# Bulgarian: gender of noun случай



## Jason_2_toi

This is what Google translate returns for

In my particular case
В моя конкретен случай

Similarly, in my personal case
В моя личен случай

I thought I would be able to tell that случай is a masculine noun from the adjectives
конкретен, личен etc,  but in that case why моя and not моето?


----------



## Panceltic

Yes, it is indeed masculine. Here, моя is not the feminine pronoun, but actually the definite object form of моят which is in turn the definite form of мой.

As you will be aware of, Bulgarian and Macedonian do not have cases (contrary to other Slavic languages), but in Bulgarian there is a remnant of the case system - masculine words take the -а ending in certain cases.

So here goes:

masculine: mine = *мой*, the mine (subject) = *моят* (мой + -ът), the mine (object) = *моя*
feminine: mine = *моя*, the mine = *моята* (моя + -та)
neuter: mine = *мое*, the mine = *моето* (мое + -то)
plural: mine =  *мои*, the mine = *моите* (мои + -те)

As you can see, this special form only applies to masculine words which have been appended the definite article.

In other words, the distinction between subject and object only exists for masculine words.

In your sentences, the object form is used because the word is preceded by a preposition which would, in other Slavic languages, require a different case.


----------



## LoraLanguage

Panceltic said:


> Yes, it is indeed masculine. Here, моя is not the feminine pronoun, but actually the definite object form of моят which is in turn the definite form of мой.
> 
> As you will be aware of, Bulgarian and Macedonian do not have cases (contrary to other Slavic languages), but in Bulgarian there is a remnant of the case system - masculine words take the -а ending in certain cases.
> 
> So here goes:
> 
> masculine: mine = *мой*, the mine (subject) = *моят* (мой + -ът), the mine (object) = *моя*
> feminine: mine = *моя*, the mine = *моята* (моя + -та)
> neuter: mine = *мое*, the mine = *моето* (мое + -то)
> plural: mine =  *мои*, the mine = *моите* (мои + -те)
> 
> As you can see, this special form only applies to masculine words which have been appended the definite article.
> 
> In other words, the distinction between subject and object only exists for masculine words.
> 
> In your sentences, the object form is used because the word is preceded by a preposition which would, in other Slavic languages, require a different case.


Excellent explanation!  I don't have anything to add!


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Jason_2_toi said:


> This is what Google translate returns for
> 
> In my particular case
> В моя конкретен случай
> 
> Similarly, in my personal case
> В моя личен случай
> 
> I thought I would be able to tell that случай is a masculine noun from the adjectives
> конкретен, личен etc,  but in that case why моя and not моето?


In my particular case/In my personal case
These have actually the same meaning. Literally, the translations are correct. However, the usus in Bulgaria excludes "В моя личен случай". I would add "Конкретнo в моя случай" which literally translates to "Particularly, in my case".



Panceltic said:


> Yes, it is indeed masculine. Here, моя is not the feminine pronoun, but actually the definite object form of моят which is in turn the definite form of мой.
> 
> As you will be aware of, Bulgarian and Macedonian do not have cases (contrary to other Slavic languages), but in Bulgarian there is a remnant of the case system - masculine words take the -а ending in certain cases.
> 
> So here goes:
> 
> masculine: mine = *мой*, the mine (subject) = *моят* (мой + -ът), the mine (object) = *моя*
> feminine: mine = *моя*, the mine = *моята* (моя + -та)
> neuter: mine = *мое*, the mine = *моето* (мое + -то)
> plural: mine =  *мои*, the mine = *моите* (мои + -те)
> 
> As you can see, this special form only applies to masculine words which have been appended the definite article.
> 
> In other words, the distinction between subject and object only exists for masculine words.
> 
> In your sentences, the object form is used because the word is preceded by a preposition which would, in other Slavic languages, require a different case.



Actually, the distinction between subject and object only exists for definite masculine words does not exist neither in Bulgarian nor in Macedonian. It is just an artificial scholar invention. The definite masculine forms like "моя", "случая", "личния", "конкретния" are totally the same as "моят", "случаят", "личният", "конкретният" with the final -т omitted. The artificial scholar invention to distinct those forms are related to the orthography only, it is impossible to be followed in speech - there is no such distinction in speech and there cannot be - neither in the high style nor in vernacular. More than 90% of Bulgarians do not obey that rule (for object/subject) distinction in their writings.


----------



## Panceltic

I've heard about this. But surely it is still obligatory to obey these rules (however artificial they be) in writing? I don't mean facebook chat but newspapers, books, essays etc.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Panceltic said:


> I've heard about this. But surely it is still obligatory to obey these rules (however artificial they be) in writing? I don't mean facebook chat but newspapers, books, essays etc.


Internet publications usually do not obey that rule.

Traditional newspapers usually do. Books also do.

Business correspondence do not. No employer would prefer an office assistant based on her/his ability to obey that rule. The ability of an office assistant to obey that rule cannot be a reason for extra salary.

School teachers: Only teachers in Bulgarian are able to obey that rule, generally speaking.

Thus, there are two classes of people who use to obey that rule:

School teachers in Bulgarian 
People hired (by traditional editors of books and newspapers) as proof-readers and spell-checkers


----------



## Panceltic

That's an interesting situation indeed. I can't imagine an orthographic rule in my language that is systematically not obeyed, the same goes for English.


----------



## LoraLanguage

Panceltic said:


> That's an interesting situation indeed. I can't imagine an orthographic rule in my language that is systematically not obeyed, the same goes for English.


It is true that there are people who don't know that rule but I think this is only because they are illiterate! It doesn't exist a teacher who will tell you that it's normal to make such a mistake! If you want to speak and write correctly, then you have to know this rule! In books, newspapers, magazines, when you watch news on television or when you read in Internet something which is written by a literate person ... you will see this rule correctly used!


----------



## Panceltic

A bit off-topic: Do you maybe know the situation in Macedonian? There, -от is the only possible ending for masculine words, I believe, and it is always pronounced as such, am I right?


----------



## LoraLanguage

Panceltic said:


> A bit off-topic: Do you maybe know the situation in Macedonian? There, -от is the only possible ending for masculine words, I believe, and it is always pronounced as such, am I right?



The truth is that when I listen to somebody who talk in Macedonian I understand most of what they say because our languages are closed but I don't know Macedonian. So I can't say anything. But I found this information in Internet https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Macedonian_articles

I hope it will help you!


----------



## Panceltic

Thanks!  But when you listen to them, do they pronounce -от?


----------



## LoraLanguage

Panceltic said:


> Thanks!  But when you listen to them, do they pronounce -от?


Yes, they pronounce "от"!  I just don't want to say something wrong because I don't speak this language but I have heard it in many songs. So I think they say "от"!


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Panceltic said:


> A bit off-topic: Do you maybe know the situation in Macedonian? There, -от is the only possible ending for masculine words, I believe, and it is always pronounced as such, am I right?



This is an off-topic explanation.

*All over the Slavophonia, during the last millenium, the final -t tended to be dropped out* of pronunciation and out of spelling as a result.

Example_1: Except Russian, the final t disappeared from present 3rd person singulal forms of verbs.
Example_2: Except Russian and Slavo-Balkanic (Bulgarian), the final t disappeared from present 3rd person plural forms of verbs.

Example_3: Archaic infinitive verbal forms in East Bulgarian do not show any T ending (_Жените можеш ли ги разбра_).

Example_4: (WE ARE HERE) In most Slavo-Balkanic dialects, the final T in the definite forms of masculine nouns are usually dropped. The full endings are -ЪТ in the East and -OT in the West. *The final T can be dropped almost everywhere*. Everywhere, nevertheless, the final T can be pronounced, although it is usually dropped out. *There are, however, some dialects where the final T is never dropped*.
Example_4_1: First, the dialect in the very center of Bulgaria. This was the native dialect of the famous writer Vazov born in Sopot. About half a century ago, I visited Kazanlık and could testify that local population never omits that final T.
Example_4_2: Second, in some dialects, in two non-adjacent areas, *triple forms of definite nouns* exist. If there are triple forms of definite nouns, then the final T should be persistent (and cannot be dropped) in order to specify one of the three forms properly.
The one area is in *the Rhodope mountains*. This feature is very hard comprehensible to the rest of Bulgarians.
The other area is *west of the Vardar river *("Transvardaria"). This feature contributed to the Macedonian standard language there and in FYROM it propagated in the learned speech to the east of Vardar too. Anyway, in vernacular, east of Vardar, dropping the final T is possible.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Panceltic said:


> That's an interesting situation indeed. I can't imagine an orthographic rule in my language that is systematically not obeyed, the same goes for English.


Actually, I do not know any other language (among at least Russian, English, French, Greek, ..) whose standard contains such an irrational orthographic rule.


----------



## Panceltic

Thank you Christo for your comprehensive and detailed explanation! It provides an excellent insight into the matter.



Christo Tamarin said:


> Actually, I do not know any other language (among at least Russian, English, French, Greek, ..) whose standard contains such an irrational orthographic rule.



It crossed my mind that, in Slovene, the ending for masculine past participle -l is maybe an example. It is pronounced as Polish ł, so would be better represented by a -v ending.

Biti > bil, bila, bilo etc., but pronounced [*biw*, bila, bilo]

This pronunciation is the only correct one, to say [bil] is completely wrong and will be laughed at. I suppose the writing has been kept to preserve the unity of all other forms (feminine, neuter etc.)

It is quite interesting what Belarusian does: быў, была, была ... While certainly an interesting convention, my eyes always hurt when I see this!

This conversation has strayed a bit off-topic, many apologies for that!


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Panceltic said:


> Biti > bil, bila, bilo etc., but pronounced [*biw*, bila, bilo]
> This pronunciation is the only correct one, to say [bil] is completely wrong and will be laughed at. I suppose the writing has been kept to preserve the unity of all other forms (feminine, neuter etc.)


This Slovenian case is much more rational than the Bulgarian artificial rule for subject distinction in masculine singular definite nouns.
The Slovenian case follows the history. Some centuries ago, that *bil* was really heard as such. The modern "biw" is an innovation, the orthography staying conservative. Orthography usually stays conservative in most languages (e.g. English) and this is natural: thus words can have their eternal look in writing.
The Bulgarian case is totally artificial. Some centuries ago, it was invented by some drunk people.


----------



## Panceltic

I'm sorry Jason  But in post #2, everything you wanted to know is explained.


----------



## rusita preciosa

_Mod note: _
_I see this discussion went way off the original topic which was the gender of the noun *случай* in Bulgarian. I am closing the thread as the initial question was fully discussed and answered._
_Please feel free to open separate threads if you would like to discuss other topics._


----------

