# со чады



## turkjey5

What does со чады refer to?
Заранее большое спасибо!!

http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Канитель_(Чехов)
Перед ним на рыжем переплете Цветной триоди лежат две бумажки. На  одной из них написано «о здравии», на другой — «за упокой», и под обоими  заглавиями по ряду имен… Около клироса стоит маленькая старушонка с  озабоченным лицом и с котомкой на спине. Она задумалась. — Дальше кого? — спрашивает дьячок, лениво почесывая за ухом. —  Скорей, убогая, думай, а то мне некогда. Сейчас часы читать стану.
 — Сейчас, батюшка… Ну, пиши… О здравии рабов божиих: Андрея и Дарьи со чады… Митрия, опять Андрея, Антипа, Марьи…


----------



## Carrot Ironfoundersson

She wants him to pray for Andrey's, Darja's and *their children's *health. It's an archaic language used in prayers.

чадо = an offspring, a child


----------



## Creato

To tell the truth if I saw this extract written in the old Slavonic language I would probably not understand what is meant by "со чады". Definitely "чадо" means the same as "child" and this old-fashioned word is still used in Russian and by the way quite often. I usually hear "чадо" in a figurative sense and I think it's never used in the official language, where the word is replaced with "ребенок". "Чадо" is also similar to "дитя", the word, which resembles the one being discussed in this thread. 

I incline to agree that "со чады" means "with children", but such a construction is now never used in Russian.


----------



## Maroseika

*Со чады* is Church Slavonic.
Declention of чадо in Plural is as follows (in modern orthography); cf. with modern Russian declention in the brackets:

Nom. чада (чада) 
Gen. чад (чад)
Dat. чадом (чадам)
Acc. чада (чада) 
Instr. чады (чадами)
Prep. чадех (чадах)


----------



## turkjey5

Maroseika said:


> Nom. чада (чада)
> Gen. чад (чад)
> Dat. чадом (чадам)
> Acc. чада (чада)
> Instr. чады (чадами)
> Prep. чадех (чадах)



Where did you find the first set of  declensions (чады, чадех, etc.)
I can't find that anywhere, only the second set.
thanks.


----------



## ahvalj

turkjey5 said:


> Where did you find the first set of  declensions (чады, чадех, etc.)
> I can't find that anywhere, only the second set.
> thanks.



Well, actually in any book on the Church Slavonic or on the history of the Russian language. There are plenty of them. In the web, you can search "church slavonic grammar" in Google. The first reference will give you the Wikipedia article on the topic.


----------



## ahvalj

Creato said:


> To tell the truth if I saw this extract written in the old Slavonic language I would probably not understand what is meant by "со чады". Definitely "чадо" means the same as "child" and this old-fashioned word is still used in Russian and by the way quite often. I usually hear "чадо" in a figurative sense and I think it's never used in the official language, where the word is replaced with "ребенок". "Чадо" is also similar to "дитя", the word, which resembles the one being discussed in this thread.
> 
> I incline to agree that "со чады" means "with children", but such a construction is now never used in Russian.



There is actually another form of the same kind used in the modern language, «со товарищи», which rather many people use but very few understand correctly, so indeed this old Instrumental Plural on -ы/и is absolutely dead in the modern Russian.


----------



## Maroseika

turkjey5 said:


> Where did you find the first set of  declensions (чады, чадех, etc.)
> I can't find that anywhere, only the second set.
> thanks.



I like this book.


----------



## Creato

ahvalj said:


> There is actually another form of the same kind used in the modern language, «со товарищи», which rather many people use but very few understand correctly, so indeed this old Instrumental Plural on -ы/и is absolutely dead in the modern Russian.



I've heard "со товарищи" and to me it means "together with your companions/friends". This phrase is another example of an old-fashioned use of a Russian phrase. Instead of saying "со товарищи" nowadays we say "с товарищами", where, as you can see, the ending of the noun "товарищи" has changed.


----------



## ahvalj

Creato said:


> I've heard "со товарищи" and to me it means "together with your companions/friends". This phrase is another example of an old-fashioned use of a Russian phrase. Instead of saying "со товарищи" nowadays we say "с товарищами", where, as you can see, the ending of the noun "товарищи" has changed.



That's true, but so many people regard it as some cryptic form of a non-existent word «сотоварищ».


----------



## morzh

Simply put, "*со чады и домочадцы*" (this is the full expression) is still usable stable form, and used only due to its popularity in the written language; it is super-archaic for "*с чадами и домочадцами*" (by itself also archaic), "with children and family members", hence the weird looking form, where the instrumental plural is expected (*с чадами и домочадцами*), and the member words of that stable form, "чады и домочадцы" are no longer used much by themselves, with exception of "чадо" which is sometimes used for certain expressional purposes, but not in the archaic form with that strange-looking case inflection.


----------



## ahvalj

morzh said:


> "чады и домочадцы"



Чад*а* и домочадцы.


----------



## morzh

Have you read what I wrote and why?

многая лета с чады и домочадцы

http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/michelson_new/5327/многая

I tried to explain that the stable form uses the preposition "Со", hence "Со чады и домочадцы".


----------



## ahvalj

Mea culpa, I never met before the term "stable form" in this context, only "stable expression" («устойчивое выражение»).

Back to the original question by turkjey5: this construction is so rare that you have all the chances to never meet it again, so please excuse our grammatical excurses here.


----------



## Maroseika

ahvalj said:


> a non-existent word «сотоварищ».


Сотоварищ doesn't exist??


----------



## morzh

*СОТОВАРИЩ*

Перевод 
 					 СОТОВАРИЩ  *СОТОВА́РИЩ*, сотоварища, муж. (книжн. устар., теперь разг.). Товарищ, чей-нибудь соучастник в чем-нибудь.


----------



## ahvalj

Maroseika said:


> Сотоварищ doesn't exist??



I think it is artificially derived from «со товарищи», and I met it only in contexts where the author seemed not to know the correct etymology.


----------



## ahvalj

morzh said:


> *СОТОВАРИЩ*
> 
> Перевод
> СОТОВАРИЩ  *СОТОВА́РИЩ*, сотоварища, муж. (книжн. устар., теперь разг.). Товарищ, чей-нибудь соучастник в чем-нибудь.



OK, to reply in more detail: this word can be better considered an occasional one, it should not be used as a full-fledged element of the vocabulary for the reason indicated above, but it may be possible in some controlled contexts. That is my opinion.


----------



## Creato

Maroseika said:


> Сотоварищ doesn't exist??



I don't know exactly, but I think the word "сотоварищ" exists. I've never heard it or come it across in books, but it seems to me that in some contexts it's possible to use it. I suppose "сотоварищ" was often used in old Russian and nowadays this word means almost the same as "товарищ".

http://www.google.ru/#sclient=psy&h...aq=f&aqi=g3&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=439e7c51dcd0a30


----------



## morzh

ahvalj said:


> OK, to reply in more detail: this word can be better considered an occasional one, it should not be used as a full-fledged element of the vocabulary for the reason indicated above, but it may be possible in some controlled contexts. That is my opinion.




*СОТОВАРИЩ* -  м. сотоварка ж. товарищ, или  со  воспитанник,  сослуживец, соучастник, помощник по делу, в  торговле,  в  пути;  собрат,  ровня  по ЧЕМУ-либо, или старый  и  короткий  знакомый.  -щество,  быт,  состоянье сотоварищей, товарищество; дружба,  связи  товарищей;  или  |  общество, круг,  братство,  союз  многих.  -вовать  кому  в  чем,  быть   временно товарищем, напр. в дороге. 

Obviously, both Dahl and Ushakov (the previous post) quite disrespectfully decided to disagree with you. Shame on them


----------



## ahvalj

morzh said:


> *СОТОВАРИЩ* -  м. сотоварка ж. товарищ, или  со  воспитанник,  сослуживец, соучастник, помощник по делу, в  торговле,  в  пути;  собрат,  ровня  по ЧЕМУ-либо, или старый  и  короткий  знакомый.  -щество,  быт,  состоянье сотоварищей, товарищество; дружба,  связи  товарищей;  или  |  общество, круг,  братство,  союз  многих.  -вовать  кому  в  чем,  быть   временно товарищем, напр. в дороге.
> 
> Obviously, both Dahl and Ushakov (the previous post) quite disrespectfully decided to disagree with you. Shame on them



Obviously. «Но я и не Айседора Дункан». If we forget the marxist connotation of the word «товарищ», the only additional meaning that «сотоварищ» conveys is «быть временно товарищем, напр. в дороге». Well, this entirely fits the suggested occasional use I admitted a few posts above, and even in this case it would sound rather artificial and quite probably back-formed some centuries ago from the less and less transparent «со товарищи». This was a natural process, of course, but «с грамматической ошибкой я русской речи не люблю», hence my reaction...


----------



## Slavianophil

In fact, the form "со чады" is totally normal in this context. There are other such forms : "со сродники" meaning "with relatives" or "с сестры" meaning "with sisters". When writing lists of names to be read during a liturgy, moleben or panikhida, people very often write something like "О здравии Любови со чады" or "О упокоении Иоанна со сродники" or "О здравии игумении Анны с сестры". This is normal Church Slavonic grammar.


----------



## ahvalj

Slavianophil said:


> In fact, the form "со чады" is totally normal in this context. There are other such forms : "со сродники" meaning "with relatives" or "с сестры" meaning "with sisters". When writing lists of names to be read during a liturgy, moleben or panikhida, people very often write something like "О здравии Любови со чады" or "О упокоении Иоанна со сродники" or "О здравии игумении Анны с сестры". This is normal Church Slavonic grammar.



«С сестры» in this context is a fault - the original and only Instr. Pl. of the a-declension is «-ами» since the indo-european times (-a:bhi:s or -a:mi:s). Just another example that the ending «-ы» disappeared from the active usage a long ago and is used now for stylistic purposes by people not very acquainted with its original scope.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Creato said:


> I don't know exactly, but I think the word "сотоварищ" exists. I've never heard it or come it across in books, but it seems to me that in some contexts it's possible to use it. I suppose "сотоварищ" was often used in old Russian and nowadays this word means almost the same as "товарищ".
> 
> http://www.google.ru/#sclient=psy&h...aq=f&aqi=g3&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=439e7c51dcd0a30


 Isn't this word a pleonasm? Since 'товарищ' means 'companion' then 'сотоварищ' is 'co-companion'?


----------



## Maroseika

Ben Jamin said:


> Isn't this word a pleonasm? Since 'товарищ' means 'companion' then 'сотоварищ' is 'co-companion'?



A compainin is only one of the meaning of товарищ - товарищ, соучастник в каком-то деле. In other sense it is just a friend.


----------



## Creato

Ben Jamin said:


> Isn't this word a pleonasm? Since 'товарищ' means 'companion' then 'сотоварищ' is 'co-companion'?



Probably I'm mistaken, but as for me both "товарищ" and "сотоварищ" mean the same. There must be some difference, but I can't catch it. I can say, however, that the word "сотоварищ" is very rarely used in Russian today, while "товарищ" is quite a common word used in several different meanings.


----------



## Creato

Maroseika said:


> A compainin is only one of the meaning of товарищ - товарищ, соучастник в каком-то деле. In other sense it is just a friend.



That's correct, but just in case I'd like to add that "товарищ" (companion) and "друг" (friend) differ in Russian. A friend is closer and more loyal than a companion. You can have many school companions whoi you used to communicate with while you were studying, but everyone usually has 1 or 2 friends that you trust most.


----------



## Alex_cs_gsp

"child" sounds like "чадо". Perhaps some thousands years ago it was a single word.


----------



## Sobakus

Alex_cs_gsp said:


> "child" sounds like "чадо". Perhaps some thousands years ago it was a single word.



That is unlikely, but it sure is cognate to German "Kind".


----------



## morzh

Из Фасмера:

Праслав. *čędо* все считали раньше заимств. из герм. (др.-сакс., д.-в.-н.  *kind*); см. И. Шмидт, Pluralb. 13; Мi. ЕW 32; Мейе, Ét. 110, 266; Ягич,  AfslPh 23, 537; Уленбек, AfslPh 15, 485. Эту точку зрения оспаривали на  том основании, что это единственный пример, где č- соответствует герм.  k- перед передними гласными (обычно с-, ср. ст.-слав. цѩта).

http://www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-Vasmer-term-15386.htm
--------


They may be indeed cognates, but of parallel development, not one from another.


----------



## ahvalj

morzh said:


> Из Фасмера:
> 
> Праслав. *čędо* все считали раньше заимств. из герм. (др.-сакс., д.-в.-н.  *kind*); см. И. Шмидт, Pluralb. 13; Мi. ЕW 32; Мейе, Ét. 110, 266; Ягич,  AfslPh 23, 537; Уленбек, AfslPh 15, 485. Эту точку зрения оспаривали на  том основании, что это единственный пример, где č- соответствует герм.  k- перед передними гласными (обычно с-, ср. ст.-слав. цѩта).
> 
> http://www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-Vasmer-term-15386.htm
> --------
> 
> 
> They may be indeed cognates, but of parallel development, not one from another.



They cannot be cognates since the Germanic k originates from the Indo-European g or g', which gave resp. g or z in the Slavic. The Germanic word is probably related to the Greek genos, Latin genus, a root lost in the Slavic. So, if not a borrowing, this similarity is pure coincidence.


----------



## Sobakus

ahvalj said:


> They cannot be cognates since the Germanic k originates from the Indo-European g or g', which gave resp. g or z in the Slavic. The Germanic word is probably related to the Greek genos, Latin genus, a root lost in the Slavic. So, if not a borrowing, this similarity is pure coincidence.



Yeah that makes sense, but this root isn't lost in Slavic, it's жен- now.


----------



## ahvalj

Sobakus said:


> Yeah that makes sense, but this root isn't lost in Slavic, it's жен- now.



No, жен- originates from gwen-. «Зять» may be related, though I am not sure.


----------

