his *attempt(s)* to open the window *failed*.


Ruukr said:


> 2. Описывается действие, где он уже оставил попытки открыть окно.


Not necessarily so (if you relate "уже" to the moment of speech). Consider:
Вчера́ он пыта́лся откры́ть окно́, но не смо́г. А сего́дня у него́ получи́лось. 
I'd say that "не смог" generally indicates a moment (perfectiveness!) when it became clear that the attempt(s) failed, while further attempts were impossible or the actor retreated.
How it workd with inanimate agents, for example:
Пу́ля не могла́ проби́ть сте́ну. (- A bullet had no chance from the start. If something did penetrate the wall, it wasn't a bullet.)
Пу́ля не смогла́ проби́ть сте́ну. (- Obviously the bullet had only one attempt at that, and that attempt failed.)
Now in plural:
Пу́ли не могли́ проби́ть сте́ну. ((The) bullets were unable to penetrate the wall.)
(Все́) пу́ли не смогли́ проби́ть сте́ну. (All the bullets which were fired at some moment proved incapable of penetrating the wall.)

Note that negated perfective verbs in the past tense usually indicate some failed attempts. If "я не убива́л его́" simply means that you didn't kill somebody (or "weren't killing", in some particular context), "я не уби́л его́" specifically indicates that you did attempt to kill someone (or at least did something that could count as that) but that attempt failed.


----------



## Ruukr

Ruukr said:
			
		

> Not necessarily so (if you relate "уже" to the moment of speech). Consider:
> Вчера́ он пыта́лся откры́ть окно́, но не смо́г. А сего́дня у него́ получи́лось.
> I'd say that "не смог" generally indicates a moment (perfectiveness!) when it became clear that the attempt(s) failed, while further attempts were impossible or the actor retreated.
> How it workd with inanimate agents, for example:
> Пу́ля не могла́ проби́ть сте́ну. (- A bullet had no chance from the start. If something did penetrate the wall, it wasn't a bullet.)
> Пу́ля не смогла́ проби́ть сте́ну. (- Obviously the bullet had only one attempt at that, and that attempt failed.)
> Now in plural:
> Пу́ли не могли́ проби́ть сте́ну. ((The) bullets were unable to penetrate the wall.)
> (Все́) пу́ли не смогли́ проби́ть сте́ну. (All the bullets which were fired at some moment proved incapable of penetrating the wall.)


Всё что относится к мог\смог означает в тех контекстах, что у ТС значат только одно:
1. Описывается действие, где она, возможно, всё ещё пытается найти такси. (действие может продолжаться). 
2. Описывается действие, где он уже оставил попытки открыть окно. (действие завершено). 
1. Пуля не могла пробить стену.
2. Пуля не смогла пробить стену.
1. Пули не могли пробить стену.
2. Пули не смогли пробить стену.
(не нужно ей забивать голову всякими рассуждениями, которые далеки от реальности).


----------



## Awwal12

Ruukr said:


> 2. Описывается действие, где он уже оставил попытки открыть окно. (действие завершено).


When is "уже"? It's far from being intuitive, you know.


Ruukr said:


> (не нужно ей забивать голову всякими рассуждениями, которые далеки от реальности).


She needs to understand how the construction works _in general_.
An infinite number of particular cases would likely just lead you to learning the language infinitely long.


----------



## Ruukr

Awwal12 said:


> When is "уже"? It's far from being intuitive, you know.
> 
> She needs to understand how the construction works _in general_.
> An infinite number of particular cases would likely just lead you to learning the language infinitely long.


Вы имели ввиду where... 
Приведите пример, где предложение будет противоречить тому, что я уже сказал.


----------



## Anita hk

Can I view it this way?
она не *могла* найти такси  - the *state* of not being able to find a taxi
она не *смогла* найти такси - tried and failed


----------



## Ruukr

Anita hk said:


> Can I view it this way?
> она не *могла* найти такси  - the *state* of not being able to find a taxi
> она не *смогла* найти такси - tried and failed


Actually, in these cases, both sentences you can translate with "couldn't" also. 
But yes, it is possible to do so.


----------



## Awwal12

Ruukr said:


> Вы имели ввиду where...


"Уже" implies some moment by which something is already true. However, you didn't specify what moment it is.

*Mod.: Reply to the deleted post is deleted.*


----------



## Ruukr

Awwal12 said:


> Не смогла вызвать is
> 1) more narrow (cf. "не могла же она вызвать такси!", where the speaker just postulates that some hypothetical event in the past is unlikely, and does not speak about (im)possibilities which actually existed in the past);
> 2) bears additional implications (again, "не смогла" implies that she tried to do sth but was unsuccessful and stopped the attempts).
> The corpus is oversaturated with "не смогла".
> 
> P.S.: Actually, it seems the closest translation for "не смогла" would be "failed to". You can go further and postulate that "failed" is a wrong word in English and one should say "couldn't" instead, but I frankly see no reason in that discussion.


Совершенно правильно.

*Mod.: Reply to the deleted post is deleted.*


----------



## Maroseika

*Mod.: Dear foreros, please concentrate on the answer to the original question about the difference between могла and смогла.*
_*Any further discussion on the acceptability of the very word смог will be deleted. This matter has been fully exhausted in the*_ *previous discussion.*


----------



## Bidulle

Let's continue this discussion with another question: In grammar books, the reason for the use of the negative imperfective is sometimes explained this way: the (grammatical) subject was excluded from the action, didn't take part in the action.
The classical example is : я не убивал (I was not there, I didn't take part in the action, it's not me...: so we can think that the action wasn't started by the subject)

So, the question is the following. In the sentence она не *могла* найти такси, did the subject really start the action or was he excluded from it from the beginning ? There was no taxi to be found in the street or she forgot her telephone at home and couldn't order a taxi -> so she не *могла* because there was an impossibility to take part in the action of finding a taxi ? Or no, she started the action (but in this case, it's difficult for me to see the difference with не *смогла*)


----------



## Maroseika

Bidulle said:


> So, the question is the following. In the sentence она не *могла* найти такси, did the subject really start the action or was he excluded from it from the beginning ?


It is not grammatically determined and depends only on the context:
_В такое позднее время она не могла найти такси в этом районе, поэтому сразу пошла пешком_. (even did not try)
_В такое позднее время она долго не могла найти такси, поэтому  пошла пешком. (tried and failed)
В такое позднее время она не cмогла найти такси в этом районе. _(tried and failed)


----------



## Anita hk

Maroseika, I'm still not very clear about the difference between the two tried and failed examples.  Could you explain a bit more please?


----------



## GCRaistlin

Anita hk said:


> I'm still not very clear about the difference between the two tried and failed examples.


It's not only you. Nobody is.

You'll never be wrong if you will always use _не могла_ instead of _не смогла._


----------



## Bidulle

Maroseika said:


> It is not grammatically determined and depends only on the context:
> _В такое позднее время она *долго *не могла найти такси, поэтому  пошла пешком. (tried and failed)_


If you add _*долго*_, you're forced to use the imperfective (afaik, долго не смогла is impossible in Russian), and we enter in the criteria "process" vs "point on the time-line" that can easily be understood and used as a criteria of choice between *мог *(2nd sentence) and *смог *(third sentence). The point of view of the narrator (who can consider the event as a process or a point on the time-line) doesn't change the action:_ she tried and failed._

The problem (for me) is with the first sentence: how the added context (_В такое позднее время)_ enables you to say that she _even did not try. _For me, with or without context, we are in the "я не убивал" situation: she didn't try. 
For me, it seems grammatically determined, even if I know for you, native speakers, it does not.


----------



## Maroseika

Anita hk said:


> Maroseika, I'm still not very clear about the difference between the two tried and failed examples.  Could you explain a bit more please?


Taken alone, the phrase Я не мог поймать такси can mean both: that I tried and failed, and that I even did not try. Grammar doesn't determine it here. All depends on the additional words and context:

_Я не мог там поймать такси. В это время их там не бывает.  Поэтому я даже не стал пытаться и пошел пешком.
Я не мог там поймать такси. Пытался в течение получаса, а потом все равно пошел пешком._
As you can see, _я не мог поймать такси_  is the same in both cases. But the sense of the utterance is different.

Unlike this, _Я не смог поймать такси_ always means "I tried and failed".



Bidulle said:


> If you add _*долго*_, you're forced to use the imperfective (afaik, долго не смогла is impossible in Russian), and we enter in the criteria "process" vs "point on the time-line" that can easily be understood and used as a criteria of choice between *мог *(2nd sentence) and *смог *(third sentence). The point of view of the narrator (who can consider the event as a process or a point on the time-line) doesn't change the action:_ she tried and failed._
> 
> The problem (for me) is with the first sentence: how the added context (_В такое позднее время)_ enables you to say that she _even did not try. _For me, with or without context, we are in the "я не убивал" situation: she didn't try.
> For me, it seems grammatically determined, even if I know for you, native speakers, it does not.


As shown above, the sense is not determined when saying я не могла найти такси, because it may mean "tried and failed" or "did not tried" depending on the context. In the examples above, I deliberately removed all extra words from the sentence with "могла", to show that the sense is determined by the context ony.


----------



## Anita hk

Maroseika said:


> It is not grammatically determined and depends only on the context:
> _В такое позднее время она не могла найти такси в этом районе, поэтому сразу пошла пешком_. (even did not try)
> _В такое позднее время она долго не могла найти такси, поэтому  пошла пешком. (tried and failed)
> В такое позднее время она не cмогла найти такси в этом районе. _(tried and failed)


 Maroseika, I understand the difference between the 1st and 2nd examples.  What I don't understand is the difference between 2nd and 3rd, because both mean tried and failed.


----------



## Maroseika

Anita hk said:


> Maroseika, I understand the difference between the 1st and 2nd examples.  What I don't understand is the difference between 2nd and 3rd, because both mean tried and failed.


In the variant with Perfective, semantic stress is on the result, the one with Imperfective is more about the process or the reason (why she decided to go on foot).
It's quite typical when Perf. and Imperf. differ only with the semantic stress, while the "general" sense is the same.


----------



## Anita hk

Thanks Maroseika.


----------

