slovosled

Discussion in 'Grammar & Pronunciation' started by Wicker808, Apr 27, 2004.

  1. Wicker808

    Wicker808 Well-Known Member

    Here is another grammatical question. The hardest thing for me in Czech is word order. It is said that Czech word order is free, but this is not true in the frame of helping conditional particles (bych, bys, by ... ), past tense particles (jsem, jsi, jsme...), and reflexive pronouns.

    The general rule sounds: the reflexive pronoun must be the second element in the sentence. This is sometimes very awkward, because often the verb, with which is associated the reflexive pronoun, is not near. For example:

    Porad se o moji naklannost ten beznadejny blbec uchazi.

    The verb here is "uchazet se" even though its two components are on other sides of the sentence! To put "se" somewhere else would be wrong. This is difficult for me, because it requires much forward planning in the sentence.

    Also this rule is very difficult to keep with complex sentences:

    Krizujici se ulice, ktere se zatarasily, se pak bombami znicily.

    Sometimes, it's not clear how to count "elements" when positioning a reflexive pronoun:

    Tak, nechces se zachranit?
    Tak se nechces zachranit?
    Ale se mylis.
    Ale mylis se.
    Proto jsem se musel s tim smirit.
    No, musel jsem se s tim smirit.

    Similar problems when verbs modify an adjective:

    Jasne, jsem ochoten pokusit se auto opravit.
    Jasne, jsem ochoten se pokusit auto opravit.

    (Sidenote. Ignore if already confused.

    I find constructions involving multiple verbs in the same clause to be a potential source of ambiguity, but maybe I'm look at it wrong. In the above case, se is the object of pokusit and auto is the object of opravit, but we could look at it otherwise: they are both accusative, so we could interepret the above sentence to mean: I'm willing to tempt the car to repair itself. Similarly, sentences like "Necham te jist" could mean either "I will let you eat" or "I will let you be eaten." But this is a subject for another day.)

    Positioning of particles can also move the reflexive pronoun:

    Miminko by se chtelo narodit.
    Ja bych si spis nepral takovou moznost.
    WRONG: Tvuj napad odmitnul bych.
    Tvuj napad bych odmitnul.

    Also there is the issue of combining reflexive pronouns with particles, which I will maybe discuss later.

    And of course there are sometimes several reflexive pronouns.

    WRONG? Vezmeme si se.
    WRONG? Vezmeme se si.

    I have never found a comprehensive summary of the positioning of reflexive pronouns, and I have looked.

    A related question is when it is appropriate to double a reflexive pronoun in the same sentence. I have been told it is correct to say:

    Snazim se ucit cesky.

    although more logical (and awkward) seems to me the form:

    WRONG? Snazim se ucit se cesky.

    And also more complicated examples:

    WRONG? At se ti dari naucit se bavit se.

    Which sounds terrible.
    Rough translation: I hope you manage to learn to enjoy yourself.

    So my quesion, I guess, isn't a question, but an expression of confusion, and a request for, at best, some guidance or explanation, and, at least, some sympathy.

    If you can throw some light on this I will be grateful.
     
  2. milan

    milan New Member

    Ahoj!

    You are right with this sentence (only the misspelling "naklonost" instead of "naklanost") , but I can't understand how someone can get this sentence while learning foreign language :))

    The word order IS free, you can say, for example:

    Porad se ten beznadejny blbec uchazi o mou naklonost.

    The logic behind this is the following:

    1. the base of the sentence is

    blbec se uchazi

    2. adding "Porad" (determination of time - WHEN?) divide "se" and "uchazi"

    Porad se blbec uchazi

    3. now you extend "blbec" with other attributes. These words are beside the main word, "blbec" - and it means that distance between "se" and "uchazi" will increase:

    Porad se ten beznadejny blbec uchazi.

    4. now you extend the word "uchazi" with its attributes and you can add these attributes before or after the main word "uchazi":

    Porad se ten beznadejny blbec o moji naklonost uchazi.

    Porad se ten beznadejny blbec uchazi o moji naklonost.

    and finaly your one:

    Porad se o moji naklonost ten beznadejny blbec uchazi.

    All three are right and the difference in meaning is so little that even many of native speakers can't see it.

    Right. Typical difficult sentence used in exams at school, I don't know anybody saying this.

    Both right, but with different meaning each time. First one means "You really don't want to be saved?" and the second one means "You don't want to be saved this way, do you?"

    First wrong, second right - as a reply to someone.

    Both right. Firstly there is one sentence, secondly two sentences together ("No" is a whole sentence here even this is one word only) This is why the word order is different. The first one would be better as "Proto jsem se s tim musel smirit."

    Both right. Native speakers can say both variants and don't see any difference.

    Again: right. "Necham te jist" is a good example, although the "main meaning" is so usual that a few people will think about other ones. If we want to say "I will let you be eaten." we say "Necham te snist."
    The trick is that link between some verbs and "se" is so strong that near to anyone will think about "se" as about "(your|my|his|him|it)self" if seeing "se" near to one of these verbs. This is similar to "looking" in "looking for" or "get" in "get out the bus".

    Both wrong, I can't quess what the meaning should be. "Vezmeme si" means "We will get/take <something>" but "Vezmeme se" means "We will become married together." I can't combine these together :)


    Both perfectly right.

    Sounds terrible. "At se ti dari naucit se bavit." But it also sound like a sentence from "wise book" or from 19th century. Maybe this is because we aren't used to give so good advice to others now :)

    I understand it is difficult and I am not a teacher, just native speaker only so I can't give you "general rules" as we did learn at school, but I hope this will be useful for you. I'm sure that you can visit Czech Republic without any fear if you have so advanced problems! :)
     
  3. Wicker808

    Wicker808 Well-Known Member

    Zdravim, Milane.

    Thank you for your answer. I was beginning to fear that no one will answer my long complex message.

    Thank you for explaining this logic. I've read several Czech grammar books, including books intended for Czechs, but have never found a explanation of this issue. It is difficult, because, as in the above example, one must know which verb one wants to use already in the second word. I often find myself in a situation, where I say, for example,

    Porad o moji naklonost ten beznadejny blbec ...

    when I suddenly realize that I need to use a verb with a reflexive pronoun. My choice is either to say the sentence again from the beginning with "se", or to say a wrong, but probably understandable sentence like:

    WRONG: Porad o moji naklonost ten beznadejny blbec se uchazi.

    This a very interesting point. I wasn't aware that "Necham te snist" would be interpreted differently than "Necham te jist." Is this a function of the aspect of the secondary verb? In other words, does using "nechat" with a perfective infinitve suggest a passive meaning more than "nechat" with an imperfective infinitive?

    Necham te jist. [imper. inf.] = I will let you eat. [active]
    Necham te snist. [per. inf.] = I will let you be eaten. [passive]

    Necham te zkoumat. [imper. inf.] ?= I will let you explore. [active]
    Necham te prozkoumat. [per. inf.] ?= I will let you be explored. [passive]

    Necham te nicit. [imper. inf.] ?= I will let you destroy. [active]
    Necham te znicit. [per. inf.] ?= I will let you be destroyed. [passive]

    Are these sentences ambiguous like "Necham te jist" or do they have exclusively the marked meanings?



    They're right, but do they have the same meaning? The second certainly means "I'm trying to learn Czech," but the first could, I think, mean as well "I'm trying to teach Czech." I suppose a less ambiguous way to express this might be:

    Snazim se vyucovat cesky.

    I know I can visit the Czech Republic without fear.... I've been here for 2 years. ;)

    Thanks again for your help.
     
  4. Sova

    Sova Well-Known Member

    That's the trick: knowing what you want to say before you actually say it. :)
     
  5. Bohaemus

    Bohaemus Well-Known Member

    You can use a synonym without the reflexive se:

    Pořád o moji náklonnost ten beznadějný blbec ... :?: ... usiluje.

    To Milan: náklonnost has double n.
     

Share This Page