# понял /понимал



## August2

Здравствуйте!

Could you please check this text for grammar/syntax?

_Тут только _учитель _ясно понял_, почему студент этого доказательства _не понимал_.
It was only then that the teacher understood/realized why the student had not understood that demonstration.


It was only then, for the first time, that the student clearly understood what he had not understood when the teacher explained that theorem.
_Тут только в первый раз он ясно понял то, чего он не понимал, когда _учитель объяснил теорему.
(I ‘_borrowed _’ this structure from АннаКаренина. Частьпятая– XIV).


----------



## Awwal12

The grammar and syntax are more or less correct, but the phrases still sound unnatural a bit. I have made some changes and added some variants:
Только [тут/тогда/в {этот/тот} момент] преподаватель/учитель понял, почему студент/ученик не понимал этого доказательства.
Только [тут/тогда/в {этот/тот} момент] он впервые ясно понял то, чего не понимал, когда преподаватель/учитель объяснял теорему.
"Учитель" and "ученик" tend to be used when one speak about a school, whereas "преподаватель" and "студент" - when one speak about an institute of higher education (институт, университет, специальное или техническое учебное заведение).


----------



## August2

Thank you, Awwal12. 

And what about this variant?
Только в этот момент он впервые ясно *понял* то, чего не *понял*, когда преподаватель объяснял теорему.


----------



## Awwal12

August2 said:


> Thank you, Awwal12.
> 
> And what about this variant?
> Только в этот момент он впервые ясно *понял* то, чего не *понял*, когда преподаватель объяснял теорему.


That is possible, but as for me, verbs coordinated in their aspect ("понимал" and "объяснял") sound better.
It is interesting what other people on this forum think about it?..


----------



## Natalisha

Awwal12 said:


> That is possible, but as for me, verbs coordinated in their aspect (&quot;понимал&quot; and &quot;объяснял&quot sound better.
> It is interesting what other people on this forum think about it?..


 
I agree with you, Awwal.


----------



## Andrey05

August2 said:


> Thank you, Awwal12.
> 
> And what about this variant?
> Только в этот момент он впервые ясно *понял* то, чего не *понял*, когда преподаватель объяснял теорему.


 
I'd say eiher 

Только в этот момент он впервые ясно *понял* то, чего не *понял*, когда преподаватель объясн*и*л теорему.
(he's understood what he didn't understand after the teacher had explained the theorem)

or 

Только в этот момент он впервые ясно *понял* то, чего не *понимал*, когда преподаватель объясн*я*л теорему.
(he's understood what he coudn't get while the teacher was explaining the theorem)


----------



## Dmitry_86

August2 said:


> Здравствуйте!
> 
> Could you please check this text for grammar/syntax?
> 
> _Тут только _учитель _ясно понял_, почему студент этого доказательства _не понимал_.
> It was only then that the teacher *clearly* understood/realized why the student *did* not understood that demonstration*/proof/evidence*.
> 
> It was only then, for the first time, when the teacher explained*/had explained* that theorem, that the student*/he* clearly understood what he had not understood *(before)*.
> _Тут только в первый раз он ясно понял то, чего он не понимал, когда _учитель объяснил теорему.
> (I ‘_borrowed _’ this structure from АннаКаренина. Частьпятая– XIV).


 
Both sentences seem to me a little bit bulky because in Russian we normally do not use such complicate structures in our everyday speech. Of course, both sentences make sense to me, but I tend to simplify them if possiblein my speech. Notice the comments in bold in the quoted post. Some more comments are as follows:

1) In the first sentence the word "clearly" is missing, because in the Russian sentence the word "ясно" is used. Concerning the appropriate Tense, I would choose Past Simple rather than Past Perfect or any other one because in the sentence it is said "... понимал" instead of "... понял" - the latter indicating to use the necessity of using Past Perfect. Finally, the word "доказательство" may be translated in several possible ways. "Demonstration" is acceptable as something that can be judged visually and shown to someone, but "proof" and "evidence" are also suitable here. Besides, since the sentence mentions a teacher who tried to explain somethingto his student, the word "proof" is more likely to correspond to the intended meaning. Probably the teacher was takling about a mathematical proof or some other one.

2)I suppose the second sentence needs feformulation so as not to mislead the target reader. Again I want to repeat that it is difficult to perceive. Also the word "before" placed by me in brackets  is not necessary but will be useful in order not to confuse the meaning - in the sentence the word "understand" is encountered too often.


----------



## Awwal12

*Dmitry 86*, but I suppose that *August2* asked to check _Russian_ grammar and syntax, not English?..


----------



## Dmitry_86

Awwal12 said:


> *Dmitry 86*, but I suppose that *August2* asked to check _Russian_ grammar and syntax, not English?..


 
Ahhh... Perhaps I have forgotten my Rusian at all!!! Anyway, I first checked his English and expressed my view of what is written in the very first post. I think he was far more interested in translating from Russianinto English rather than vice versa. Well, in any case thank you for reminding me of checking Russian, but I find the Russian sentences quite fine. The only thing that is worth changing concerns the second sentence. The problem is the word order which should be rearranged to facilitate comprehension:

_Тут только в первый раз, когда _учитель объяснил теорему,_ он ясно понял то, чего он не понимал_.


----------



## Natalisha

It was only then, for the first time, that the student clearly understood what he had not understood when the teacher explained that theorem.- Только в этот момент *ученик/студент* впервые ясно понял то, чего не понимал, когда преподаватель объяснял теорему.


----------



## Dmitry_86

Natalisha said:


> It was only then, for the first time, that the student clearly understood what he had not understood when the teacher explained that theorem.- Только в этот момент *ученик/студент* впервые ясно понял то, чего не понимал, когда преподаватель объяснял теорему.


 
I think, if we say "объясн*ял*", which emphasizes that the action was lengthy and progressive, it would be better to use the Past Continuous: "was explaining"


----------



## August2

Я хорошо понимаю, что …the _consecutio temporum_ in my English sentences are far from being perfect. 

But, as *Awwal* rightly points out, my only interest was in the correct coordination of Russian verbs in their aspect. 
I added an English ‘rough’ translation just to give an idea of what I wanted to say in Russian.

On the whole, I think I’ve got some useful ‘materials’ and useful hints. 
So, molte grazie Natalisha, Awwal, Dmitry e Andrey!


----------



## freevillage

The sentences sound just as awkward in Russian as they do in English. You probably want to use synonyms or restructure your sentence in either language.

The best translation for Учитель понял, что ученик не понимал is in my view, something like "The teacher understood what the student was not understanding (all along)". 

In Russian, I would rephrase it along the lines of Учитель понял, что было неясно ученику. Something analogous would work well in English, too.


----------



## estreets

The only thing I know for sure is that Tolstoy's language differs a bit from the normal Russian language we speak now. That's why constructions based ob Tolstoy's language sound strange. One shouldn't take those examples to practice in Russianm imho.
And I agree with Feevillage about restructuring the sentences in general.


----------



## Ptak

As for me, the first of the given sentences, "Тут только учитель ясно понял, почему студент этого доказательства не понимал" sounds quite good to me. Only a little bit old-fashioned, indeed.


----------



## cyanista

*Mod note*

Please note that Rule 5 reads as follows:



> These forums respond to specific questions about text. They do not provide free translations. They do not provide proofreading and rewriting of texts. Thus, discussion should center on the word or phrase in the thread title. Additional source text is accepted only as context; please do not submit it for translation or proofreading.


----------



## vallery

august2 said:


> Здравствуйте!
> 
> could you please check this text for grammar/syntax?
> 
> _Тут только _учитель _ясно понял_, почему студент этого доказательства _не понимал_.
> it was only then that the teacher understood/realized why the student had not understood that demonstration.
> 
> 
> it was only then, for the first time, that the student clearly understood what he had not understood when the teacher explained that theorem.
> _Тут только в первый раз он ясно понял то, чего он не понимал, когда _учитель объяснил теорему.
> (i ‘_borrowed _’ this structure from АннаКаренина. Частьпятая– xiv).


 

Только когда учитель объяснил теорему, он в первый раз ясно понял то, чего он тут не понимал.


----------



## August2

Perhaps the Moderator will allow me to synthesize what I’ve learned about *понять/**понимать* (and объяснить/объяснять as ‘side-effect’ companion verbs) and give my thanks also to *freevillage, estreet, Ptak and vallery* for their attention and useful suggestions.

So, “Преподаватель *понял*, что студент не *понимал*”can be rephrased as “Преподаватель *понял*, что *было неясно* студенту”. 
To say the truth, my first original sentence was:
“Тут только учитель ясно *понял*, _почему_ студент этого доказательства не *понимал*”, which only sounds a bit old-fashioned.

I would only be too glad to give the original context, i.e. describe that “mathematical proof” but it would surely be off-topic (even if it wasn’t _Доказательство великой теоремы Ферма_).

However, that awkward and old-fashioned context might be described in plain words like this:
Студент спросил: "Профессор! Я не *понял* доказательство теоремы VB. Не могли бы вы *объяснить* мне его еще раз?" Профессор оцепенел на несколько минут и, снова вернувшись на землю, сказал: "...что и требовалось доказать. Ну вы* поняли *меня? ". Студент переспросил: "Да, но вы так и не сказали мне, как доказывается теорема". "Хорошо, я приведу вам ...”.
_Тут только преподаватель ясно *понял*, почему студент этого доказательства не *понимал*”._


----------



## Dmitry_86

August2 said:


> So, “Преподаватель *понял*, что студент не *понимал*”can be rephrased as “Преподаватель *понял*, что *было неясно* студенту”.
> To say the truth, my first original sentence was:
> “Тут только учитель ясно *понял*, _почему_ студент этого доказательства не *понимал*”, which only sounds a bit old-fashioned.


 
Why do you think that your ORIGINAL sentence sounds old-fashioned? No, it does not. It is absolutely correct. On the contrary, I find the first two sentences a bit awkward. The first one “Преподаватель *понял*, что студент не *понимал*” lacks an object at the very end. In this meaning "понимал" must be followed by an object clarifying to us what particularly the student did not understand. The other sentence “Преподаватель *понял*, что *было неясно* студенту” is better, but I would still add the word "именно" after "что" so the sentence becomes “Преподаватель *понял*, что ИМЕННО *было неясно* студенту”. 



August2 said:


> However, that awkward and old-fashioned context might be described in plain words like this:
> Студент спросил: "Профессор! Я не *понял* доказательство теоремы VB. Не могли бы вы *объяснить* мне его еще раз?" Профессор оцепенел на несколько минут и, снова вернувшись на землю, сказал: "...что и требовалось доказать. Ну вы* поняли *меня? ". Студент переспросил: "Да, но вы так и не сказали мне, как доказывается теорема". "Хорошо, я приведу вам ...”.
> _Тут только преподаватель ясно *понял*, почему студент этого доказательства не *понимал*”._


 
This extract is fine. The only thing I do not understand is the relation of "земля" to the crux of this passage.


----------

