All Slavic: to have + where + verb

< Previous | Next >

Encolpius

Senior Member
Hungarian
Hello, I wonder if all Slavic languages use this unique type of syntax. How would you say this sentence:

(1) Czech: mít kde bydlet [to have+where+to live]
(2) Polish: mieć gdzie mieszkać [to have+where+to live]

Do you use such it in both negative and affirmative sentences?

Thanks.
 
  • sokol

    Senior Member
    Austrian (as opposed to Australian)
    This is possible and quite common in Bulgarian: имам/нямам къде да живея.
    Indeed it is, but it is not using the infinite form of the verb but a finite form: same as in Serbian by the way (Serbian has both constructions but some think that "da + finite verb" is "more Serbian", as well as most nowadays think that "da + finite verb" is "not Croatian").

    So Bulgarian (and Serbian, and Macedonian I guess) use "da + finite verb" (which is a different construction grammatically); Serbian also has the version with infinitive.
     

    Orlin

    Banned
    български
    Indeed it is, but it is not using the infinite form of the verb but a finite form: same as in Serbian by the way (Serbian has both constructions but some think that &quot;da + finite verb&quot; is &quot;more Serbian&quot;, as well as most nowadays think that &quot;da + finite verb&quot; is &quot;not Croatian&quot;).

    So Bulgarian (and Serbian, and Macedonian I guess) use &quot;da + finite verb&quot; (which is a different construction grammatically); Serbian also has the version with infinitive.
    Sorry but there is no infinive in Bulgarian.
     

    Sobakus

    Senior Member
    So the right sentence is: У меня есть/не есть где жить. (??)
    Yeah, у меня есть/нету где жить, у нас будет где жить, у него не было где жить and so on. But when иметь is in infinitive, in future tense for example, you could as easily say вы будете иметь где жить.
     

    nimak

    Senior Member
    Macedonian
    In Macedonian too:

    има/нема каде да живее (ima/nema kade da živee)
    or
    има/нема каj да живее (ima/nema kaj da živee)

    lit. "has/doesn't-have where to live"
     

    Awwal12

    Senior Member
    Russian
    Yeah, у меня есть/нету где жить, у нас будет где жить, у него не было где жить and so on. But when иметь is in infinitive, in future tense for example, you could as easily say вы будете иметь где жить.
    Half of that sounds completely extraterrestrial to me, I am afraid. "Иметь где жить" by itself is stylistically atrocious, and "у него не было где жить" borders agrammaticality.
    "У меня есть где жить" is already somewhat problematic, since, undoubtedly, the default way to convey that idea in everyday speech is "мне есть где жить", with the dativus commodi ("(to) me (there) is where (to) live").
     

    Sobakus

    Senior Member
    Half of that sounds completely extraterrestrial to me, I am afraid.
    "Иметь где жить" by itself is stylistically atrocious, and "у него не было где жить" borders agrammaticality.
    That's all right, there might be many reasons for this, from a genuine difference between your grammar and that of other Russian speakers (which is normal) to trying to analyse the construction using a descriptively inadequate (or even wrong) framework, such as the grammar we learn at school, cf. the no split infinitive-type "rules" of English. Have you looked these expressions up in a search engine? It often happens to me that what looked bewildering out of context starts looking absolutely fine when context is sufficient.
    "У меня есть где жить" is already somewhat problematic, since, undoubtedly, the default way to convey that idea in everyday speech is "мне есть где жить", with the dativus commodi ("(to) me (there) is where (to) live").
    These two expressions mean different things. "У меня́ есть где жить" is a possessive expression equal to "я имею где жить, у меня есть жильё". The other example refers to having no ability to find a living accomodation. This is why examples like "в Новгороде у меня нет где жить" mean "у меня́ нет кварти́ры в Но́вгороде" and could be uttered by anyone who has no apartment there, while "мне не́где жить" (notice the preference of негде over нет где, while being as strongly dispreferred in a possessive construction with у меня) doesn't work that well with a space adjunct, and when used so can be interpreted to mean "I don't have enough space to live there", e.g. "льву в э́той кле́тке не́где жить", while "у льва́ в этой кле́тке нет где жить" sounds absurd, as if it doesn't have an apartment in the cage.
     
    Last edited:

    Awwal12

    Senior Member
    Russian
    These two expressions mean different things. "У меня́ есть где жить" is a possessive expression equal to "я имею где жить, у меня есть жильё".
    It doesn't necessary imply ownership (e.g. "у меня есть где жить в Москве - я живу в тётиной квартире" is absolutely fine by me, other than it sounds clumsy a bit). And the broad possessivity has basically the same semantics (cf. Eng. "I have a place to live" - which doesn't mean you own the place either).
     

    jasio

    Senior Member
    "у меня есть где жить в Москве - я живу в тётиной квартире" is absolutely fine by me, other than it sounds clumsy a bit.
    Excuse my OT, but how would you phrase it naturally then? In Polish "W Warszawie mam gdzie mieszkać - mieszkam u cioci" sounds quite ok., even though a specific wording may be different, depending on context.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top