# nouns with and without по-



## pimlicodude

I've come across a lot of deverbals that seem to be minimal pairs or have different meanings depending on whether по- is used:

1. знание knowledge/познание cognition
2. селение village/поселение colony
3. давление pressure/подавление suppression
4. веление order/повеление command (more obsolete)
5. стройка construction site and also the process of construction/постройка construction (something constructed) and also the process of construction

As you can see, these are confusing to a learner. Particularly, the last one, where the meanings are not strongly differentiated.

Would it be right to formulate a rule that where there is such a pair, the one with по- is always more abstract in meaning? and the one without the prefix more concrete in meaning?


----------



## Maroseika

I would not say that. At least in your pairs nouns with по- do not look more abstract. They are either synonymous, or just quite different.
In fact, prefix по- forms very different kinds of verbs, in one popular dictionary there are 6 types. So it's hardly possible to mark out only one distinctive factor.


----------



## Sobakus

No, the meaning is transparently derived from the corresponding verbs; therefore the difference is first and foremost in perfectiveness, and secondarily lexical. As a whole it's the perfectives that can be described as concrete, resultative and goal-oriented, as opposed to the imperfectives which refer to indefinite processes. The abstractness effect of the perfective pairs is due to their future-orientedness; the imperfectives are concrete in the sense that they're conceived as existing here and now.

Perhaps a better, less grammar-centered and more action-conception oriented framework to descibe the difference is Aktionsart/Telicity - the perfective-derived nouns are all Telic, the others all Atelic.


----------



## pimlicodude

Thank you. In the end, it seems they need to be learnt one by one.


----------



## pimlicodude

Sobakus said:


> No, the meaning is transparently derived from the corresponding verbs; therefore the difference is first and foremost in perfectiveness, and secondarily lexical. As a whole it's the perfectives that can be described as concrete, resultative and goal-oriented, as opposed to the imperfectives which refer to indefinite processes. The abstractness effect of the perfective pairs is due to their future-orientedness; the imperfectives are concrete in the sense that they're conceived as existing here and now.
> 
> Perhaps a better, less grammar-centered and more action-conception oriented framework to descibe the difference is Aktionsart/Telicity - the perfective-derived nouns are all Telic, the others all Atelic.


Thank you. I had to look up telicity there-- I've never seen that word before.


----------



## Sobakus

Yeah, it's a concept that describes the internal logical structure of actions in any language, as concepts in principle independent from grammar (though often grammatically expressed), so it should be rather intuitive once you find a comprehensive enough treatment (the two wikipedia articles honestly suck). As a result of this language independence, the same distinction should be visible from the English translations, especially with those prefixed Latinate words.


pimlicodude said:


> In the end, it seems they need to be learnt one by one.


I incline to the opposite - the nouns are transparently related to the verbs and share their action structure, which in Russian is linked to perfectiveness and specifically to the prefix _по_—all actions expressed with this prefix (whatever their part of speech) are all Telic, terminative. Therefore I'd say all these pairs can only be understood as a system, a matrix that includes the verbal pairs as well.


----------



## nizzebro

The difference in these pairs is indeed driven by perfectivity and the role of prefixes. The perfective conveys transition between states ('states' in a broad sense: an ongoing process is also a state as the same thing holds at each moment of time). And the actual pattern for a transition is conveyed by the prefixes,

Знание - knowledge as, basically, 'knowing'.
Познание  is not even 'abstract': this notion implies namely _acquiring _a knowledge. As I see, they tend to use 'cognition' in translations,, probably it adds that sense of acquiring, to some degree:
_Познание_ открывает путь к... (Cognition reveals the path to...?)   - here, it's not knowledge as a permanent state, but the idea of getting it - until you get it, the path is closed.

Поселение  means both the act of settling, and, a settlement - and I'd say the nuance is exactly that селение is associated with a village that is present there who knows how long, while поселение gives an impression of something temporary or newly established. Anyway both are either bookish or formal. Just to add - селение is not used for the process as such as it cannot pictured as having a homogeneous internal structure: each newcomer gets change of their state, so we say 'заселение', "вселение' etc.

давление /подавление - no comment, давление is about force as such, and подавление  about switching of states.

постройка brings, again, that temporary feel - due to the built-in semantics of transition. And in the 'processual' meaning it conveys transition to the ready state: _постройка его  заняла 1 год - it took 1 year to build it. _Стройка is not so common for the meaning of process, usually they prefer строительство - while стройка is rather like a fact, a presence of such.

P.S. As for по-, I would not say that it has a clear prevalence in respect to de-verbal nouns. It  just goes from the original verb.


----------



## pimlicodude

nizzebro said:


> The difference in these pairs is indeed driven by perfectivity and the role of prefixes. The perfective conveys transition between states ('states' in a broad sense: an ongoing process is also a state as the same thing holds at each moment of time). And the actual pattern for a transition is conveyed by the prefixes,
> 
> As for по-, I would say that it has a clear prevalence in respect to de-verbal nouns.
> 
> Знание - knowledge as, basically, 'knowing'.
> Познание  is not even 'abstract': this notion implies namely _acquiring _a knowledge. As I see, they tend to use 'cognition' in translations,, probably it adds that sense of acquiring, to some degree:
> _Познание_ открывает путь к... (Cognition reveals the path to...?)   - here, it's not knowledge as a permanent state, but the idea of getting it - until you get it, the path is closed.
> 
> Поселение  means both the act of settling, and, a settlement - and I'd say the nuance is exactly that селение is associated with a village that is present there who knows how long, while поселение gives an impression of something temporary or newly established. Anyway both are either bookish or formal. Just to add - селение is not used for the process as such as it cannot pictured as having a homogeneous internal structure: each newcomer gets change of their state, so we say 'заселение', "вселение' etc.
> 
> 
> давление /подавление - no comment, давление about force as such, подавление is about switching of states.
> постройка brings, again, that temporary feel - due to the built-in semantics of transition. And in the 'processual' meaning it conveys transition to the ready state: _постройка его  заняла 1 год - it took 1 year to build it. _Стройка is not so common for the meaning of process, usually they prefer строительство - while стройка is rather like a fact, a presence of such.


веление/повеление - here the problem is that повеление is obsolete or dated, right? But apart from that, it can be brought into the same pattern, ie. повеление envisages implementation of the order, whereas веление is just the order itself?


----------



## Maroseika

pimlicodude said:


> веление/повеление - here the problem is that повеление is obsolete or dated, right? But apart from that, it can be brought into the same pattern, ie. повеление envisages implementation of the order, whereas веление is just the order itself?


At least the modern words mean exactly the same - the order. Difference is only stylistic and in the set expression usage: eg. веление времени, бога; по велению сердца, души, долга (not повеление).


----------



## pimlicodude

Желание and пожелание is another one


----------



## nizzebro

pimlicodude said:


> Желание and пожелание is another one


No problem here - желание is a desire as a permanent state that one is experiencing or 'carrying'; пожелание is an act of wishing something - that is,  perfectivity is implied.


----------



## Maroseika

pimlicodude said:


> Желание and пожелание is another one


If you mean merely stylistic distinction, I'm inclined to disagree. Веление and повеление are both derived from perfective verbs велеть and повелеть, while желать and пожелать are imperfective and perfective verbs respectively.


----------



## nizzebro

Maroseika said:


> Веление and повеление are both derived from perfective verbs велеть and повелеть,


Just to add, велеть can be imperfective in the iterative sense (много раз велел), it only cannot be progressive, as the action  lacks the internal temporal structure. So this verb is rather one of those beasts that can be of either aspect and work like a (germanic) preterite.


----------



## Sobakus

pimlicodude said:


> веление/повеление - here the problem is that повеление is obsolete or dated, right? But apart from that, it can be brought into the same pattern, ie. повеление envisages implementation of the order, whereas веление is just the order itself?


Nope, the terminus of повеле́ть, theoretically, is the act of issuing the order, not its implementation; for the latter you need a verb meaning "to implement". On practice it has no terminus; веле́ть has no terminus either, even though it's one of those biaspectual verbs that are great for trolling the natives with grammatical aspirations; so perfective but Atelic. It appears that its imperfective is a State ("to know") and is only used with present tenses, and the perfective is Semelfactive (one-time-action "to knock"), only used in the past tense. As a result it's frightfully close to the English "to will": он веле́л "he willed it so", он не вели́т "he wills it not". Even the present=future is like in English: когда велит тогда и сделаем "when he wills it is when we'll do it".

The difference between веление and повеление comes from the fact that the latter doesn't have the present tense resp. cannot be a State. Cf. повелева́ть "to wield power over".


----------



## pimlicodude

Maroseika said:


> If you mean merely stylistic distinction, I'm inclined to disagree. Веление and повеление are both derived from perfective verbs велеть and повелеть, while желать and пожелать are imperfective and perfective verbs respectively.


Yes, I see now. I should have noted the biaspectal nature of велеть.


----------



## pimlicodude

Sobakus said:


> Nope, the terminus of повеле́ть, theoretically, is the act of issuing the order, not its implementation; for the latter you need a verb meaning "to implement". On practice it has no terminus; веле́ть has no terminus either, even though it's one of those biaspectual verbs that are great for trolling the natives with grammatical aspirations; so perfective but Atelic. It appears that its imperfective is a State ("to know") and is only used with present tenses, and the perfective is Semelfactive (one-time-action "to knock"), only used in the past tense. As a result it's frightfully close to the English "to will": он веле́л "he willed it so", он не вели́т "he wills it not". Even the present=future is like in English: когда велит тогда и сделаем "when he wills it is when we'll do it".
> 
> The difference between веление and повеление comes from the fact that the latter doesn't have the present tense resp. cannot be a State. Cf. повелева́ть "to wield power over".


And велеть is etymologically related to the English word "will", it seems.


----------



## pimlicodude

I've found another pair that is not deverbal:

земельный: land, agriculture
поземельный: ground, land

To what extent are these just identical in meaning?


----------



## nizzebro

pimlicodude said:


> земельный: land, agriculture
> поземельный: ground, land
> 
> To what extent are these just identical in meaning?


земельный is just related to land; земельный участок is a section of land;   in some specific context, might be that of ground/soil.
поземельный is outdated and is about specifically land and its distribution: поземельный налог/банк/кредит, поземельная перепись/собственность;  today, земельный would also work for some of these - but in many cases they prefer prepositional collocations such as налог на землю.
 'По' is conveying rather the sense of preposition, not that of verbal prefix in this adjective; it has a feel of distribution or like.


----------



## Sobakus

Yep, this is the preposition по, not the verbal prefix. The underlying semantics is as in по одному́, по де́сять; this is then used in various nominal and verbal phrases with the meaning "on the basis on, proportionate to", e.g. ка́ждому по заслу́гам. This is roughly the same meaning as in суди́ть по чему-либо. The final sequence is облага́ть нало́гом по земле́ > нало́г по земле́ > поземе́льный нало́г.


----------



## pimlicodude

nizzebro said:


> земельный is just related to land; земельный участок is a section of land;   in some specific context, might be that of ground/soil.
> поземельный is outdated and is about specifically land and its distribution: поземельный налог/банк/кредит, поземельная перепись/собственность;  today, земельный would also work for some of these - but in many cases they prefer prepositional collocations such as налог на землю.
> 'По' is conveying rather the sense of preposition, not that of verbal prefix in this adjective; it has a feel of distribution or like.


Thank you. I see now.


----------



## pimlicodude

I understand all that is said above and do not mean to reopen discussion, but in case this thread serves as a resource for future learners, I add these:
жизненный life (adj), vital; пожизненный life-long
становление formation, establishment; постановление resolution, decree, enactment


----------



## nizzebro

pimlicodude said:


> жизненный life (adj), vital; пожизненный life-long
> становление formation, establishment; постановление resolution, decree, enactment


пожизненный - yes, it is based on the distributive projection discussed above ;
but постановление is a deverbal of постановить (a formal 'to decide', intransitive), which is an independent verb and cannot be broken apart - its unprefixed base (-становить) is not used separately, only in combinations; everything is fused inside it - 'ста-' - "to stand"; '-в-' bringing aspectual 'prolongation';  'по-' as a function of perfectivity for intransitive verbs of homogeneous activity, conveying some 'logical portion' of the process - but this is all about basal patterns of the language which do not appear as some evident functional modules here. As for становление, it evidently goes from стать/становиться (to become), with adding some formal pathos into this meaning.

It's worth noting that 'по-' as attached to nouns is productive only with imperfective activities 'по...ивать' (or, -ывать)  producing nouns with '-вание'. This 'по'+'ва' is about a process consisting from discrete fractions, performed by the subject from time to time - e.g. 'помахивать' - 'помахивание'. The same holds true for other prefixes in secondary imperfectives with '-ва-'; usually action nouns are derived easily form those.
But the perfective 'по-' in 'помахать' has no common grounds to derive a noun from it - as the meaning is supposed to be a complete act, it should have some pragmatical use: to conceptualize a complete 'logical portion' of a process as an entity, the language needs some objectifying sense - so 'пожелать' is not anymore just some "stretch of wishing" but namely a _wish_, so there is 'пожелание' - but, such formation is the language's internal business.


----------



## pimlicodude

nizzebro said:


> пожизненный - yes, it is based on the distributive projection discussed above ;
> but постановление is a deverbal of постановить (a formal 'to decide', intransitive), which is an independent verb and cannot be broken apart - its unprefixed base (-становить) is not used separately, only in combinations; everything is fused inside it - 'ста-' - "to stand"; '-в-' bringing aspectual 'prolongation';  'по-' as a function of perfectivity for intransitive verbs of homogeneous activity, conveying some 'logical portion' of the process - but this is all about basal patterns of the language which do not appear as some evident functional modules here. As for становление, it evidently goes from стать/становиться (to become), with adding some formal pathos into this meaning.
> 
> It's worth noting that 'по-' as attached to nouns is productive only with imperfective activities 'по...ивать' (or, -ывать)  producing nouns with '-вание'. This 'по'+'ва' is about a process consisting from discrete fractions, performed by the subject from time to time - e.g. 'помахивать' - 'помахивание'. The same holds true for other prefixes in secondary imperfectives with '-ва-'; usually action nouns are derived easily form those.
> But the perfective 'по-' in 'помахать' has no common grounds to derive a noun from it - as the meaning is supposed to be a complete act, it should have some pragmatical use: to conceptualize a complete 'logical portion' of a process as an entity, the language needs some objectifying sense - so 'пожелать' is not anymore just some "stretch of wishing" but namely a _wish_, so there is 'пожелание' - but, such formation is the language's internal business.


Thank you. I see I should have noted that постановление came from постановить and is no contrastive with становление.


----------



## pimlicodude

In other to turn this threat into a resource:
давление: pressure
подавление: suppression


----------



## Rosett

Maroseika said:


> по велению сердца, души, долга (not повеление).


И _по повелению сердца/души/долга_ бывает тоже:

_«По повелению сердца_ из красной строки
Давай с тобою построим наш мир вопреки
Где нас с тобой счастливою волною снесёт
И я скажу тебе: "Слушай, сбудется всё!"»

«_По повелению души_
Я вспоминаю дни войны,
И все превратности судьбы,
На плечи наши что легли.»

«Таков этот Иуда – любящий, предающий не из-за денег, не из ненависти, не _по повелению долга_, а по великой любви – великий провокатор хотел всех благословить, а вместо того утопил вселенную.»


----------



## Rosett

pimlicodude said:


> In other to turn this thread into a resource:
> давление: pressure
> подавление: suppression


Не всё так просто:
*подавление*
с.
1) (насильственное прекращение чего-л) suppression; repression
2) воен. neutralization [-laɪ-]
*подавление*
rejection, suppression
*подавление*
1) blanketing
2) blanking
3) cancellation
4) depression
5) extinction
6) mask
7) quench
8) quenching
9) rejection
10) suppression
*подавление*
cancel, cancellation, (напр. шумов) elimination, kill, quenching, rejection, squelch, squelching, (напр. помех) suppression
*подавление*
oppression, repression, suppression
*подавление*
crackdown, repression, suppression
*подавление*
1) depression
2) inhibition
3) repression
4) suppression
*подавление*
ср.
1) психоан. (один из защитных механизмов) repression
2) (торможение) inhibition, suppression
3) (укрощение) suppression, repression, mortification
*подавление*
damping, depression, inhibition, killing, muting, quenching, rejection электр., repression, suppression
*подавление взаимных помех*
1) antiinterference
*подавление*
Syn: сдерживание, усмирение (усил.), задерживание


----------



## nizzebro

Давление and подавление are deverbals of давить and подавить. 
Давить basically is about a continuous pressure with one's hand or some tool or body, including that idiomatic as weighing mass or an ongoing or habitual pressure on an individual; this pressure is seen like in isolation so 'давить на X' complies with 'push X' only if not represented as directly causing motion as "push the cart" (which is толкать, so you'd use давить like in "давил на неё, и она понемногу двигалась") or switching some state as "push the button" (which is нажимать - even though давить is also used as conveying some intensity). Давить + acc is used for multiple small objects like grapes, insects, pimples (and idiomatically enemies as morons) and means a process where each element was crushed by pressure.
Давление is only about the former pattern of "давить на", and means both the process and the degree of pressure.

Подавить is a transitive verb; it uses a pretty common pattern where по- allows both "did that for a while" (in this case, rarely used), and, a resultative action - where another prefix would add some unwanted details. So on a deeper level of semantics, all this verb says is  "to achieve an opposite state for the object (the meaning transitive perfective) using a time span (the meaning of по-) of pressure (the root)". That is, suppress, hold back and neutralize someone's activity or emotions or uprising; inhibit something. As we have here switching states, the meaning suggests that the object was not passive, but showed some activity in a form of expansion/growth, so that some neutralizing force was applied against it.
Подавление might refer to a practice in common, or, especially in case of uprising, a particular act.


----------



## Rosett

pimlicodude said:


> In other to turn this threat into a resource:


I have another entry for your resource;
_мойка_ (car)wash, (dish)washer, washing, sink - _помойка_ dumpster, dump/garbage site


----------



## Rosett

Also:
_ковка_ - _поковка_
*ковка*
ж.
1) (ручная) smithery ['smɪ-]; (механическим молотом, прессом) forging
2) (лошадей || of a horse) shoeing
*ковка*
forging, hammering
*поковка*
ж. тех.
forging, forged piece


----------



## Rosett

A more elegant one:
_желание_ - _пожелание_
*желание*
с.
1) (рд.; стремление к чему-л) desire (for); wish (for); (сильное) longing (for), hunger (for); (нетерпеливое) itch (for)
2) (просьба, пожелание) wish
загадать желание — make a wish
возыметь желание — conceive a wish
исполнить чьё-л желание — fulfill smb's wish
удовлетворять желания кого-л — meet smb's wishes
пусть ваши желания исполнятся — may your wishes come true
он будет считаться с вашими желаниями — he will respect your wishes
они выразили желание работать там — they expressed a wish to work there
по вашему желанию — as you wish, in accordance with your desire
по моему собственному желанию — of my own accord
увольнение по собственному желанию — voluntary termination (of one's employment contract)
3) (вожделение, любовное влечение) desire, lust
••
при всём желании — with the best will in the world
гореть желанием (+ инф.) — burn with the desire (+ to inf), burn (+ to inf), be eager (+ to inf)
по желанию — according to one's choice; optionally
эти предметы можно изучать по желанию — these are optional subjects
против желания — against one's will; reluctantly
было бы желание, а способ найдётся погов. — where there's a will, there's a way
*желание*
с
1) (стремление) wish; desire
при всём желании — as much as I want to
против желания — against (one's) wishes, against one's will
горячее желание быть услышанным — his ardent desire to be heard
2) (просьба) request [rɪ'kwest]
по желанию — by request
•
- гореть желанием
*гореть желанием*
to burn with the desire (to); to be eager (to)
*пожелание*
c.р.
wish, desire; request
*пожелание*
с.
wish, desire [-'z-]
наилучшие пожелания — best wishes
*пожелание*
с
1) wish
2) (предложение) suggestion [sə'ʤesʧən]
*пожелание*
ср.
1.Высказанное, выраженное желание об осуществлении чего-либо (обычно приятного).
2.Предложение, запрос, требование.


----------



## Rosett

_ломка_ - _поломка_
*ломка*
ж.
1) (раздробление) breaking, break-up
2) (поломка) breakage, breakdown
3) (снос) demolition
4) (системы, традиций и т.п.) destruction, collapse
5) разг. (болезненное состояние у наркоманов) withdrawal pains pl
*поломка*
breakdown, damage, death
*поломка*
bug
*поломка*
crash
*поломка*
ж.
break(age), break-down, breaking; distress; failure
*поломка*
break, breakage, breakdown, failure, fracture, layup, wreck, wrecking


----------



## pimlicodude

разительный: striking, telling
поразительный: striking, amazing


----------



## nizzebro

pimlicodude said:


> разительный: striking, telling
> поразительный: striking, amazing


If we take the only the sense of idiomatic striking, there's no actual difference, as there is no such between striking in process and that in the sense of a complete impact taking place - except that разительный feels like dated. As for a stronger connotation to "telling" for the former (at least today), it can be caused either by that the unprefixed form is easier to associate with a stative meaning, or, by associations with разница (раз and рез is evidently the same paradigm, "сutting and therefore dividing").


----------



## Rosett

_Разительный_ is used in the set expressions:
*разительный*
striking
разительный пример — striking example
разительное сходство — striking likeness
*разительный*
прил.
Производящий сильное впечатление, действие; поражающий.
_Поразительный_ is ubiquitous with a variety of shades.
*поразительный*
(удивительный) striking, startling; (потрясающий) staggering
поразительное сходство (с тв.) — striking resemblance / likeness (to)
*поразительный*
striking, amazing
*поразительный*
arresting, striking
*поразительный*
прил.
Изумительный, необыкновенный.
*поразительный*
Syn: удивительный, изумительный (усил.), ошеломительный (редк., усил.), ошеломляющий (усил.), потрясающий (усил.), замечательный
Ant: обычный, обыкновенный, банальный, тривиальный
It’s interesting to note that _разительный_ isn’t listed as a synonym here as it conveys a distinctive shade of meaning.


----------



## pimlicodude

рождение: birth
порождение: engendering, generating, creating (Solzhenitsyn: Для этого утверждения богослову и историку достаточно одного факта дарования миру Библии и порождения трёх мировых монотеистических религий)


----------



## nizzebro

In the modern narrative, порождение is usually a "product", as a consequence of some activity, and, often has a negative sense - in the highest degree of which it refers to a spawn of evil forces. But it may also carry a processual meaning, typically related to some intrinsically iterative spawning - e.g. of some elements that appear periodically due to invisible processes inside a medium.


----------



## pimlicodude

Let me bring in here: волжский - of the River Volga. поволжский - of Поволжье, of the Volga region. I realised this reading Solzhenitsyn.


----------



## Rosett

бег - побег

побег
I м. (бегство) flight; (из тюрьмы тж.) escape
II м. (росток) sprout, shoot; (от корня) sucker; (для посадки) set; (для прививки) graft

побег
I м.
1. устар. Бег, быстрое движение.
2. перен. Тайный самовольный уход из места обязательного пребывания (из армии, из тюрьмы и т.п.); бегство.
II м.
1. Новый росток, молодая ветка, стебель с листьями и почками.
2. перен. разг. Новое поколение; молодежь.

бег

м.р.
1) run(ning); race спорт
быстрый бег — scamper
- барьерный бег
- бег на короткие дистанции
- бег на длинные дистанции
- на бегу
- эстафетный бег
- бег на месте
- барьерный бег
- бег с препятствиями
2) (бега) the races, horse-race, running
Syn: скачки
3) (бега) разг. hiding
- быть в бегах

бег
м.
1) (движение бегом) run, running
на бегу — (while) running
бег трусцой — jogging
бег по пересечённой местности — cross-country (run)
бег на месте — 1) (упражнение) running on the spot 2) (о безрезультатной деятельности) marking time
2) (вид лёгкой атлетики) race
бег на короткие дистанции — sprint
бег на длинные дистанции — long-distance race

бег
м
run, running; спорт тж track, race
бег на 100 метров 100 — meters (race)
состязание в беге — race
барьерный бег — hurdles, hurdling
бег по пересечённой местности — cross-country race
бег с препятствиями — steeplechase
эстафетный бег — relay (race)
- бег трусцой
- соревнования по бегу

бег
I м.
1. процесс действия по гл. бегать I 1.
2. Результат такого действия.
II м. Перемещение в пространстве, попеременно то одной, то другой ногою быстро и резко отталкиваясь от земли, как вид спорта.


----------



## pimlicodude

Another interesting thing I've found - an adjective, not a noun - is пореволюционный, meaning "post-revolutionary", and so contrasting with революционный.


----------



## Maroseika

pimlicodude said:


> Another interesting thing I've found - an adjective, not a noun - is пореволюционный, meaning "post-revolutionary", and so contrasting with революционный.


Also more frequent пореформенный ( post-1861) and посмертный.


----------



## pimlicodude

Maroseika said:


> Also more frequent пореформенный ( post-1861) and посмертный.


Yes, very good examples! жизненный and пожизненный too. пожизненный срок, life imprisonment.


----------



## Rosett

Ход - поход
Ходка - походка


----------



## nizzebro

Ездить - поездка, летать - полёт, гнать - погоня.

There are also some curious meanings derived from motion verbs:

ползти (to crawl) -> поползновение - a weak, feeble effort of a tormented person, in the political narrative it is used for heinous attempts of attacking, being a hidden insult that assumes that the opponent is weak but sneaky, such a reptile-like skunk.

таскать (to drag smth) -> таскаться (coll.; таскаться по + dat.pl. =  to drag oneself/trudge/traipse around; таскаться за + instr. - to tail (a woman)) -> потаскун (male)/потаскушка (female) (both derogatory) - a person addicted to the opposite gender and occasional relations, a slug.

нести - to carry/bear/bring, to drive along by the wind, water flow etc  -> понос - diarrhea


----------



## Rosett

nizzebro said:


> нести - to carry/bear/bring, to drive along by the wind, water flow etc -> понос - diarrhea


Нос - понос
(based on носить - поносить .
I think only valid nouns/adjectives derived from their respective verbs with and without prefix “по-“ are admissible here.


----------



## nizzebro

Rosett said:


> Нос - понос


ok, нести/носить, because one cannot say what is the basis in these - поно́сить is itself a derived form and only about experiencing that problem, while понести complies with a generalized idea for this semantics - to start transporting smth. It could be just a variation of the stem in the derived noun.

вести/водить (to lead, conduct) - повод (1. a rein to control a horse; 2. an excuse or a cause in the sense of a pretext); поводок - a leash for a dog (a small rein, literally).


----------



## Rosett

nizzebro said:


> вести/водить (to lead, conduct) - повод (1. a rein to control a horse; 2. an excuse or a cause in the sense of a pretext); поводок - a leas for a dog (a small rein, literally).


But what is deverbal of вести/водить?


----------



## nizzebro

Rosett said:


> But what is deverbal of вести/водить?


In that perspective,  ведение/вождение.
You see, I couldn't strictly derive повод from повести or поводить, due to the temporal patterns in these; but anyway, in the deverbal, 'по-' is a prefix. If the rules of this game are so strict, we should restrict it to the productive '-ние' as everything else carries some variations in the semantics anyway; походка is also not a deverbal of ходка, by the way. Indeed, these are not about "portion of process" which the verbal 'по-' is based on - unlike поход, which really suits to the idea of portion of "ходить".


----------



## Rosett

nizzebro said:


> походка is also not a deverbal of ходка, by the way.


Поход is deverbal of походить, ход - of ходить. «-ка» was added to the existing deverbals to expand their meanings.
Given the rules, there’s not so many valid pairs.


----------



## nizzebro

Rosett said:


> Поход is deverbal of походить, ход - of ходить. «-ка» was added to the deverbals to expand their meanings.


Okay, if we take into account formal coincidence only and ignore the semantic relations, понос conforms to поноси́ть, then - even if that's illogical. Is походка a small/short-time etc поход? No. Is it about ходка? No. Походить (туда-сюда)? No relation. It is a manner of ходить, directly derived from this verb. Понос is from нести, with a stem variation -and, it is about a process, not manner.


----------



## Rosett

nizzebro said:


> Okay, if we take into account formal coincidence only and ignore the semantic relations, понос conforms to поноси́ть, then - even if that's illogical. Is походка a small/short-time etc поход? No. Is it about ходка? No. Походить (туда-сюда)? No relation. It is a manner of ходить, directly derived from this verb. Понос is from нести, with a stem variation -and, it is about a process, not manner.


Каждое из обсуждаемых слов имеет по нескольку значений - отсюда и игра слов.


----------



## Maroseika

pimlicodude said:


> Yes, very good examples! жизненный and пожизненный too. пожизненный срок, life imprisonment.


But there is no "post" meaning, just boundness, isn't it?


----------



## pimlicodude

Maroseika said:


> But there is no "post" meaning, just boundness, isn't it?


Yes, but it’s something a foreign learner could confuse, but you”re right.


----------



## Rosett

чтение - почтение

чтение
с.
1) (процесс) reading
беглое чтение — cursory reading
чтение корректуры — proofreading
чтение лекций — lecturing
чтение стихов — recitation
чтение мыслей — thought-reading
чтение карт(ы) — map-reading
2) (в парламенте) reading
провести первое [второе] чтение законопроекта — give the bill its first [second] reading
принять законопроект во втором чтении — adopt the bill at the second reading
3) информ. reading, read
операция чтения — read operation

чтение
I ср.
1. процесс действия по гл. читать I 1., 2. отт. Результат такого действия. несов. перех. и неперех. 1. Воспринимать письменную речь по её знакам, буквам (произнося вслух или про себя). отт. Уметь делать это. 2. Воспринимая знаки письменной речи, усваивать что-либо, знакомиться с содержанием чего-либо. отт. Заниматься таким ознакомлением, предаваться ему как занятию.
2. Предмет обучения навыкам такого действия.
3. То, что читают; читаемый текст.
II ср.
1. процесс действия по гл. читать II 1., 2. несов. перех. и неперех. 1. Произносить вслух написанное или напечатанное, имея текст перед глазами или наизусть; исполнять, декламировать. 2. Вести лекционный курс в учебном заведении. отт. Излагать, передавать устно слушателям содержание чего-либо.
2. Результат такого действия; читка II 2. вслух.
3. Предварительное прочтение, репетиция в форме чтения пьесы по ролям; читка II 3..
4. Устное изложение чего-либо; читка II 2. лекций.
III ср.
1. процесс действия по гл. читать III несов. перех. Выбирать данные из внешнего запоминающего устройства или с экрана дисплея в основную память компьютера; считывать (в информатике).
2. Результат такого действия; выбор данных из внешнего запоминающего устройства или с экрана дисплея в основную память компьютера; считка (в информатике).

почтение
с.
respect, esteem, consideration; deference
относиться с почтением (к), оказывать почтение (дт.) — treat (d) with respect / distinction
относиться без всякого почтения (к) — treat without any respect (d), have no respect (for)
с почтением (подпись в письме) — respectfully yours, yours faithfully
••
моё почтение! разг. — my compliments!

почтение
ср.
1. Глубокое уважение, испытываемое или проявляемое по отношению к кому-либо, чему-либо.
2. устар. процесс действия по гл. почтить 1.
почтить
сов. перех. устар.
1. Оказать почет, выразить уважение, почтение кому-либо, чему-либо.


----------



## Rosett

чин - почин

чин

м.
1) (ранг) rank
иметь высокий чин — have a high rank
повышение в чине — promotion
быть в чинах — be of high rank, hold a high rank
2) (чиновник, служащий) official
чины дипломатического корпуса — officials of the diplomatic corps [kɔː]
3) церк. (ритуальный порядок) rite, order; rules pl
4) церк. (ряд иконостаса) range, row
••
чин чином, чин чинарём разг. — in good order, properly
без чинов — without ceremony

чин
I м.
1. Служебный разряд, ранг государственных гражданских и военных служащих, с которыми связаны определённые должностные права и обязанности (в Российском государстве до 1917 г.).
2. Должностное положение, сан.
II м. Порядок совершения чего-либо, норма в следовании чего-либо; обряд.
III м. Горизонтальный ряд икон, расположенных по строго установленному порядку расположения святых (в составе иконостаса).
IV м. разг.
1. Общественное положение кого-либо, обусловленное родом его занятий.
2. Тот, кто занимают какую-либо административную должность; чиновник.

почин

м.
1) (инициатива) initiative
по собственному почину — on one's own initiative
смелый почин — daring innovation
подхватить чей-л почин — take up smb's initiative
2) разг. (начало) beginning; (в торговле тж.) first sale of the day
для почина — for a start, to make a beginning / start

почин
м.
1. устар. Начало в развитии чего-либо.
2. перен. Инициатива, начинание.


----------

