Is "же" necessary in "такая же, как"?

Question

(a) Эта машина такая же, как та машина.

(b) Эта машина такая, как та машина.

(c) Эта машина не такая же, как та машина.

(d) Эта машина не такая, как та машина.

Are all of these sentences correct? Is "же" necessary in "такая же, как"?

Answer 1

Are all of these sentences correct? Is "же" necessary in "такая же, как"?

All of them may be correct in a relevant context. However, depending on what you're trying to say, же can be preferred or better left out. Example (in a neutral context):

This car is the same as that one. - Эта машина такая же, как та. This car is not the same as that one. - Эта машина не такая, как та. (although in real life I'd probably say Это не такая машина or maybe even Это разные машины, depending on the situation)

Hope this helps. Feel free to ask for further clarifications.

Answer 2

Эта машина такая же, как та (машина)

(b) Эта машина такая, как та.

(c) Эта машина не такая же, как та.

(d) Эта машина не такая, как та.

First of all, you don't need to repeat the noun.It will sound more natural omitting it. Secondly, the positive pair of sentences is correct and has the same meaning, as well as the negative ones, so you can use them interchangeably. There's a slight difference in intensity. Же is a particle which serves as an intensifier.

Answer 3

To my ear if you say такая же, you mean they're exactly the same in every way, while just using такая could mean similar in some way but not all ways, i. e.

Эта машина такая как та, они обе плохо в гору едут.

This isn't a hard rule, it's just often used in such a way.

Answer 4

No.

такая же = exactly the same

такая = similar in some respect, such as

The currently accepted answer is wrong.

Answer 5

As for me I would never omit "же" in positive statements with "как" and never add it in negative statements. So only (a) and (d) sounds natural to me.

Answer 6

Depends upon what you try to conwey, to stress. The meanings overlap a lot, but priorities weigh in, what you consider primary message and what - undertones.

If you want characterize object A by comparing to object B then же is not needed. Like you may try to explain nuanced colours to a professional painter. He knows very many colour terms, but you don't. But you may say something like "i would like this wall with a colour LIKE the skies near that cloud" ~ "мне понравится, есди у стена будет такого цвета, как небо вокруг вон того облака".

There was once a pop song "Такого как Путин" - with the repeats going like "I want me a husband like a Putin so he would do X". There was no actual husband there, there was just "copying" characteristics from a well known object.

The opposing intention, instead of the characterizing something by analogy, with neither giving detailed descriptions nor listing through soecialized dictionaries, would be stressing the "sameness" (or, sometimes, lack of it) of some objectes. When you do not care that much what "value" the attribute has, but the fact of it being the same. It can be surprise, anger, disapproval, questioning, etc.

For example, you may come to unknown village and roam the streets, trying to "find the house with the walls SAME colour as on this old photograph" - "искать дом со стенами ТОГО ЖЕ цвета, как на этой старой фотографии".

Or maybe there is a heap of mess in the room, you hold some left boot and you ask someone to find a pair. You might end up saying "help me to find the boot that is all the SAME but is right one" - "помогите мне найти ботинок ТАКОЙ ЖЕ только правый". While this does, among other thing, fix the attribites, the qualities of a missing boot, you primary concern is not in those specific colour or size or shape but in the boot as a whole being a MATCH for the one you hold.