# На полке повыше кефир стоит



## Encolpius

Hello, I ran into this comment on a SNS: "...На нижней полке свалены в кучу пакеты молока. На полке повыше кефир стоит. На самом верху стоит йогурт." Of course there were more yogurts and kefirs, so I would use plural. 
Is it possible (correct) to say: *кефири стоят, стоят йогурты. *Thanks. Encolpius


----------



## Rosett

Encolpius said:


> Is it possible (correct) to say: *кефири стоят, стоят йогурты. *


No. You should use singular only, unless kefir or yogourt are clearly of different brands, or if you use пакеты/упаковки (кефира/йогурта):
На полке стоит кефир (unspecified amount and retail units.)
На полке стоят пакеты кефира/с кефиром.
На полке стоят разные виды кефира. Colloquially, you can say, «На полке стоят разные кефиры / стоит (разный) кефир».


----------



## Awwal12

While "йогурт" may be easily undrestood as a unit (pack or bottle) of yogurt in the colloquial language, with кефир it's more problematic (probably because kefir is usually sold in larger volumes); I'd understand "кефиры" (not "кефири"   ) as explicitly stressing that there are different types of kefir present. Using "кефир" in the meaning "a pack or a bottle of kefir" is virtually limited to counting and small numbers (coll. два кефира = два пакета кефира).


----------



## pimlicodude

Awwal12 said:


> While "йогурт" may be easily undrestood as a unit (pack or bottle) of yogurt in the colloquial language, with кефир it's more problematic (probably because kefir is usually sold in larger volumes); I'd understand "кефиры" (not "кефири"   ) as explicitly stressing that there are different types of kefir present. Using "кефир" in the meaning "a pack or a bottle of kefir" is virtually limited to counting and small numbers (coll. два кефира = два пакета кефира).


This is the same as in English, where "there was more yoghurt" (NB: the correct spelling in British English is yoghurt; many people in England are annoyed that the major UK supermarket has shifted to spelling it "yogurt") would be said. Yoghurts could refer to individual packets, e.g. I bought three yoghurts. But in the content in #1, it is yoghurt, the collective, that is being referred to.


----------



## Vovan

Encolpius said:


> Is it possible (correct) to say: *кефиры стоят, стоят йогурты. *


No, you should say: _Кефир стоит, стоят йогурты_.

As a reference to bottles of kefir, the plural form "кефиры" will sound extremely clumsy in most instances. If, for some reason, you need to convey the idea of there being a number of containers, you could say instead: _Стоят йогурты, стоят бутылки с кефиром (_or:_ бутылки кефира)._

But, as Awwal noted in his post above, there's an exception. I'd add that "кефиры" in the sense "(a number of) bottles of kefir" is mostly limited to shopping, ordering food in cafes, etc. So we can buy "два кефира" (=two bottles/packets/glasses... of kefir), but we'll hardly say "Теперь я добавляю эти два кефира в миску" (=Now I'm adding these two kefirs into the bowl) while commenting on how we're making a cake on Youtube.




Encolpius said:


> I ran into this comment on a SNS: "...На полке повыше кефир стоит. На самом верху стоит йогурт".



The phrase "стоит йогурт" usually brings an image of one container of yoghurt, at least to me:
_У меня в холодильнике йогурт стоит - возьми, если хочешь. _(I've got a yoghurt in the fridge - take it if you like.)​​To specifically refer to many, we say "стоят йогурты". But actually, we'd rather say the following below, with "стоят/стоит" replaced by "есть":
_У меня в холодильнике есть йогурт - возьми, если хочешь. _(Есть = имеется = there's. The sentence isn't saying whether there's just one container or more.)​
In the sentence you quote, "стоит йогурт" only contextually refers to containers. Both "йогурт" and "кефир" should be understood here as simply (groups of) product items, not containers.


As is now clear, the verb "стоять" strongly affects whether countable or uncountable meanings of "кефир" and "йогурт" could be used along with it. I'll make an attempt at listing all those meanings (but I may miss something):

*йогурт, кефир:*

a general type of food/drink (Я люблю кефир/йогурт. / Убери кефир/йогурт в холодильник) - uncountable;
a particular brand name food product (Лидер рынка кефиров/йогуртов в стране) - countable;
a bottle/packet/glass... of it (Взял два кефира/йогурта в магазине) - "йогурт" is countable, while "кефир" normally isn't ( Убери кефиры в холодильник);
a product item, or a group of product items (Кефир(ы)/йогурт(ы) у нас на той полке) - countable/uncountable;
a type of "dish" (Рецепты фруктовых кефиров) - countable/uncountable.


----------



## MIDAV

Awwal12 said:


> Using "кефир" in the meaning "a pack or a bottle of kefir" is virtually limited to counting and small numbers (coll. два кефира = два пакета кефира).


People probably still perceive it as a kind of singular considering that, while _два кефира _sounds quite natural, _пять кефиров_ becomes problematic. In a similar fashion, _молоко_, a noun that certainly has no plural, can still be combined with два, три, and четыре, for example _три молока_. 

I would say it doesn't have to be a small number. Rather, it has to be a number ending in два, три or четыре, for example _32 кефира_.


----------



## nizzebro

MIDAV said:


> while _два кефира _sounds quite natural, _пять кефиров_ becomes problematic.


Of course it is problematic, because having so much kefir could be not so good for your stomach.  
I think that Awwal is right in #3 in that that is connected to volumes. Suppose there is a small grocery shop in your neighborhood, where they sell a lot of kefir of different flavors in small packs like 0.25 l, which is a kind of local feature there, beloved by all residents - and, you have five children and buy them that kefir on a daily basis. In such case, I believe, it would be some easier for you to utter "... и 5 кефиров, как обычно". Молоко is another thing - it is about morphology, I guess - even though probably the gender as such also matters.


----------



## Awwal12

MIDAV said:


> for example _32 кефира_.


Let's say I struggle to imagine a context where it would sound natural.


----------



## nizzebro

Awwal12 said:


> Let's say I struggle to imagine a context where it would sound natural.


Well, a small retailer making a purchase from a wholesaler who sells it of one and the same sort and packing all the time.


----------



## MIDAV

nizzebro said:


> Of course it is problematic, because having so much kefir could be not so good for your stomach.
> I think that Awwal is right in #3 in that that is connected to volumes. Suppose there is a small grocery shop in your neighborhood, where they sell a lot of kefir of different flavors in small packs like 0.25 l, which is a kind of local feature there, beloved by all residents - and, you have five children and buy them that kefir on a daily basis. In such case, I believe, it would be some easier for you to utter "... и 5 кефиров, как обычно". Молоко is another thing - it is about morphology, I guess - even though probably the gender as such also matters.


I would definitely try avoiding "_пять кефиров_" in pretty much any context. Whatever the shop and however small the volume, I would prefer _пять штук кефира_ or just _пять кефира _(sic).

And if you don't like _молоко_, we can use _вода _or _вино_ or _чай _(can be continued ad nauseam) - all nouns with regular plurals. They would exhibit the same behaviour - they can be combined with два, три or четыре, but not with other numerals.


----------



## nizzebro

MIDAV said:


> And if you don't like _молоко_, we can use _вода _or _вино_ or _чай _(can be continued ad nauseam) - all nouns with regular plurals. They would exhibit the same behaviour - they can be combined with два, три or четыре, but not other numerals.


However, with йогурт the behavior seems to be different anyway - and I don't see how it is different from кефир from purely grammatical standpoint.


----------



## Vovan

MIDAV said:


> And if you don't like _молоко_, we can use _вода _or _вино_ or _чай _(can be continued ad nauseam) - all nouns with regular plurals. They would exhibit the same behaviour - they can be combined with два, три or четыре, but not with other numerals.


That's debatable. "Пять/шесть... вин" is quite possible, but it would refer to types/brands of wine:
_Эти пять вин – от престижного Бордо до чернильного австралийского Шираза – жаждут все винные гурманы._ (The internet.)​​Also, even without referring to any sorts of water, we can say:
_Для детей овощи и фрукты надо мыть в трех водах с мылом, забыть о кремовых трубочках и бифштексах с кровью. _(Idem.)​And we can easily continue here: _в шести водах_ etc.


----------



## MIDAV

Vovan said:


> That's debatable. "Пять/шесть... вин" is quite possible, but it would refer to types/brands of wine:
> _Эти пять вин – от престижного Бордо до чернильного австралийского Шираза – жаждут все винные гурманы._ (The internet.)​


Well yes, I agree it is quite possible. But I presumed we were discussing things that can be placed in a fridge, such as cartons of milk or bottles of wine, in which case it becomes impossible.


----------



## nizzebro

I suppose that anyway the key factor is, so to speak, to how much degree that thing is mass-like or of diverse sorts in respect to volume.

So чай is masculine as well as йогурт, but, is more mass-like, both in the way it is distributed (it can be sold potentially by weight) and in the way it is consumed - you can make and drink it throughout the day, so it is hard to conceptualize some generic portion of it, while youghurt is a portion-wise dessert (at least in Russia): you open a small pack, consume it at once and forget. It is sold also in big packs today, but initially, these were really tiny.

And speaking of neuter/feminine nouns, although we could take into account only phonetics and morphology (which makes short genitive forms as вод, вин without a marker less clear in the genitive, complicating the communication), but the water (вода) is also a "highly mass-like" thing (and besides a broad notion), and as well is beer and wine - and  wine, besides that, even though it goes in bottles, is thought as highly diverse in sorts. This makes me think once again of correlation between the morphology and semantics in respect to "comfy/non-comfy" forms...


----------



## nizzebro

And, I always can say "бутылок вина", but I don't know what is the proper term for a small pack of yougurt. "Упаковка" sounds too formal/complicated and may refer to a package of many items. If it is a paper pack, "пакет" sounds as something that is either big or flat, and "пачка" sounds as if said about cigarettes or butter. If it is cup-like, it is probably "стаканчик" - but also sounds ambiguous because a proper стаканчик is that of ice cream; "чашка" (cup) should be open on top. A small bottle is "бутылочка" - but sounds a little like infant food; and neither of these is the most common option for the form of pack they use to sell it. No count word - so it becomes itself the count word.


----------



## Vovan

nizzebro said:


> ...youghurt is a portion-wise dessert (at least in Russia)


That's true: ordinary Russians got acquainted with yoghurt as something that only comes in packs (cups, bottles, etc.), and at the very beginning, "йогурт" was even perceived more like a_ Kinder Surprise_ (TM) than a generic/basic product. It was only later that it was put on a par with milk, kefir, etc. by ordinary people.


----------



## pimlicodude

I have to say I was caught out on more than one occasion with kefir, when my university sent me to Voronezh for a three-month language course and I lived with a Russian man in his flat. He often served me kefir for breakfast, and it looked like milk, and I thought it was milk, and then I tasted it and realised I had been cruelly tricked.


----------

