The verb 251 збудований театр a built theatre (a theatre that was built) прочитана книжка a read book (a book that was read) відчинене вікно an open(ed) window прислані листи posted letters (letters that were posted) Він батько вбитого He's the father of the soldier who was killed. солдата, недопитий чай the unfinished tea (lit. 'not drunk up') недосолена риба fish that hasn't been quite salted (enough) доварений суп soup that has been cooked (enough) позначення подовженої the marking of lengthened pronunciation of вимови приголосних consonants (re transcriptions in the dictionary) The imperfective PPR, in addition to referring to an action that was taking place in the past, can express results that continue to be in effect in the present; Dudyk (1988: 320-1) makes the point that some of these participial forms could therefore easily be replaced by present tense active forms. Thus: бажаний результат the desired effect (not necessarily just in the past) січене сіно the cut hay (hay that has been, was being cut) And citing the writer Ivan Franko (Dudyk, ibid.): І почуває він себе таким слабким, безсилим і безвільним, мов пилина, вітрами гнана. And he feels so weak, powerless and 'unfree', like a speck of dust driven by the winds. (Implied: that is being driven by the winds.) When the agent (the one who carried out the action) is mentioned, it appears in the instrumental case: Ти читала книжку, написану Have you read the book (that мною? was) written by me? Ось стаття, перекладена ним. Here is the article translated by him. У тому будинку, збудованому In this building built by the workers . . . робітниками... До країни, відкритої нами ... То the country discovered by us . . . 6.4.4.2 Use of the PPR: predicative In the predicate the PPR is used in constructions which involve the copula 'to be' in English: The stadium was built', 'the book was written', and so on. The standard formulation is as follows: an impersonal form of the PPR in -ho, -то is used, and - against expectation - the object will appear in the accusative; this shows an incomplete separation of the passive from the active, as the object would occur in the accusative in active constructions. The ending of the PPR is not neuter (the neuter ending being -e), but strictly a marker of the impersonal quality of the formulation:
|