Almafák és barackfák / alma- és barackfák

[ausermilar]

Hello,

I've been reading a leaflet about the villages around Vizsoly and the text says that in the area "sok almafák és barackfák vannak", but a few lines later the same description says that "föleg alma- és barackfák vannak".

May we cut these compound nouns in any situation? Even when we speak?


Thanks.

 

[Zsanna]

Hello,
Yes, to both of your questions.
The reason is to avoid the repetition of the same "fák". (We say that in general, Hungarian language tries to avoid repetitions.)

 

[ausermilar]

Hello,

I've been reading a leaflet about the villages around Vizsoly and the text says that in the area "sok almafák és barackfák vannak", but a few lines later the same description says that "föleg alma- és barackfák vannak".

May we cut these compound nouns in any situation? Even when we speak?


Thanks.

Correction: sok almafák van. Lapsus, sorry.

 

[arlett]

Not only is this structure possible, but in fact it's also preferred.
See: Fővárosi Állat- és Növénykert ("animal garden" and "plant garden", but only the last one is named)

The example with "sok" is not correct though, it should be singular (unlike in many other languages).

sok almafa és barackfa
sok almafa és sok barackfa
sok alma- és barackfa
almafák és barackfák
alma- és barackfák
sok almafák és barackfák

Instead: "sok alma- és barackfa van..."

 

[Stacy11]

Not only is this structure possible, but in fact it's also preferred.
See: Fővárosi Állat- és Növénykert ("animal garden" and "plant garden", but only the last one is named)

The example with "sok" is not correct though, it should be singular (unlike in many other languages).

sok almafa és barackfa
sok almafa és sok barackfa
sok alma- és barackfa
almafák és barackfák
alma- és barackfák
sok almafák és barackfák

Instead: "sok alma- és barackfa van..."

This is correct what Arlett says!
"sok almafák és barackfák vannak" is wrong. Because you only have to express the plural form one time. You can say
-"almafák" and in this case you use the verb also in plural form "vannak"
OR
- you can say "sok almafa" (which is also showing us that there are many of them) and in this case you use the verb also in singular form (because the noun is singular) "van".

So correct expressions are:
"sok almafa és barackfa van" / "sok alma- és barackfa van"
"(főleg) almafák és barackfák vannak" / "(főleg) alma- és barackfák vannak"

+
"(főleg) almafa és barackfa van" / "(főleg) alma- és barackfa van" (this is a little more advanced and casual. this also means many of them, but you say it in a general way. it means that there are apple and peach trees rather than any other trees.
"Arrafelé főleg alma- és barackfa van, nem pedig szilva". But actually you don't need to use this form, because a normal plural form is proper and more common, But you can hear this form, too.)

I hope this helped

 

[francisgranada]

I agree with all the above comments and opinions, however in a "normal" colloquial speech I would say "almafák és barackfák". I.e. not "alma- és barackfák".

The probable reason is the fact that almafa, barackfa, etc ...are perceived as "one word", pronounced with stress only on the first syllable ['almafa] , i.e. not *['alma'fa].

 

[Zsanna]

I agree with all the above comments and opinions, however in a "normal" colloquial speech I would say "almafák és barackfák". I.e. not "alma- és barackfák".

The probable reason is the fact that almafa, barackfa, etc ...are perceived as "one word", pronounced with stress only on the first syllable ['almafa] , i.e. not *['alma'fa].

Yes, I think this shorter form (alma- és barackfa/ák) is particularly used in written language.
Oral language is less strict in following rules (grammar or otherwise).

 

[ausermilar]

This is correct what Arlett says!
"sok almafák és barackfák vannak" is wrong. Because you only have to express the plural form one time. You can say
-"almafák" and in this case you use the verb also in plural form "vannak"
OR
- you can say "sok almafa" (which is also showing us that there are many of them) and in this case you use the verb also in singular form (because the noun is singular) "van".

So correct expressions are:
"sok almafa és barackfa van" / "sok alma- és barackfa van"
"(főleg) almafák és barackfák vannak" / "(főleg) alma- és barackfák vannak"

+
"(főleg) almafa és barackfa van" / "(főleg) alma- és barackfa van" (this is a little more advanced and casual. this also means many of them, but you say it in a general way. it means that there are apple and peach trees rather than any other trees.
"Arrafelé főleg alma- és barackfa van, nem pedig szilva". But actually you don't need to use this form, because a normal plural form is proper and more common, But you can hear this form, too.)

I hope this helped

Wow. Two posts before I had already corrected my "sok" with a plural noun, but anyway, thanks.

 

[elroy]

Two posts before I had already corrected my "sok" with a plural noun

No, you corrected the verb ("vannak" > "van") but the noun was still erroneously plural ("almafák"):

Correction: sok almafák van. Lapsus, sorry.

Maybe you meant to correct the noun too and say "sok almafa van."

 

[Concise]

OFF

Sidenote: I try to “give back” some of the precious help I got in Slovak forum, so please accept it as it is, not something with the aim of confusing, more like with that of highlighting the aspect of cost and benefit when speaking a language.
ON

Yes, I think this shorter form (alma- és barackfa/ák) is particularly used in written language.
Oral language is less strict in following rules (grammar or otherwise).

I guess since the savings is (would be) very tiny, “fa” is (almost) the possible shortest word/noun, so is its plural “fák”, therefore one can easily hear and even read “almafák és barackfák”, too.

My personal taste would favour this latter, by the way, maybe because the “price” coming from the repetition of “fák” is so low vs. the bigger benefit coming from the nice rythm achieved by repeating a word of one syllable.

If the eliminated part of a compound noun is more substantial, like in the example of “fa- és kőfaragó” then both to my Hungarian ears and eyes “fafaragó és kőfaragó” would sound/seem quite strange.

Moreover I doubly opt for “fa- és kőfaragó” for the very same reason as above:
a) I can get rid of a relatively longer word (three syllables)
b) the first parts of these two compound nounds (“fa” and “kő”) are so short, that putting them closer to each other than in the version “fafaragó és kőfaragó” gives not just a cost savings, but an extra elegance, too. At least for me.


Finally let me remark that we omit not just the second part of a compound nouns in order to avoid repetition (considering also some personal taste like the one I explained above), but the first part also. So instead of saying and writing “kutatóintézetek és kutatóközpontok” , we say and write “kutatóintézetek és -központok”.

 

[Zsanna]

I agree to/can accept your point of view. It is always helpful to have several approaches in these questions. (They can also help to revise one's own point of view, because even if we are native speakers, we cannot think of "everything", especially when giving prompt answers.)
However, the general rule - including the one you mention about the ellipsis of the first part of a compound word - stays the same.