# Translating reported speech and other uses of "would"



## Malamalangue

Hello
This is more of a russian grammar question.
For example, if you are writing a story about something in the past, but you want to express something that at that time in the past was in the future, but now (as you are writing about it in the past) has already happened.
For example:
My friend called me (yesterday morning). He said that *he would call me back* later (in the evening) with the details.
Мой друг позвонил мне (вчера утром). Он сказал, что он (would call me back) (вчера/тем?) вечером.
the verb in bold (which in russian is перезвонить I think) is what I am confused about. It took place in the past, but it is about a future action.
Does this have something to do with the difference between the past tense of imperfective and perfective verbs?
Please correct my mistakes in my Russian translation.
спасибо!!!


----------



## floridian002

So your main problem is the conjugation of the verb? Or the following time reference?

You actually don't have to worry too much about the grammar for the conjugation.

Whenever you have "would" in English the Russian verb will be in the past.
The construction is...
"Бы+ past"

Ты *бы* хоте*л* стать вампиром?
*Would* you like to become a vampire?

Он сказал что он бы перезвонил попозже.
He said he´d call back a little latter.


----------



## Malamalangue

Thank you. I know that when translating "would" when it is used in the conditional, you use _past_ + áû. But in this example, "would" is not expressing the conditional (as there is not really a condition implied). So just to be clear, are you saying that whenever we use "would" in english, and not just in the conditional, it is translated _past_ + áû?

By the way, did my cyrillic characters show up OK in this post?


----------



## floridian002

"So just to be clear, are you saying that whenever we use "would" in english, and not just in the conditional, it is translated _past_ + áû?"

Yup 
A nice little break isn't it?  Must be something to do with the supposed common heritage.

Even stylistically strangely enough!
He would get up in the morning and then he'd buy a blin at teremok.
Он бы просыпался по утрам и покупал бы блин в теремоке.

The conditional techniqually would have to include "если"

Если бы ты не жил здесь, где ты бы хотел жить?
If you didn´t live here, where would you like to live?


*I had to change my browser, it's a mystery why its just you.

p.s.
Enjoy Russia.


----------



## Malamalangue

Thanks for the clarification. I'm learning that while english has a lot of irregular words/constructions and the meaning of words are more flexible, Russian is almost the opposite with almost too many rules and subtle differences between the contexts of similar words. But sometimes Russian does give you a break!
thanks again! I'm really enjoying Russia and the russian language. I'm here for a year as a student to learn Russian and Russian culture. So far it's been great!


----------



## Awwal12

> Он бы просыпался по утрам и покупал бы блин в теремоке


1. A little correction: "в тере*мк*е". As well as "в замке", "в песке" and so on. In words with -ок endings, "o" disappears during declension, as well as in plural number ("замки", "теремки"). There are some exceptions, however, where "ок" is a firm part of word's root - "рок", "пор*о*к", and all possible loaned words.
2. "Покупал что-л. в теремке" sounds as absurd (well, at least without any context) as "bought smth. in the house". Except the case "в "*Т*еремке"" (i.e. в магазине / кафе / киоске / ресторане под названием "Теремок").


----------



## floridian002

(в магазине/кафе/ларьке/ресторане под названием "Теремок")

Именно в том я имел ввиду . Он бы заказал "email" кстати.

Всегда надо с большими буквами писать названия фирм?


----------



## dec-sev

floridian002 said:


> Even stylistically strangely enough!
> He would get up in the morning and then he'd buy a blin at teremok.
> Он бы просыпался по утрам и покупал бы блин в теремоке.


Just to make it clear, that "would" is not "бы+past" in "descriptive" sentences. If you mean repeated actions in the past I would say: "Бывало просыпался он по утрам, покупал блины в "Tеремке"..."
But if it's a conditional sentence that's OK:
Если бы я жил в деревне, то я бы просыпался утром...
If I lived in the country I would get up in the morning...


----------



## estreets

Malamalangue said:


> Hello
> This is more of a russian grammar question.
> For example, if you are writing a story about something in the past, but you want to express something that at that time in the past was in the future, but now (as you are writing about it in the past) has already happened.
> For example:
> My friend called me (yesterday morning). He said that *he would call me back* later (in the evening) with the details.
> Мой друг позвонил мне (вчера утром). Он сказал, что он (would call me back) (вчера/тем?) вечером.
> the verb in bold (which in russian is перезвонить I think) is what I am confused about. It took place in the past, but it is about a future action.
> Does this have something to do with the difference between the past tense of imperfective and perfective verbs?
> Please correct my mistakes in my Russian translation.
> спасибо!!!


позвонит (simple future)
You should use the Russian future.
I'd say, the Russain tenses are more relative. If he said "I will call", in Russian it is said "he said he will call".
This difference is a great difficulty for Russians studying English as well. They forget to change the tenses and it takes them much time to learn tables of sequence of tenses (and other words to be replaced).
вчера вечером - more common and colloquial
тем вечером - a bit archaic, poetic, but still OK.
But I'd say "он сказал, что перезвонит (по)позже (в тот же вечер? тогда же вечером? тем вечером?)"
This ajunct really puzzles me.
Foreros, any suggestions?


----------



## dec-sev

> the verb in bold (which in russian is перезвонить I think) is what I am confused about. It took place in the past, but it is about a future action.


Yes, it´s about a future action, but we unlike English Russian doesn’t have sequence of tenses. We use the future tense if it’s about the future in the past:
Он говорит, что приедет вечером. – he says…
Он сказал, что приедет вечером. – he said…


> Does this have something to do with the difference between the past tense of imperfective and perfective verbs?


 I don't think so, if only I understood your problem correctly.


----------



## ExMax

floridian002 said:


> "So just to be clear, are you saying that whenever we use "would" in english, and not just in the conditional, it is translated _past_ + áû?"
> 
> Yup


Nuh-uh 
In the conditional, yes. In the subjunctive mood, yes. You can also use "ли" ("He asked me would I go" - "Он спросил меня, не пойду ли я")
However, " I was sure she’d be late as usual" - "Я был уверен, что она опоздает как обычно"
So, a verb in the past tense is translated with the verb in the past tense, and a verb in the future tense - with a verb in the future tense.
*Added: *



> Всегда надо с большой буквы писать названия фирм?


Actually, yes.
From Rosentahl:
"_§ 22
... 
10. С п р о п и с н о й буквы пишутся первое слово и собственные имена в выделяемых кавычками названиях предприятий, фирм, банков и т. д., например: фабрика “Трехгорная мануфактура”, многопрофильный концерн “Гермес”, коммерческий банк “Российский кредит”, акционерное общество “Исполин”, фирма “Юнайтед фрут компани”...    _    "


----------



## floridian002

I stand corrected.
So conditional and subjunctive are OK, but descriptive isn't.

Whatever that is .


----------



## Awwal12

> Он бы заказал "email" кстати.


Заказывать все-таки можно "по e-mail(-у)" (т.е. по элекронной почте), в крайнем случае - "через e-mail" или "e-mail-ом" (причем в последнем случае имеется в виду конкретное письмо по электронной почте). Но вообще, намного более распространен вариант "заказать что-л. по Интернету" или, реже, "через Интернет".


> Всегда надо с большими буквами писать названия фирм?


Названия фирм - имена собственные и, соответственно, пишутся с большой буквы.
Кроме того, обычно они дополнительно заключаются в кавычки. Например, ОАО "Фобос-торг", ресторан "Арагви", гостиница "Украина", кинотеатр "Ханой", "Газпром" и т.п.


----------



## dec-sev

floridian002 said:


> I stand corrected.
> So conditional and subjunctive are OK, but descriptive isn't.
> 
> Whatever that is .


Well, I'm not sure if the term "descriptive sentence" exists at all  What I wanted to say is that "would" apart from "will" in the past is used when we speak about repeated actions in the past. The construction is often used in stories, novels, etc. Like in your example:


> He would get up in the morning and then he'd buy a blin at teremok.
> Он бы просыпался по утрам и покупал бы блин в теремоке.


But your translation into Russian is wrong I'm afraid, if only you meant a repeated action in the past indeed. My first thought was that it was the example of how "would" could be misunderstood and translated as "бы+verb in the past" 
Well, there are sentences where "would" and "wouldn't" meaning the future in the past can be translated using the past tense in Russian. But it's too complicated for a beginner (I'm referring to Malamalangue now) and I would rather not give examples in order not to complicate things at this stage.


----------



## ExMax

dec-sev said:


> But your translation into Russian is wrong I'm afraid


Why "wrong"? There're two clauses in the conditional mood; the main clause (with a description of a condition) is omitted. I think the translation is grammatically correct.


----------



## estreets

ExMax said:


> Why "wrong"? There're two clauses in the conditional mood; the main clause (with a description of a condition) is omitted. I think the translation is grammatically correct.


It can be wrong because the verb 'would' is sometimes used for description of repeatitive actions (as dec-sev mentioned). If it's synonymous to 'used to do something' no 'бы' can be used.
(Such use is possible and normal for the English language).


----------



## Awwal12

"он бы просып*а*лся по утр*а*м" - subjunctive mood, periodical action. The actual period of time (could it be in past, or would take place in future) is inessential. Similar samples: "он бы убив*а*л его" (prolonged action), "он бы ход*и*л в шк*о*лу" (periodical action), "он бы ход*и*л круг*а*ми" (prolonged action) etc.

"он бы просн*у*лся *у*тром" - subjunctive mood, single completed action. The actual period of time is also inessential, the difference is only in attributes of action. Similar samples: "он бы уб*и*л его", "он бы отпр*а*вился / уш*ё*л в школу", "он бы приш*ё*л в школу", "он бы пош*ё*л в школу (в п*е*рвый раз)", "он бы сд*е*лал круг" etc.

The main difference is that in first example we have the verb of imperfective aspect, and in the second example - of perfective aspect respectively; also "по утр*а*м" is used for regular action (i.e. the action which repeats each morning; ~ "к*а*ждое *у*тро"), when "*у*тром" doesn't mark the periodicity in any way (but sometimes may be used in the same context, for example: "*У*тром он об*ы*чно чит*а*л газ*е*ты." = "По утр*а*м он об*ы*чно чит*а*л газ*е*ты.").


----------



## Malamalangue

Thank you for all the discussion on this thread. It has really cleared up a lot for me.



dec-sev said:


> Well, there are sentences where "would" and "wouldn't" meaning the future in the past can be translated using the past tense in Russian. But it's too complicated for a beginner (I'm referring to Malamalangue now) and I would rather not give examples in order not to complicate things at this stage.


 
dec-sev, I won't be a beginner forever  and I would be interested in seeing some of these examples of when the future in the past would be translated using the past tense in Russian, if you wouldn't mind explaining. Thank you!


----------



## ExMax

In general, when we talk about the future in the past tense, the rule is quite simple, a verb of the main clause should be translated with a verb in the past; a verb of the subordinate clause should be translated with a verb in the future. However, there are very similar constructions with 'would', but not the future in the past though. For instance, 'He said the engine wouldn't start'. In this case, the verb in the subordinate clause can be translated with the verb in the past, 'мотор никак не заводился.' Anyway, this example isn't the future in the past. Another one, also not related to the future in the past, 'I asked him to visit us, but he wouldn't come' - '... но он не пожелал придти.' In fact, you should define that when we have "would" as the modal verb of the future in the past, usually we translate a verb of the subordinate clause  with a verb in the future tense. In other cases (including the conditional mood and the subjunctive mood), we can translate "would+inf." with other grammatical constructions.
_Added:_ BTW, your _'if you wouldn't mind explaining_' can be translated (depending on style) as '_не были бы Вы так любезны_ объяснить' or 'объясните, будьте добры'. We simply use the corresponding standard Russian expressions in this case. Anyway, this isn't the future in the past too....


----------



## cyanista

*Mod note:*

I have now changed the thread title to reflect the development of the discussion.


----------



## Ben Jamin

ExMax said:


> Nuh-uh
> In the conditional, yes. In the subjunctive mood, yes. "_§ 22_
> 
> _Have you got the subjunctive mood in Russian? This is interesting Can you write a little more about it?_
> 
> _Look what I found about this in Wikipedia: _
> _"_Некоторые отдельные индоевропейские языки совсем или почти совсем утратили сослагательное наклонение. К первым принадлежит армянский язык, ко вторым германские и балтийско-славянские языки, в которых от него остались только незначительные обломки."


----------



## dec-sev

Один из обломков 

_It’s necessary that he find the books._
It’s a subjunctive construction in English.

_Необходимо, чтобы он нашёл эти книги._
I’m not sure if it’s a subjunctive construction in Russian or not. I would call it “чтобы +  Past Tense”. May be ExMax meant something else.


----------



## Ben Jamin

dec-sev said:


> Один из обломков
> 
> _It’s necessary that he find the books._
> It’s a subjunctive construction in English.
> 
> _Необходимо, чтобы он нашёл эти книги._
> I’m not sure if it’s a subjunctive construction in Russian or not. I would call it “чтобы + Past Tense”. May be ExMax meant something else.


 
I have just had a discussion about the subjunctive mood in Polish, and I was told that the Slavic languages have no own Subjunctive mood, that is no own verb forms that are used only in "logical subjunctive constructions", such as the optative or volitional. "The logical subjunctive constructions" are expressed using the verb forms of the conditional. In this case the expression _чтобы он нашёл эти книги_ does not consist of “чтобы + Past Tense”, but is itself and wholly a conditional present form of the verb _найти_. _нашёл itself is a particip, which in contemporary Russian expresses the earlier compound past tense consisting of a particip and a form of be (like in Czech "_Našel jsem"), once common for all Slavic langauges.

This construction is not a residue fragment (обломок) but a common grammatical form, used for all verbs. What the author meant with this expression, I do not know.


----------



## dec-sev

Ben Jamin said:


> ...and I was told that the Slavic languages have no own Subjunctive mood, that is no own verb forms that are used only in "logical subjunctive constructions", such as the optative or volitional.


I begin to regret having got myself involved into the discussion  I'm not a language scientist and even don't have a formal education as far as languages are concerned. My be that's why I don't understand what "Slavic languages have no own Subjunctive mood, that is no own verb forms that are used only in "logical subjunctive constructions" mean. Could you please explain it more plainly? Does English have its own subjunctive mood in the way Russian doesn’t have it?  In spite of the smile-sign my question is serious. I really can’t get what you mean.


Ben Jamin said:


> In this case the expression _чтобы он нашёл эти книги_ does not consist of “чтобы + Past Tense”, but is itself and wholly a conditional present form of the verb _найти_.


Well, you may put it this way if you like, but I don’t see any practical application of the wording. I mean if I were to explain to a Russian learner what is considered the Subjunctive in English I would give a couple of examples like “it’s necessary that…” and would say that it’s Russian equivalent is “чтобы + verb in the past tense”. 


Ben Jamin said:


> _нашёл itself is a particip, which in contemporary Russian expresses the earlier compound past tense consisting of a particip and a form of be (like in Czech "_Našel jsem"), once common for all Slavic langauges.


I know a simpler wording. Нашёл is the past tense of the word найти, but what you’ve just written may be true as well 
Again, I don’t know if the construction “чтобы + verb in the past tense” is Subjunctive in Russian, but it’s a structure using which you can express what is Subjunctive in English.


----------



## Slavianophil

Awwal12 said:


> Заказывать все-таки можно "по e-mail(-у)" (т.е. по элекронной почте), в крайнем случае - "через e-mail" или "e-mail-ом" (причем в последнем случае имеется в виду конкретное письмо по электронной почте). Но вообще, намного более распространен вариант "заказать что-л. по Интернету" или, реже, "через Интернет".
> 
> .


 I see you never eat at Teremok! E-mail is the silly name they give to a pancake they sell. (If I remember correcly, it is with mushrooms.)


----------



## ExMax

Ben Jamin said:


> _Have you got the subjunctive mood in Russian? This is interesting Can you write a little more about it?_
> 
> _Look what I found about this in Wikipedia: _
> _"_Некоторые отдельные индоевропейские языки совсем или почти совсем утратили сослагательное наклонение. К первым принадлежит армянский язык, ко вторым германские и балтийско-славянские языки, в которых от него остались только незначительные обломки."


Hi, Ben!
I cannot investigate all "Baltic-Slavic languages", but we have “сослагательное наклонение” (i.e. a verb  + "бы") in our language (in Russian, I mean), and it's certainly true. Moreover, to avoid discussion about the terms, I mean not only the grammatical constructions related to the conditions of the consequence.
To be honest, I meant Russian grammatical constructions corresponding to English grammatical constructions with “would” when I wrote my post. There are lots of examples when Russian “сослагательное наклонение” corresponds to English subjunctive mood. Although, we can find examples when we can use Russian "повелительное наклонение" for translation of the subjunctive mood, so I intentionally use the Russian terms to avoid confusion.
I am afraid we can duplicate this thread


----------



## dec-sev

ExMax said:


> .
> To be honest, I meant Russian grammatical constructions corresponding to English grammatical constructions with “would” when I wrote my post. There are lots of examples when Russian “сослагательное наклонение” corresponds to English subjunctive mood.


Could you please give one?


ExMax said:


> Although, we can find examples when we can use Russian "повелительное наклонение" for translation of the subjunctive mood, so I intentionally use the Russian terms to avoid confusion.


You haven’t succeeded much in avoiding confusion, I’m afraid. As far as I understand you correctly you call the constructions like “ If I had enough money I would buy a new house  / Если бы у меня были деньги, я бы купил новый дом” subjunctive. True that the Russian expression “сослагательное наклонение” is translated into English as “conjunctive mood”, but when we use  “сослагательное наклонение” (I mean _если бы_ construction) in Russian it’s expressed using the conditional in English. 
Another example:
If you had supported you opinion not only with sources, facts and explanations but also with examples you wouldn’t have confused me, ExMax. 
This is a conditional sentence. According to Michael Vince from Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching Between Towns Road, Oxford OX4 3PP, UK. It’s just to meet you requirements with regard to sources 

And this is from the link you gave:


Jana337 said:


> As I said in my last but one post, we certainly can express the subjunctive but the point is that we miss a separate grammatical mood. Look at this example from the webpage you quoted:
> *Я бы пошёл в кино, если бы у меня был билет.*
> I would have gone to the movie, if I had had a ticket.
> 
> In both parts of the Russian sentence, you have a conditional. If some people call it conjuctive, I think they are only creating confusion in the heads of learners: It would be infinitely easier to say that you just need two conditionals in the if-clauses.





ExMax said:


> I am afraid we can duplicate this thread


That’s OK. Cyanista can split the thread or re-name it for the third time  What is more important is to make the matter clear in order to avoid confusion as you mentioned.


----------



## estreets

Полслова вдогонку.
В русском языке это наклонение называется условно-сослагательное и все свалено в кучу (не понимаю, почему. Может, чтобы запутать учащихся?).
На самом деле чистое сослагательное используется, например, после глаголов волеизъявления (хочу, чтобы Россия выиграла чемпионат). Также некоторые конструкции требуют чистого сослагательного: Какой бы учебник вы ни читали, (все равно останутся вопросы).
Все остальное - от лукавого.


----------



## Анастасия

Malamalangue said:


> Hello
> This is more of a russian grammar question.
> For example, if you are writing a story about something in the past, but you want to express something that at that time in the past was in the future, but now (as you are writing about it in the past) has already happened.
> For example:
> My friend called me (yesterday morning). He said that *he would call me back* later (in the evening) with the details.
> Мой друг позвонил мне (вчера утром). Он сказал, что он (would call me back) (вчера/тем?) вечером.
> the verb in bold (which in russian is перезвонить I think) is what I am confused about. It took place in the past, but it is about a future action.
> Does this have something to do with the difference between the past tense of imperfective and perfective verbs?
> Please correct my mistakes in my Russian translation.
> спасибо!!!



In this case you say: Мой друг позвонил мне (вчера утром). Он сказал, что перезвонит позже (вечером) и расскажет о подробностях.


----------

