First of all, a shameless plug of my earlier answer on why у does not quite mean "near" (but something more akin to the French chez, i.e. a place/household/domain notion used in the abstract.)
Secondly, I have a general impression that languages usually start out not having a verb for "to have", and then some evolve it and some don't. Entire language ...
Right punctuation is
Я, понимаешь, я это чувствую, потом мы всё наверстаем, я предчувствую
The translation is
I, you know, I'm feeling it, we will catch all then, I forefeel it.
"Понимаешь" in this case isn't a really the verb, but acts as a filler. The full phrase would look like "понимаешь ли ты?" (do you understand?)
No, it shouldn't, a different verb should be used here -- "находить". The 3rd person singular form of this verb is "находит".
The difference between those two verbs is the aspect. "Найти" is a perfective verb, while "находить" is imperfective. Imperfective verbs are usually used in place of English present simple tense.
So, the correct translation should be ...
You use perfective verbs when you are talking about a task that you have to complete once:
Мне надо помыть четырёх кошек (и потом я могу отдыхать).
And you use imperfective verbs when you are talking about tasks that you do on a regular basis:
Мне надо мыть четырёх кошек (каждую неделю).
Or, for your example:
Перед едой (каждый раз) надо мыть руки....
First of all, I agree with Nikolay Ershov and others who point out that your understanding of "у" is incorrect: it really mostly means belonging (even stronger than chez) and only secondarily and colloquially you can use it to talk about proximity.
Russian absolutely has a verb for ownership, the same "иметь" you mention, but:
it must be used logically, in ...
Понаехать here is used in the sense 4 in Wiktionary: "to come in big numbers, not being welcome".
It's usually used when talking of big cities, like Moscow or St. Petersburg, because that's where people go in big numbers, not being welcome by those who came into these cities in big numbers a year earlier.
Normally, it's used in impersonal constructs:
Люблю читать is 'I like reading' while your task was to translate 'I love reading'. 'To love' is neutral любить when referring to relationships between people, but when it refers to things or activities, 'to love' is no way neutral, it shows a stronger affection, which is обожать in Russian.
Russian любить has two main meanings:
'to love' when it refers ...
For a person (and in Russian everything is a person), the Russian thought model makes no distinction between:
the person's moral right to do something;
the person's ability to do something (like, physical ability);
the objective circumstances allowing or not for anyone to do something in a given situation. (Note that the circumstances are a person too!)
The character is saying расход! indeed, which is supposed to mean "scatter!", as a command.
This is not a mainstream word, but its meaning is obvious to a Russian speaker.
Russian sports and the military, historically, to a large extent owe their vocabulary to Germanic languages like English, Dutch and German.
This includes commands like марш < &...
Because historically what we call past in modern Russian is perfect, and what we believe to be past forms of the verbs are in fact participles (adjectives formed from verbs).
Он пел / она пела / оно пело (he / she / it has sung)
Он бел / она бела / оно бело (he / she / it is white)
In old Russian there was a number of other past tenses. The most ...
I think that it's a three layered thing in Russian:
мне нравится читать
я люблю читать
я обожаю читать
Just like @V.V. also do believe that "я обожаю" is too strong here. After all, we'll end up with translating any phrase like "I love cooking" with "обожаю" which is, well, too much. "I just love reading" would be closer to "обожаю читать"
So, OK, if we ...
I understand where your confusion comes from: the verb seemingly agrees with the preceding noun which you mistook for the subject.
This sentence is actually of a special kind called неопределённо-личные предложения ("indefinite person sentences"). They have no subject and the verb is in the third person plural:
В зале поют. - There is singing in ...
The colloquial пона- prefix, in general, describes something done to excess.
Понастроили домов! — Too many houses have been built!
Понапокупали прав! — Too many people have bribed their way to a driving license without bothering to learn the road rules!
Понапривозили хлама! — Too much junk has been brought in!
Well, идти has a lot of different use cases in Russian, such as (in no particular order):
functioning (usually about watches) - "часы идут"
run through - "дорога идёт через лес"
broadcasted by TV, like in "этот сериал идёт по НТВ"
used for, applied, like in "эти доски идут на забор"
to suit, like in "эта шляпа ей очень идёт"
about rain and snow or related ...
This is a typical imperfective/perfective pair of verbs, they are different in their aspect only. And they, actually, have the same root, -пад-, only in падать it is followed by a thematic vowel -a-, and упасть does not have the vowel, the root is immediately followed by the infinitive suffix -ть, so the two similar consonants get dissimilated:
In the general case the only pattern, that came into my mind, when you can not interchange спеши́ть and торопи́ться is a talking about a gaining clock:
Часы спешат на пять минут [The watch is five minutes fast]
but extremly rare часы торопятся.
Поиграть means 'to play a little (for some time, with something)' and if it's about some game (not just toys), then maybe to leave it unfinished.
До двух часов поиграем в футбол, потом пойдём купаться.
Сыграть means to play a complete game or to perform some element in a game, e g. to pass the ball or to make a chess move.
Вчера наша команда сыграла ...
Well, it's quite straight-forward, "ездить" is always about going by car, by public transport etc. - in other words, it's never about walking. When one is saying "я езжу в это кафе часто" or "она ездит на остановку электрички" - it's never about going by foot, otherwise it would have been just "ходить".
On the other ...
Different Russian speakers may come up with different perfectives for the same verb (new or not) and there is a good chance that listeners will recognise the original verb and the perfectiveness.
Given the abundance of ways to form a perfective that Russian offers, a new verb is likely to have more than one perfective. But the choice is not random and will ...
Двери палаток хлопали, открываясь и закрываясь от ветра.
Note that хлопнули is a single-event verb whereas хлопали is a multi-event verb which is probably what you wanted.
I think you used "open and shut" only to emphasize the repetitiveness of the slamming. In Russian you can safely drop "открываясь и закрываясь" because repetitiveness is already ...
(Here is an empirical explanation of the modern habbit; I'm not a linguistics specialist and could only speculate on the reasons of such pattern)
Because complicated morphology allows us Russians not to.
Using a verb usually implies some action. Having/possessing something is not an action - it's a statement. We don't use a verb for a statement in general -...
Well, that's quite an interesting question. But to say how the tenses correspond to each other we must first know what they really mean in both languages. And this is where we may fail as everyone knows well at most only one language. But let's try anyway.
English Continuous tense means: "I'd like to point out that some action is still in progress"....
Both forms are correct.
"Встань" - is for "[you,] stand up!" - it's the imperative form. "Встать!" is the infinitive form that also can be used in modern Russian as an imperative. The difference is that infinitive imperative is more command-like, hard and generally speaking more offensive.
A policemen can shout out: "Встать!", but mother would tell her son:...
I did not find the specific invocation, but there are two possible uses of this word:
Turning the verb расходимся (we part ways) to a noun. This is unusual but can surely arise in a subculture slang. Note that пойдём has an opposite meaning since it implies shared action.
Also, the word расход means getting rid of someone, usually by murder: пустить в расход....
Летающий and летящий are formed from two different verbs: летать and лететь (the former being an iterative for the latter).
It's similar to English "sniffle / sniff, shuffle / shove" etc.
However, this particular iterative participle also acquired an idiomatic meaning: it means not only "flying repeatedly" but also "able to fly".
Adjectives meaning "able ...
В случае, когда два глагола стоят в одинаковой форме, причем одно указывает способ, а второе цель действия, имеет место осложненное глагольное сказуемое.
Запятые в этом случае не ставятся.
As pointed out in comments, your impression of English “can” and “may” seems too rigid. Consider these dictionary definitions with the many meanings and examples, some of which overlap, and the usage note at can: can, may, may.
Many of your original examples can use these same English verbs and sometimes even both, even though you say they all of the ...
Here is what I was taught regarding the matter.
Some centuries ago бывал was considered a special past tense of быть. I quote from Российская Грамматика written by М. Lomonosov in 1755:
Времен имеют российские глаголы десять: осмь от простых да два от сложенных; от простых: 1) настоящее — трясу, глотаю, бросаю, плещу; 2) прошедшее неопределенное — ...