There are two options:
first - patronymic - surname
surname - first - patronymic
Иван Иванович Иванов
Иванов Иван Иванович
In other words patronymic is an "extension" for the first name and can only follow it.
Except a very informal form, when only the patronymic is used.
The full name is the most formal ...
The main pattern is to place the subject to the end of the question, after the predicate. If the predicate is complex, it is most likely to be reversed.
Examples. Let's checkout examples provided in the article above:
She dances - Танцует она.
Ben reads the book - Книгу читает Бен.
Ben's mother, Felicity, gave me a present - Фелисити, Бена Мать, дала ...
They are interchangeable to a certain degree. Благодарю is much more formal. In some cases, it might also be considered more polite. This being said, Спасибо is absolutely "safe" and polite in any situation. When in doubt, I would suggest using Спасибо, as Благодарю may sound a bit awkward, outdated or even sarcastic (in certain contexts).
Спасибо could be ...
This statement is not quite ungrammatical, but it's definitely not a neutral writing and speaking style either.
It is parsable and comprehensible, but it abuses the relatively lax Russian word order rules.
So your professor is right in a way: it's not a mistake in the strict sense, but people don't really talk like that unless they are making their way out ...
In Russian this effect is achieved mainly by adding so-called diminutive suffixes to nouns. "Little sister" is Russian will be сестричка whereas сестра is a normal form. Here the ичк suffix is used, but in fact there are plenty of them. Seems difficult to remember them all for Russian learners. You can check out the whole list here. There's a table with ...
Actually, if you consider secular texts, especially those the compilers of which were not likely to have been much subjected to the influence of the bookish style (in particular, that of the Church Slavonic language), they are, while containing some dialect words, cliches uncommon for the modern language and historisms, perfectly understandable.
As the ...
In this particular case it would not be an oversimplification to say that this forms are interchangeable and one can easily encounter in casual usage, say, у меня есть две кошки and у меня две кошки.
Keep in mind though that there still can be differences in usage Compare у меня есть пистолет and у меня пистолет!. First is more of a statement, an admission ...
These two "есть" are homonyms. Есть like "to eat " and есть like "to own, possess,have". For choosing just consider the context.
In case of possession we can use the verb or leave it out. And in most cases we don't use the verb. But sometimes we use it for emphasis or you can't do without it (in questions mostly).
У нас (есть) большие возможности.У него ...
Как знать, это ли правда?
First of all, "как узнать". "Как знать" is valid but means doubt: "it's impossible to know". Why? Because you can't "знать" before you "узнать" and you're not doing that.
Как узнать, это ли правда?
Second, this is a valid form but rare, and it's a good translation. It means that there are several probable truths and you try to ...
This means the highest degree of a quality denoted by an adverb.
To use an awkward equivalent just for the sake of illustration полным-полнО is full to the fullest.
давным-давно - a very long time ago
черным-черно - pitch black
темным-темно - extremely/completely/totally dark
first - patronymic - surname
is the default form and the most respectful one.
surname - first - patronymic
is used when alphabetic ordering is needed (in lists, encyclopedias, when calling a person from a group/class etc).
The first-patronymic-last is the most common form. The last-first-patronymic is something that is used some formal cases like official lists (for instance of awarded persons, or deceased in accident etc.), like:
К награждению представляются: Иванов Никита Петрович, Павлова Анна Александровна.
Also, last-first-patronymic in articles dedicated to the ...
A1. Both "быть может" and "может быть" indeed mean 'perhaps/maybe', although those phrases are completely unrelated to "и речи быть не может".
A2. The phrase does mean 'smth. is out of the question'. The literal translation would sound Yoda-style: '(About smth,) talk can there not be' :)
A3. "И речи быть не может", with the stress placed on "речи", sounds ...
Russian word order is very flexible.
^ That's probably the most appropriate answer here.
How far should Я, ТЫ МЫ ... be from the verb?
Well, it could be really far.
Быстро, споро, экстремально,
Находясь почти в нирване
Я средь ночи в ресторане,
На весь зал треща ушами,
Чтоб не дай бог не поймали, озираясь по углам,
Злясь, икая и потея,
Отдуваясь и ...
Sometimes the agreement of verb predicates with subjects is governed by rather complex rules.
With two or more subjects and one predicate, the general rules are:
(a) When the predicate follows the subjects, it is normally in the plural:
Книга и газета лежали на столе. До завтрака хлеб и сыр были на столе.
(b) When the predicate precedes the ...
Actually, all those phrases are idiomatic, and their list is restricted. Белым-бело is about snow outdoors, темным-темно and черным-черно are about the darkness in the night, or just in a dark place, полным-полно has already been mentioned. Maybe, there exist something else, but it doesn't come to my mind. Светлым-светло. These phrases are used as either ...
Literally, об этом не может быть и речи translates as 'it even cannot be spoken of [not to say about doing it]' (и works like 'even' here). The phrase denies the slightest possibility of doing something and thus expresses a strong refusal. In your example sentences, it works like this:
(Not only shall not we go hunting,) it [hunting] even cannot be
The numeral одни(х) is used here in the meaning только, so the word combination is equivalent in sense to "только лишь" where the two words are close synonyms and express almost the same meaning. They can follow in either order without changing sense, but the version "одних лишь" in that particular sentence sounds slightly more phonetically balanced than "...
In short, (almost) everything is permitted in Russian. However, every word order is different from another. As the rule of the thumb, the last word is more important, so "идти не хочу" mostly emphasizes "I don't want".
But the process of "writing poems" in Russian has many more rules than just that. And the most important thing is probably never to use many ...
Your translation is incorrect, "свободное" is free, an adjective, not a noun, freedom, which is "свобода". In modern Russian the majority of adjectives indeed precedes nouns, so one will say "наше свободное отечество".
In poetry and lyrics, however, it's pretty acceptable to put adjective after noun - for the sake of rhyming and/or metrical foot.
Russian does allow for a lot of flexibility with word order but moving the subject from the main clause to the subordinate clause is pushing its limits unto the ungrammatical zone. This can occur in impromptu, unprepared speech, the kind that Krylov was portraying. Certainly not clear, academic writing which your teachers were probably expecting.
Both your ...
In Russian by changing the word order you may arrive at unexpected results.
The sentence may become looking poetic, pompous or high-style.
The sentence may become looking archaic.
The sentence may change its meaning either slightly or totally
The sentence may become ambiguous and depending on the phrase stress.
The sentence may become looking unfinished, ...
Maybe I disappoint you, you mentioned that Russian allows very flexible word order. That is true, but at the same time some word orderings are more usual than others, so basically when Russians try to mimic Yoda speech they will try to get sentence in any unusual word ordering. This still will sound grammatically correct. I have seen some "instructions" - ...
I'd say it's not so much to do with можно as with the general tendency of colloquial Russian towards SOV rather than SVO; можно, being the effective "verb" of the sentence, gets the last place. Note also how слова precedes учить, again reversing the standard word order in favour of a more casual-sounding one.
Oh, and regarding я так понимаю: it's not really ...
The difference is very subtle. I would say something like the following, others may disagree.
У них ничего нет
Emphasis on нет. So if you are speaking about a shop, this empathizes that while at first glance the shop may have some goods, they do not have anything you are looking for. Or they may pretend to have something which is untrue.
Or, in other ...
Я тя спросил... Я те сказал
Please note that, unlike in Serbian, such clitics in Russian are thought to be of particularly low style. Yes, sometimes people say so, but I don't recommend you to use them.
word order due to personal preferences with clitic word ordering
But in (literate) Russian there's no clitic here. So both word orders sound essentially ...
Есть is generally used where English applies the indefinite article to the object, 'a or an'. Where English would apply the definite article 'the' есть is usually omitted. For example:
У доктора есть телефон. The doctor has a telephone
У кого есть словарь? Who has a dictionary.
У кого словарь? Who has the dictionary
Yes, it's rather a convention. Changes of word order convey shades of meaning and are used for emphasis of certain elements within a sentence.
The direct order of мой друг makes the phrase sound descriptive like in a sentence Он - мой друг - He's a friend of mine.
In contrast the order of друг мой makes the phrase sound vocative, i.e. expressing an address -...