# По-русски говорим



## dimhollow

I know that the Russian's word-order is quite variable. Can I say: па русский говори́м - instead of говори́м па русский? Does it sound natural? My guess is that this way I emphasize the fact that it's Russian that we speak.  Thank you, dimhollow.


----------



## Maroseika

dimhollow said:


> I know that the Russian's word-order is quite variable. Can I say: па русский говори́м - instead of говори́м па русский? Does it sound natural? My guess is that this way I emphasize the fact that it's Russian that we speak.  Thank you, dimhollow.




По-русски говорим and говорим по-русски are both correct and natural. 
However without a context it's a bit hard to say what exactly is emphasized in each of them.


----------



## dimhollow

Can explain that to me with some examples?


----------



## Maroseika

Neutral sequence in Russian is SVO, like in English. Inversion usually means shift of the semantic stress. But there is no subject in your phrases, so I had to add it. 

Neutral phrase:
- Вы говорите по-украински?
- Нет, мы говорим по-русски. 

По-русски is semantically stressed:
- Вы сейчас говорите по-русски или по-украински?
- Да по-русски мы говорим, конечно.


----------



## dimhollow

Thank you!


----------



## Moro12

And please note:
русский - Russian (adjective or noun)
but:
по-русски - in Russian (adverb). No -й!


----------



## football_

dimhollow said:


> I know that the Russian's word-order is quite variable. Can I say: па русский говори́м - instead of говори́м па русский? Does it sound natural? My guess is that this way I emphasize the fact that it's Russian that we speak.  Thank you, dimhollow.


It depends also on intonation. In writing there is no intonation; so, when reading, we guess the meaning from context.

For example, I could pronounce second Maroseika's example so that "говорим" will be semantically stressed, but it won't make any sense in the context.

To clarify, I'd add my feeling, that grew up after some (not that many) years of using Russian. The concept of "semantic stress", commanded by word order and intonation, is rather blurred, because both word order and intonation act upon two, not one, "semantic stresses". First, they message what we speak about in a sentence (A), that is, from what the thought begins; second, they message which fact (B), said by a speaker about A, is most significant for him/her, that is, where exactly the main part of thought goes. I guess (though I'm not completely sure), that this conclusion may apply to English (and many other human languages, though maybe not to all — some of them are free to drop the distinction from expressing) as well.

For example (letters apply to preceding words):
- Вы (A) говорите (B) по-русски?
- По-русски (A) я с недавних пор говорю (B), но плохо (B).  ("с недавних пор" is unmarked here by intonation; but it could as well be marked — in other phrase written the same).

Another example: in the sentence "To clarify (A), I'd |add my feeling| (B) here" the subject of discussion is clarification; and the main fact I message about clarification is that I'm adding my feeling somewhere. The facts that it is I who is adding the feeling and that I'm adding the feeling exactly here are not most significant in the sentence I used; but if I pronounce the sentence differently — for example, if I stress the word "here" by my intonation — then "here" will become B, and the action of adding my feelings will be nothing but a comment to the whole message about clarification. And if now I drop out the words "to clarify" (and retain the stress on "here"), then "here" will remain B, and the action of adding the feelings will become A.

The actual rules (A), how to get to know A and B in a particular sentence, are complicated (B) (and I |don't know| (B) them all; maybe |nobody does| (B) ). So you have to get a feel for them by your own experience with Russian language (and I think, that actually it's not as hard as it sounds to be).

Well, there are (A) of course some other (B) meanings, "stresses", expressed by intonation and word order, like the meaning of question (in Russian we mark a sentence as a question, using intonation; in other languages, say, in French and in English, they often use word order to achieve this, or a special word like "est-ce que"). But the whole of it gets too complicated without mentioning this fact as well  . The interesting thing, we get to know how to use all this, without knowing all the rules...

Good luck!


----------



## oirobi

The word order in Russian is not as free as it may seem:


Человек пришел - *The* man has come / came.

Пришел человек - *А* man has come / came.

По-русски говорим - We do speak Russian. It sounds as if it is emphasised that we do speak, but don't read, sing (or smth like that) in Russian.

Мы говорим по-русски - It is Russian that we speak.

По-русски говорим мы - It is us that speak Russian (not them/him etc)


----------



## morzh

The phrase is in the form of a question.
because of this, it has to be explained that it is less polite than "Вьi говорите по-русски" or even "тъi говоришь по-русски"?

I would not say this phrase to any person I don't know. And if I know a person, then I certainly do not need to use it.
I would not advise using it, unless you are a police officer.


----------



## Ptak

oirobi said:


> Человек пришел - *The* man has come / came.
> 
> Пришел человек - *А* man has come / came.


This is rubbish to me. Why on earth "человек пришел" can't be translated as "*a* man has come" ? Everything depends on the intonation, on which word you stress. As well as in the other examples you gave.


----------



## morzh

Ptak said:


> This is rubbish to me. Why on earth "человек пришел" can't be translated as "*a* man has come" ? Everything depends on the intonation, on which word you stress. As well as in the other examples you gave.



(Can I suggest for us to have a civilized discussion? - we are not here to compete).

Either one can be translated as "a man" or "the man".
It depends on context.

1) - Там человек пришел, Вас ожидает - there's a man there waiting for you.

2) 
- Танечка, я тут одного человека жду, так что как он придет, позвоните мне сразу же, ладно? (to a secretary - Tanya, I am waiting for someone, so once he comes, call me immediately, OK?)
- Хорошо, Иван Иваньiч. (Sure).
(5 минут спустя) (5 minutes later)
- Иван Иваньiч, человек пришел, пропустить его к Вам? (The man has just come, should I let him through?)

Both "пришел человек" and "человек пришел" may mean the same, including whether it is "a man" or "the man", but with different nuances.


----------



## oirobi

I suggest you read something about the following notions: theme, rheme, topic, focus, актуальное членение предложения, etc. 

Once that lacuna in your knowledge is filled up, "the rubbish" will start making perfect sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic–comment is not bad for starters (here's what it says, in particular: "So called free-word order languages (e.g. Russian, Czech, to a certain extent Chinese or German) use word-order as the primary means. Usually topic precedes focus. However, for example in Czech, both orders are possible.") But Wiki is no authority on the subject. Ideally, try to get a hold of one of the classic works by Talmy Givon. But a good textbook in linguistics will do too.

 As for " Там человек пришел", it implies that the man is indefinite, thus translates as "*a* man". In the phrase "человек пришел", however, the man is definite, hence "*the* man". Of course, the intonation can alter the message (it is one the reasons why "the topic of topic" in linguistics belongs to another level - the discourse, not the grammar.) but do you mark intonation in writing?


----------



## Sobakus

oirobi said:


> По-русски говорим - We do speak Russian. It sounds as if it is emphasised that we do speak, but don't read, sing (or smth like that) in Russian.
> 
> Мы говорим по-русски - It is Russian that we speak.
> 
> По-русски говорим мы - It is us that speak Russian (not them/him etc)


 These are true if the last word is stressed. I, however, would stress по-русски in all of these sentences and that would change the translation. There's no correspondence between word order and meaning outside of context in written speech.


----------



## oirobi

Sobakus said:


> There's no correspondence between word order and meaning outside of context in written speech.



Discourse and "актуальное членение предожения" are not about meaning, they are about topic, focus, new information, etc. Guys, before you start a discussion, take at the least the trouble to learn the basics of the subject you wanna argue about.


----------



## Sobakus

oirobi said:


> Discourse and "актуальное членение предожения" are not about meaning, they are about topic, focus, new information, etc. Guys, before you start a discussion, take at the least the trouble to learn the basics of the subject you wanna argue about.


 Ehm, in my understanding "meaning" includes the things you listed. Regardless of whether I know or do not know what "ачп" is(which I do), your translations are wrong. In such short phrases without context the focus depends primarily on sentence stress, not on word order.


----------



## morzh

What I honestly do not understand is how almost every question that requires a simple answer turns into a scientific dispute in this particular forum.
Should we learn to put a lid on it? Are we here for our own amusement in the first place, or for the benefit of the people who come here asking question in hope to get a simple and understandable answer?


----------



## oirobi

I agree with Morzh and don't feel like arguing. Anyways, it's either you take a book and learn something new, or else perservere in your absolute certitude that you already know everything, including "ачп" )).


----------

