Auxiliary verbs

Discussion in 'Čeština (Czech)' started by linguist80, May 31, 2009.

  1. linguist80 New Member

    Italian - Ticino (Switzerland)
    Hi, can any native speaker of Czech translate the following sentences:

    (i) I have arrived 5 minutes ago

    (ii) You have arrived 5 minutes ago

    (iii) He has arrived 5 minutes ago

    (iv) I have called 5 minutes ago

    (v) You have called 5 minutes ago

    (vi) He has called 5 minutes ago

    (vii) They have arrived 5 minutes ago

    (viii) They have called 5 minutes ago

    (ix) I have eaten a cake

    (x) You have eaten a cake

    (xi) He has eaten a cake

    (xii) They have eaten a cake

    I am trying to verify that the auxiliary is systematically omitted in the 3rd person and with any type of verb.

    Thank you!!!
  2. sokol

    sokol Senior Member

    Vienna, Austria; raised in Upper Austria
    Austrian (as opposed to Australian)
    Actually you do not need a translation of the whole paradigm (with several words) for this; it suffices to ask this question alone. :)
  3. linguist80 New Member

    Italian - Ticino (Switzerland)
    Actually, I would also love to have data concerning the other persons of the paradigm. that is how it works in Linguistics. :)
  4. texpert Senior Member

    Too busy to fill up the whole questionnaire but it is just as you might have expected:

    Dorazil jsem (před pěti minutami)
    Dorazil jsi..
    Volal jsem..
    Volal jsi..
    Jedl jsem (dort)
    Jedl jsi..
  5. jazyk Senior Member

    Brno, Česká republika
    Brazílie, portugalština
    Statements i to viii should have the simple past rather than the present perfect in English.

    i - Přišel jsem před pěti minutami.
    ii - Přišel jsi před pěti minutami.
    iii - On přišel před pěti minutami.
    iv - Zavolal jsem před pěti minutami.
    v - Zavolal jsi před pěti minutami.
    vi - On zavolal před pěti minutami.
    vii - Přišli před pěti minutami.
    viii - Zavolali před pěti minutami.
    ix - Jedl jsem koláč.
    x - Jedl jsi koláč.
    xi - Jedli koláč.

    Přišel could also be přišla and zavolal could also be zavolala if the subject is a woman (excluding iii and vi, because the subject on is masculine). Zavolali and přišli could also be zavolaly and přišly, respectively. Přišel could also be přijel if they came in a means of transportation. Jedl could also be jedla for feminine or even Snědl(a) in the perfective. It's hard to say without more context.
  6. linguist80 New Member

    Italian - Ticino (Switzerland)

    Thanks much texpert and jazyk!
  7. K.u.r.t Senior Member

    London, UK
    In most situations the subject is left out. That is unless you want to stress out that HE (not someone else) arrived 5 mins ago.
  8. CapnPrep Senior Member

    You can also look for the answer in any Czech grammar. Linguists also do this before jumping into their field work. ;)
  9. linguist80 New Member

    Italian - Ticino (Switzerland)
    Thanks CapnPrep for the very insightful suggestion. In any case, what if I have done that already and I still want to double-check the facts with native speakers. Just making sure the data are correct, one never knows ;)
  10. Fantomas.CZ

    Fantomas.CZ Member

    Veselí nad Lužnicí, Czech Republic
    Czech - čeština (Čechy)
    Sentences (i) to (viii) are not correct in English - you would use a simple past if a time value is given. But your presumption is correct - in the 3rd person the auxiliary has been left out since some 200 years, at least what I know. It would be "on jest přišel" for "he (has) came" and it was archaic already a hundred years ago.

    The other translations:
    (ix) I have eaten a cake
    Snědl jsem koláč (like in English, must be perfect here, because it was made in the past, but the "consequences" last - the cake is gone :)
    (x) You have eaten a cake
    Snědl jsi koláč.
    (xi) He has eaten a cake
    Snědl koláč.
    (xii) They have eaten a cake
    Snědli koláč.

    Let's say that the expression "I have eaten a cake" is not fully compliant with "Ho mangiato una focaccia", because in English it means a fact that arose in the past and stil lasts, however in Italian it means purely a past fact.

    So in this case you would translate it with the past tense, but in the case of words expressing existence, e. g. "I have lived here for 25 years" translates into "Žiju zde (už) 25 let", so in the present tense.

Share This Page