Koko wrote:Hey all! I recently got a desire, more a craving, to learn some (probably going to be a lot ) Czech. So to start off, I am going to write a few simple sentences and hopefully I make few mistakes
[flag=]en-ca[/flag]I go to the house. [flag=]cs[/flag]Jím k domě. (I believe this implies the action is completed; unless I got the aspect wrong)
[flag=]en-ca[/flag]He is writing a letter to me. [flag=]cs[/flag]Mi dopis píší.
[flag=]en-ca[/flag]In my house, we have a dog and a cat. [flag=]cs[/flag]V moje domě, my pesa i kočku máme. (místo je "v domě moje…"?)
Koko wrote:Why does the demonstrative need to be used? Does this imply significance like "the"?
Koko wrote:I write to the man.- Píšu muži.
Koko wrote:I wrote to the man.- Psal muži jsem.
Koko wrote:I write a letter to the man.- Píšu dopis muži.
Koko wrote:I wrote a letter to the man in a castle.- Ve hradu psal jsem dopis muži.
Ashrak wrote:Psal jsem dopis muži v hradu (the man and in castle need to be together) or Mužovi v hradu jsem psal dopis (again depends on emphasis)
Koko wrote:You are writing a letter.- Pisuješ dopis.
Koko wrote:You write in Czech.- Píšeš v Češtině.
Koko wrote:He wrote to me.- Psal mi.
Koko wrote:She was writing me a letter.- Pisovala mi dopis.
Koko wrote:A man washes dishes in his house.- Muž myje nádobí v joho[*] domě.
Koko wrote:Moje matka čte mi starou knihu. (My mom reads me an old book.)
Koko wrote:Já ponésu ten čaj tátovi, ty čti. (I'll carry the tea to dad, you read.)
Koko wrote:Myji ten dům. (I clean the house.)
I think it sounds weird because it's just a training sentence to exercise grammar, they're always weird and there's no need to think about how they should sound naturally.Ashrak wrote: V hradu jsem psal mužovi dopis
I can't really explain why do Man and letter change place here, but it sounds better to me Still sounds a bit off to me, i will think further.
I'd be careful about comparing simple and continuous tense to perfective and imperfective aspect. In this case, when we don't know more, it could be translated just as well with "psal mi" as Koko suggested.Ashrak wrote:Koko wrote:He wrote to me.- Psal mi.
Correct Eventhough in past this would translate as: He was writing to me. He wrote me is: Napsal mi. (notice how we simple and continuous past tenses of psát say with different verbs, this doesn't work in present though ... napíšeš mi is future tense)
It's "jeho". And it's jeho in all cases, you don't decline it.Koko wrote:Only wrong verb and not knowing the declensions of joho were my major mistakes.
Ashrak wrote:So as long as Koko tries to translate: He wrote to me on Friday i stand behind my perfective aspect
I thought this would have negative meaning ... "he was writing to me every Friday" = "I was not interested in reading it and found it irritating". Or is this used as a neutral piece of information as well?Koko wrote:In English it is possible to use the simple past for habitual actions: He was writing to me every Friday (better "He used to write to me…")= He wrote to me every Friday.
hreru wrote:…But he might have
I thought this would have negative meaning ... "he was writing to me every Friday" = "I was not interested in reading it and found it irritating". Or is this used as a neutral piece of information as well?
Koko wrote:hreru wrote:…But he might have
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest