Talk:согласованный

Spelling of short forms

It is strange (to me, a learner) that the short forms should be spelled different, with single or double н. Russian Wiktionary only shows the single н. --LA2 (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

(Notifying Atitarev, Cinemantique, KoreanQuoter, Useigor, Wanjuscha, Wikitiki89, Stephen G. Brown, Per utramque cavernam, Guldrelokk): In this case, Zaliznyak clearly indicates the difference in short forms in adjective vs. participle. There are many such lemmas. For some of them, ruwikt correctly indicates the difference in short forms, for others they don't. Sometimes the adjective has two different ways of declining the short form depending on meaning, one of which matches the participle (cf. влюблённый (vljubljónnyj), удовлетворённый (udovletvorjónnyj)). In general, ruwikt isn't so good in this respect; for example, for влюблённый (vljubljónnyj) they indicate the difference in short forms in adjective vs. participle, but not the two different adjectival declensions. Benwing2 (talk) 02:33, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@LA2, Benwing2: I can demonstrate a difference in usage of short forms: "они́ согласо́ваны (со мной)" - they have been coordinated with me (participle) - "они́ согласо́ванны" - "they are coordinated, concerted" (adjective). The topic is not easy even for native speakers. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

For a speaker of Swedish/English/German, "they have been coordinated" and "they are coordinated" should be completely synonymous. I find it hard to imagine a case where they should not be. Perhaps there are literary texts in Wikisource or Google Books that provide examples? If two wheels run at the same speed, they "are synchronous" (perhaps by chance) and perhaps as a result of an action: "they have been synchronized" (based on the verb synchronize). In that case, the difference is expressed with different words. But "are synchronized" implies that this is the result of an action, just like "have been synchronized". --LA2 (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@LA2: You need to try to figure out the main difference between participles and adjectives. In participles, the focus is on the action, there may be an actor and the object receiving the action. Adjectives may be related to participles but they are not participles. They can have strength - more, less, very, perception (e.g. "looks (as if) coordinated"). I know it's difficult but that's the way it is and it is a cause for errors for native speakers and learners. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:49, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

There is no need to convince me. But an explanation that is easy to understand should be in place for future readers. As far as I am concerned, the easiest explanation is that there is no difference. In my native Swedish language, I don't know any examples where there would be any difference between a past participle and the adjective formed from that participle (e.g. fångad or skriven). Are there good examples of this in English? And by "good" I mean examples that can easily be explained to and understood by laymen. But perhaps the difference is more important in Russian than in Germanic languages? --LA2 (talk) 17:19, 7 July 2018 (UTC)