# виноват



## Xavier61

I see that some people use a verb "виновать", for instance: кто виновать и что делать?  I cannot find such a verb in dictionaries. I only find винить. So, questions:

In which register of the language is used виновать? Is it acceptable in casual conversation? 
Винит has no perfective form? Повинить? Обвинить?


----------



## Q-cumber

There's no verb "виновать" in Russian, sorry.

Кто винова*т... *- who is guilty/ responsible?

"Виноват" is a short form of the adjective "виноватый" (guilty).
Я виноват - it's my fault.

The related verbs are: винить, обвинять, виноватить (colloquial, rarely used) - to accuse, to blame, to make smb. feel guilty.


----------



## Rosett

"Виновать" is a properly conceivable singular imperative form of "виноватить".
"Ну, так и не цепляйся, не виновать его. Вышли ему другую сотню»[221]. Холл так и поступил. А через три дня в ..."
Значение: осуждай, устыжай.


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Hi Xavier61. "Bиноват!" ("виновата!" if the person speaking is female) is also routinely used in social situations where something awkward has happened, e.g. you bump into someone, and you want to say "sorry!", "my fault!" - you take the blame. More on the use of this word in the WR dictionary here, and on the page here (classes.ru)


----------



## Xavier61

Enquiring Mind said:


> Hi Xavier61. "Bиноват!" ("виновата!" if the person speaking is female) is also routinely used in social situations where something awkward has happened, e.g. you bump into someone, and you want to say "sorry!", "my fault!" - you take the blame. More on the use of this word in the WR dictionary here, and on the page here (classes.ru)



Thanks. It was strange for me that the same word could be written either with hard or soft last consonant. There are many examples in internet and books.


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> Thanks. It was strange for me that the same word could be written either with hard or soft last consonant. There are many examples in internet and books.


The word with the soft sign doesn't exist in Russian (and never existed). You can trust me here.  No matter how many examples there are in Internet, all of them are wrong.** *Please note that according to the pre-reform Russian orthography rules (before 1917) the word was ending with the *hard sign "ъ". 




			"Кто виноватъ и что дѣлать"
		
Click to expand...



* *with the exception of what Rosett mentioned above


> "Виновать" is a properly conceivable singular imperative form of "виноватить".


However, this verb has extremely limited and low colloquial usage. It is very unlikely that you'll ever hear or read it.


----------



## Vovan

Xavier
Виноват lies in the same category as рад, обязан, должен, согласен etc., i.e. the so-called предикативы. These short adjectives are special in that they cannot be changed into their full forms when used as предикативы.  Another feature is that they tend to be disconnected with the preceding "не" in today's Russian.

"Я виноват в этом" is good, while "Я виноватый в этом" is unusual.


----------



## Xavier61

Q-cumber said:


> The word with the soft sign doesn't exist in Russian (and never existed). You can trust me here.  No matter how many examples there are in Internet, all of them are wrong.** *Please note that according to the pre-reform Russian orthography rules (before 1917) the word was ending with the *hard sign "ъ".
> *
> "Кто виноватъ и что дѣлать"
> 
> *
> 
> * *with the exception of what Rosett mentioned above
> 
> However, this verb has extremely limited and low colloquial usage. It is very unlikely that you'll ever hear or read it.



Thank you, I asked because, searching for it,  I also saw it in some books with pre-reform orthography:
* Ты ни въ чемъ не виновать*
Из родной литературы послегоголевского периода

*Да, я, барышня, виновать предъ вами*
Владимирские мономахи

and more. Typographic errors, maybe?
Anyway, I am not much interested in 19th century speech. It's only that I saw this word in Internet and I was surprised.
Thanks to all for your help


----------



## Vovan

http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/wordhistory/1518/Виноватый - история слова "виноватый" с т.зр. словообразования.


----------



## Xavier61

Vovan said:


> http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/wordhistory/1518/Виноватый - история слова "виноватый" с т.зр. словообразования.


 Thank you Vovan.
Now I see that some people also use "винивать".
А за Крым нельзя ведь винивать только Путина и ФСБ России
И винивать в этом вам будет некого!

Even "винивать/винить":
Нельзя винивать бедного модератора в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная.


----------



## Rosett

Vovan said:


> http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/wordhistory/1518/Виноватый - история слова "виноватый" с т.зр. словообразования.


I don't think that the explanation given above is plausible enough. "Виноватый" is a lesser degree of "виновный", in a full agreement with the paradigm of _-оват_.
(Even "винный" remains as such in its perfective part "повинный", that acquired the new imperfective sense through usage, or in its short form "винен".)


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> Thank you, I asked because, searching for it,  I also saw it in some books with pre-reform orthography:
> * Ты ни въ чемъ не виновать*
> Из родной литературы послегоголевского периода
> 
> *Да, я, барышня, виновать предъ вами*
> Владимирские мономахи
> 
> and more. Typographic errors, maybe?
> Anyway, I am not much interested in 19th century speech. It's only that I saw this word in Internet and I was surprised.
> Thanks to all for your help


These are either printing or scanning errors. Please notice and compare distances between the last two letters.   There's exactly the space to accommodate the hard sign.


----------



## rusita preciosa

Xavier61 said:


> Thank you Vovan.
> Now I see that some people also use "винивать".


There is no such word as винивать. The examples you listed must be typos.


----------



## Drink

Vovan said:


> Xavier
> Виноват lies in the same category as рад, обязан, должен, согласен etc., i.e. the so-called предикативы. These short adjectives are special in that they cannot be changed into their full forms when used as предикативы.  Another feature is that they tend to be disconnected with the preceding "не" in today's Russian.
> 
> "Я виноват в этом" is good, while "Я виноватый в этом" is unusual.



There is the famous line from Бриллиантовая Рука: "Не виноват*ая* я, он сам пришел." I used to find this very strange.


----------



## Rosett

Drink said:


> There is the famous line from Бриллиантовая Рука: "Не виноват*ая* я, он сам пришел." I used to find this very strange.


It may be even more strange, that the phrase became a popular mem since then, found universally now:
"Не виноватая я... Катерина пришла ко мне на прием в отчаянии и хотела, чтобы я «помогла ей стать хорошей матерью». Еле сдерживая слезы, она ..."
"Не виноватая я: Тимошенко открестилась от связи с Онищенко"
""Не виноватая я": студентка из Екатеринбурга провела в СИЗО целый год из-за своего парня-наркодилера. Оксану задержали как члена банды, но она утверждает, что попала в руки полиции случайно."

Usually, it is about a lame excuse, when the guilt is obvious anyway.


----------



## Xavier61

Q-cumber said:


> These are either printing or scanning errors. Please notice and compare distances between the last two letters.   There's exactly the space to accommodate the hard sign.


Yes, I think you are right, eagle eye. Malfunction of old scanning software.


----------



## Xavier61

rusita preciosa said:


> There is no such word as винивать. The examples you listed must be typos.


Can a native speaker make an educated guess about which is the typo? I mean, which word did the original poster want to write?

А за Крым нельзя ведь винивать только Путина и ФСБ России ...
И винивать в этом вам будет некого.
Нельзя винивать бедного модератора в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная.


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> Can a native speaker make an educated guess about which is the typo? I mean, which word did the original poster want to write?
> 
> А за Крым нельзя ведь винивать только Путина и ФСБ России ...
> И винивать в этом вам будет некого.
> Нельзя винивать бедного модератора в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная.


The right verb would be "винить".


----------



## Vovan

"Ви́новать" - диалектизм со значением "обвинять".  Формы 1-го и 2-го лица - "ви́ную" и "ви́нуешь". Например:
Не винуй, моя любезная. Виноватая глухая полночь.​(Из словаря русских народных говоров, РАН.)


----------



## Q-cumber

Vovan said:


> "Ви́новать" - диалектизм со значением "обвинять".  Формы 1-го и 2-го лица - "ви́ную" и "ви́нуешь". Например:
> Не винуй, моя любезная. Виноватая глухая полночь.​(Из словаря русских народных говоров, РАН.)


Ну это что-то такое уже совсем экзотическое, из области этнографии.


----------



## Sobakus

Xavier61 said:


> Can a native speaker make an educated guess about which is the typo? I mean, which word did the original poster want to write?
> 
> А за Крым нельзя ведь винивать только Путина и ФСБ России ...
> И винивать в этом вам будет некого.
> Нельзя винивать бедного модератора в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная.


Looks like the iterative form of _винить_ like _пиливать_ from _пилить_, rarely used without prefixes in modern Russian but standard with verbs of movement_._ I just don't see any reason to use the iterative in those contexts, but perhaps it's supposed to soften the meaning, so "to find fault" instead of "to accuse".


----------



## Xavier61

Vovan said:


> "Ви́новать" - диалектизм со значением "обвинять".  Формы 1-го и 2-го лица - "ви́ную" и "ви́нуешь". Например:
> Не винуй, моя любезная. Виноватая глухая полночь.​(Из словаря русских народных говоров, РАН.)


 
Thank you Vovan, that is what I was looking for.

By the way, who and why changed the title of the thread?


----------



## Xavier61

Q-cumber said:


> Ну это что-то такое уже совсем экзотическое, из области этнографии.



Exotic as it might be, some people think it can be used in poetry, not only in forums. I cannot judge the literary quality of the text, is it written in proper Russian?

Не виновать

Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова

Не виновать! Тут нет моей вины, –
я не звала. Отозвалась – и только! 
Как камертон на звук твоей струны.
Ты – музыкант, я  –  до-ре-ми-фа-солька.
Не виновать (Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова) / Стихи.ру

How should we read the poem? Do you think that she mistakes soft and hard consonants?
I think that mistaking soft and hard consonants is a marker of being non-native Russian, it is a mistake that a native Russian rarely makes.
I see that in Ukrainan the adjective is "виноватий", does Ukrainan have a short form "виновать"?


----------



## Drink

Xavier61 said:


> I see that in Ukrainan the adjective is "виноватий", does Ukrainan have a short form "виновать"?



In Ukrainian, и is a hard vowel similar to Russian ы. Also, Ukrainian for the most part does not have short forms of adjectives.


----------



## Vovan

Q-cumber said:


> Ну это что-то такое уже совсем экзотическое, из области этнографии.


Once I was looking for a few words that I had only heard from my late father (born in Sverdlovsk in 1950), and so I found this wonderful dictionary, which listed those words.

Basically, I agree with you.  But the funny thing is that hardly had I ever realised before my twenties that those words my Dad would use were pure regionalisms.

I guess that today many of such words might be seen as occasionalisms, for they have been spread far beyond their places of origin.


Xavier61 said:


> Exotic as it might be, some people think it can be used in poetry, not only in forums. I cannot judge the literary quality of the text, is it written in proper Russian?
> 
> Не виновать
> 
> Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова
> 
> Не виновать! Тут нет моей вины, –
> я не звала. Отозвалась – и только!
> Как камертон на звук твоей струны.
> Ты – музыкант, я  –  до-ре-ми-фа-солька.
> Не виновать (Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова) / Стихи.ру
> 
> How should we read the poem? Do you think that she mistakes soft and hard consonants?


Before today I would have read it as "Не винова́ть!" (and would have thought about "мариновать"  as a phonetic association, and about "Не казнить!" as the possible meaning). Now I know that this use is possible as dialectical, but the stress is different: "Не ви́новать!" (=Не вини́ть!).

But what the poetess actually means is the verb *"винова́тить"*: "Не винова́ть (меня)!" (=Не делай из меня виноватую).

This is good poetry, Xavier.


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> Exotic as it might be, some people think it can be used in poetry, not only in forums. I cannot judge the literary quality of the text, is it written in proper Russian?
> 
> Не виновать
> 
> Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова
> 
> Не виновать! Тут нет моей вины, –
> я не звала. Отозвалась – и только!
> Как камертон на звук твоей струны.
> Ты – музыкант, я  –  до-ре-ми-фа-солька.
> Не виновать (Наталья Алексеевна Бирюкова) / Стихи.ру
> 
> How should we read the poem? Do you think that she mistakes soft and hard consonants?
> I think that mistaking soft and hard consonants is a marker of being non-native Russian, it is a mistake that a native Russian rarely makes.
> I see that in Ukrainan the adjective is "виноватий", does Ukrainan have a short form "виновать"?


Poets enjoy so-called 'poetic freedom' a.k.a. 'poetic license' , which means that they can do with words whatever they want in order to express their feelings and thoughts.  As to this particular poem, I find it quite inferior. In my opinion, it's just another self-published product of graphomania. Anyway, she obviously uses "винов*а*ть" intentionally. It's not a mistake. I think this is a 'poetic occasionalism'.


----------



## Xavier61

Q-cumber said:


> Poets enjoy so-called 'poetic freedom' a.k.a. 'poetic license' , which means that they can do with words whatever they want in order to express their feelings and thoughts.  As to this particular poem, I find it quite inferior. In my opinion, it's just another self-published product of graphomania. Anyway, she obviously uses "винов*а*ть" intentionally. It's not a mistake. I think this is a 'poetic occasionalism'.



на вкус и цвет...
Well, we have gone from a word that supposedly did not exist to a word that exists as a occasionalism, or some other word ending in -ism or -lect.
I insisted because I could not believe that so many Russian speakers (native or not) were mistaking -ть with -т.


----------



## Xavier61

Sobakus said:


> Looks like the iterative form of _винить_ like _пиливать_ from _пилить_, rarely used without prefixes in modern Russian but standard with verbs of movement_._ I just don't see any reason to use the iterative in those contexts, but perhaps it's supposed to soften the meaning, so "to find fault" instead of "to accuse".



Looks like there was a word "винивать" in Old Russian
БЕСПРИСТАВОЧНЫЕ ГЛАГОЛЫ С СУФФИКСОМ -ИВА-/-ЫВАВ МАТЕРИАЛАХ СЛЕДСТВЕННОГО ДЕЛА «ВОССТАНИЕ МОСКОВСКИХ СТРЕЛЬЦОВ. 1698 ГОД»
винивать/и/ся 
It is curious how a 17th. century word has survived more than 300 years without being noticed . Nowadays, I suppose it is some kind of -ism. Regionalism? Dialectalism?


----------



## Xavier61

Vovan said:


> Once I was looking for a few words that I had only heard from my late father (born in Sverdlovsk in 1950), and so I found this wonderful dictionary, which listed those words.
> 
> Basically, I agree with you.  But the funny thing is that hardly had I ever realised before my twenties that those words my Dad would use were pure regionalisms.
> 
> I guess that today many of such words might be seen as occasionalisms, for they have been spread far beyond their places of origin.
> 
> Before today I would have read it as "Не винова́ть!" (and would have thought about "мариновать"  as a phonetic association, and about "Не казнить!" as the possible meaning). Now I know that this use is possible as dialectical, but the stress is different: "Не ви́новать!" (=Не вини́ть!).
> 
> But what the poetess actually means is the verb *"винова́тить"*: "Не винова́ть (меня)!" (=Не делай из меня виноватую).
> 
> This is good poetry, Xavier.



I like it also.
So, we are back to what Rosett wrote the first day. He really knows.


----------



## Sobakus

Xavier61 said:


> Looks like there was a word "винивать" in Old Russian
> БЕСПРИСТАВОЧНЫЕ ГЛАГОЛЫ С СУФФИКСОМ -ИВА-/-ЫВАВ МАТЕРИАЛАХ СЛЕДСТВЕННОГО ДЕЛА «ВОССТАНИЕ МОСКОВСКИХ СТРЕЛЬЦОВ. 1698 ГОД»
> винивать/и/ся
> It is curious how a 17th. century word has survived more than 300 years without being noticed . Nowadays, I suppose it is some kind of -ism. Regionalism? Dialectalism?


Well, again, it's a perfectly productive word-formation model, but it's no longer normally applied to imperfective verbs (_"бесприставочные глаголы"_). Instead it turns perfective verbs into secondary imperfectives (_полить -> поли*ва*ть_). Still, when the need arises to stress the repetitive nature of the action, one can use it as an occasionalism which will be immediately understood. And, once again, I'm not sure why it was used in your examples.


----------



## Xavier61

Sobakus said:


> Well, again, it's a perfectly productive word-formation model, but it's no longer normally applied to imperfective verbs (_"бесприставочные глаголы"_). Instead it turns perfective verbs into secondary imperfectives (_полить -> поли*ва*ть_). Still, when the need arises to stress the repetitive nature of the action, one can use it as an occasionalism which will be immediately understood. And, once again, I'm not sure why it was used in your examples.



Russian is such a rich language.
Нельзя винивать кого-либо в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная,5
Maybe there is some kind of iterativity in винивать.


----------



## Maroseika

Xavier61 said:


> Looks like there was a word "винивать" in Old Russian
> БЕСПРИСТАВОЧНЫЕ ГЛАГОЛЫ С СУФФИКСОМ -ИВА-/-ЫВАВ МАТЕРИАЛАХ СЛЕДСТВЕННОГО ДЕЛА «ВОССТАНИЕ МОСКОВСКИХ СТРЕЛЬЦОВ. 1698 ГОД»
> винивать/и/ся
> It is curious how a 17th. century word has survived more than 300 years without being noticed . Nowadays, I suppose it is some kind of -ism. Regionalism? Dialectalism?


I think you are confusuing the words ви́нивать and винива́ть. The former is iterative form (like гова́ривать, ви́дывать, слы́хивать), while the latter is just a typo and never existed in Russian.
Ви́нивать meant 'regret about something', 'acknowledge one's guilt', therefore one cannot винивать кого-либо, as in your examples.


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> Russian is such a rich language.
> Нельзя винивать кого-либо в том, что у него не верная информация. Зато можно винить в том, что говорит не зная,5
> Maybe there is some kind of iterativity in винивать.


This is a just a mistake (typo)  And "неверная" should be written jointly here.


----------



## Xavier61

Sobakus said:


> Well, again, it's a perfectly productive word-formation model, but it's no longer normally applied to imperfective verbs (_"бесприставочные глаголы"_). Instead it turns perfective verbs into secondary imperfectives (_полить -> поли*ва*ть_). Still, when the need arises to stress the repetitive nature of the action, one can use it as an occasionalism which will be immediately understood. And, once again, I'm not sure why it was used in your examples.



We have some examples in this thread "говаривать", "слыхивать". I can add "слушивать".


----------



## Xavier61

Maroseika said:


> I think you are confusuing the words ви́нивать and винива́ть. The former is iterative form (like гова́ривать, ви́дывать, слы́хивать), while the latter is just a typo and never existed in Russian.



I have no opinion on the stress in "винивать". 



Maroseika said:


> Ви́нивать meant 'regret about something', 'acknowledge one's guilt', therefore one cannot винивать кого-либо, as in your examples.



I am not sure to understand your point. "Iterative" as I understand it, means "repeated action", the iterative of "to blame" is "to keep on blaming", not "to acknowledge one's guilt". Maybe it is a  different verb?


----------



## Q-cumber

Xavier61 said:


> на вкус и цвет...
> Well, we have gone from a word that supposedly did not exist to a word that exists as a occasionalism, or some other word ending in -ism or -lect.
> I insisted because I could not believe that so many Russian speakers (native or not) were mistaking -ть with -т.


I afraid that we've got some mess here.  Your initial question was about the verb "виновать" as in "кто виновать  и что делать". Your sample clearly suggests that the 'verb' is (supposed to be) used in the third person singular form ("who accuse*s*..."). I responded that such a verb (form of verb) never existed. I can confirm this once again. Then Rosett pointed out that "виновать" is the proper imperative form of the low colloquial/ outdated verb "виноватить" ("(don't) accuse!"). I confirmed that this is technically correct, even though the word sounds ugly and awkward to my ear. In your poetic example "(не) виновать!" is an imperative. I don't know whether the author used the word as mentioned above or just occasionally 're-invented' it to fit into the verse.
   As to the dialectism "в*и*новать" (with the first syllable stressed), I've never heard it in my life. Its usage is limited to some small particular social group and it might be interesting from the ethnographic standpoint only.


----------



## Awwal12

Drink said:


> There is the famous line from Бриллиантовая Рука: "Не виноват*ая* я, он сам пришел." I used to find this very strange.


Using the full forms instead of the short ones was normal in many Russian dialects, if I am not mistaken. (Even in the standard modern colloquial language the short forms have a noticeably more limited field of use than in the literary language.)


----------



## Xavier61

Q-cumber said:


> I afraid that we've got some mess here.  Your initial question was about the verb "виновать" as in "кто виновать  и что делать". Your sample clearly suggests that the 'verb' is (supposed to be) used in the third person singular form ("who accuse*s*..."). I responded that such a verb (form of verb) never existed. I can confirm this once again. Then Rosett pointed out that "виновать" is the proper imperative form of the low colloquial/ outdated verb "виноватить" ("(don't) accuse!"). I confirmed that this is technically correct, even though the word sounds ugly and awkward to my ear. In your poetic example "(не) виновать!" is an imperative. I don't know whether the author used the word as mentioned above or just occasionally 're-invented' it to fit into the verse.
> As to the dialectism "в*и*новать" (with the first syllable stressed), I've never heard it in my life. Its usage is limited to some small particular social group and it might be interesting from the ethnographic standpoint only.



Thank you for clearing the mess Basically, I agree with you. We could discuss some details (виновать was supposedly an infinitive, that we know does not exist, uneducated back formation from a supposed participle виноватый, that we know is not a participle, but an adjective with -еват suffix, ...)  but I don't think we would get much more in clear. There are many non native Russian speakers in the web, I suppose that this could explain most of the instances of that word in the Web. Other possible usages, Rosett and Vovan explained. Thanks to all.


----------

