<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who Owns The Rights To Lenin’s Face?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/</link>
	<description>Language and Culture of the Russian-Speaking World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:49:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anya</title>
		<link>http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/comment-page-1/#comment-271</link>
		<dc:creator>Anya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/#comment-271</guid>
		<description>Come to think of it, you could write a whole blog on the word «принадлежность».

The first translation that you cite for the word -- accessories, articles, gear; -- is correct only of the plural noun &quot;принадлежности.&quot;

The second meaning - belonging (to), affiliation (with); - is correct only in the verb form of this word, as you explained it in your blog.

The third meaning - characteristic, attribute -is the trickiest usage of this word.  If you just wish to translated the word &quot;attribute, characteristic, property&quot; into Russian, you should use &quot;своиство.&quot;  The word «принадлежность» in the singular noun form becomes applicable only when speaking about a characteristic of a specific object within a specific context. «Принадлежность» is a combination of the prepositions &quot;при&quot; [with, in the surroundings of], &quot;над&quot; [above, before, over] and the verb &quot;лежать&quot; [to lay, v.]  Together, the meaning of the word mutates to &quot;its/his main purpose here is. . .&quot; -&gt; as in «принадлежность этой вещи/этого человека . . .»  The implication is that the same object in a different context will have a different &quot;принадлежность&quot;.

Whew. . . Explaining Russian language is tough! I hope this will helpful to you in furthering your understanding of Russian.

Anya</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come to think of it, you could write a whole blog on the word «принадлежность».</p>
<p>The first translation that you cite for the word &#8212; accessories, articles, gear; &#8212; is correct only of the plural noun &#8220;принадлежности.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second meaning &#8211; belonging (to), affiliation (with); &#8211; is correct only in the verb form of this word, as you explained it in your blog.</p>
<p>The third meaning &#8211; characteristic, attribute -is the trickiest usage of this word.  If you just wish to translated the word &#8220;attribute, characteristic, property&#8221; into Russian, you should use &#8220;своиство.&#8221;  The word «принадлежность» in the singular noun form becomes applicable only when speaking about a characteristic of a specific object within a specific context. «Принадлежность» is a combination of the prepositions &#8220;при&#8221; [with, in the surroundings of], &#8220;над&#8221; [above, before, over] and the verb &#8220;лежать&#8221; [to lay, v.]  Together, the meaning of the word mutates to &#8220;its/his main purpose here is. . .&#8221; -&gt; as in «принадлежность этой вещи/этого человека . . .»  The implication is that the same object in a different context will have a different &#8220;принадлежность&#8221;.</p>
<p>Whew. . . Explaining Russian language is tough! I hope this will helpful to you in furthering your understanding of Russian.</p>
<p>Anya</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anya</title>
		<link>http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/comment-page-1/#comment-270</link>
		<dc:creator>Anya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/#comment-270</guid>
		<description>A few corrections to your Russian in this blog:

If you wish to use the diminutive case on the word &quot;Lenin,&quot; it would probably sound more like &quot;Lenichka&quot; or &quot;Lenishka,&quot; but not Leninchik. I am only a native speaker, not a Russian teacher, so forgive me if my explanation is awkward:

I feel that Leninchik sounds wrong because of the awkward accent in this word.  For example, in the word &quot;ГОлубь&quot;, the accent falls on the first syllable, just as in the word ЛEнин.  In the diminutive, the accent falls on the second syllable &quot;ГоЛУбчик,&quot; but in the word &quot;ЛеНИнчик,&quot; the accent ought to fall on the second syllable. However, if you try pronouncing it that way, you&#039;ll immediately feel the awkwardness and loss of the word &quot;Ленин.&quot;  To preserve the accent on the first syllable, the diminutive ending would change to &quot;-чка,&quot; or &quot;нька,&quot; as in converting the male name &quot;Миша&quot; to &quot;Мишенька.&quot;

Then again, you can take this grammar discussion into another realm entirely based on the origin of the word Lenin, which comes from the river Lena, and literally means &quot;of Lena.&quot;  If you are trying to make a diminutive adjective, then the correct word would be &quot;Lenochkin.&quot;

-------
and one more note: «эти штаны моя принадлежность» doesn&#039;t work for two reasons: штаны and принадлежности are always plural.  So there is really only one way to say it: «эти штаны принадлежат мне».

Anya</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few corrections to your Russian in this blog:</p>
<p>If you wish to use the diminutive case on the word &#8220;Lenin,&#8221; it would probably sound more like &#8220;Lenichka&#8221; or &#8220;Lenishka,&#8221; but not Leninchik. I am only a native speaker, not a Russian teacher, so forgive me if my explanation is awkward:</p>
<p>I feel that Leninchik sounds wrong because of the awkward accent in this word.  For example, in the word &#8220;ГОлубь&#8221;, the accent falls on the first syllable, just as in the word ЛEнин.  In the diminutive, the accent falls on the second syllable &#8220;ГоЛУбчик,&#8221; but in the word &#8220;ЛеНИнчик,&#8221; the accent ought to fall on the second syllable. However, if you try pronouncing it that way, you&#8217;ll immediately feel the awkwardness and loss of the word &#8220;Ленин.&#8221;  To preserve the accent on the first syllable, the diminutive ending would change to &#8220;-чка,&#8221; or &#8220;нька,&#8221; as in converting the male name &#8220;Миша&#8221; to &#8220;Мишенька.&#8221;</p>
<p>Then again, you can take this grammar discussion into another realm entirely based on the origin of the word Lenin, which comes from the river Lena, and literally means &#8220;of Lena.&#8221;  If you are trying to make a diminutive adjective, then the correct word would be &#8220;Lenochkin.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;-<br />
and one more note: «эти штаны моя принадлежность» doesn&#8217;t work for two reasons: штаны and принадлежности are always plural.  So there is really only one way to say it: «эти штаны принадлежат мне».</p>
<p>Anya</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/comment-page-1/#comment-269</link>
		<dc:creator>John Baker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 05:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transparent.com/russian/who-owns-the-rights-to-lenin%e2%80%99s-face/#comment-269</guid>
		<description>Josefinchka!
You have made me laugh like no other. We have a saying in America, and maybe it is used in Sweden and Russia as well, &quot;Only the Good die young.&quot;
I offer a revision, in honor of the Bolsheviks the consummate Revisionists. &quot;Only the Good are invited to Communist Heaven. But afterwards the Good are Rehabilitated.&quot;
But this makes me ask the question, &quot;If this is semi-de-Leninisation, when did the Secret Speech take place?&quot; Can there be de-Leninisation without a secret speech?

Thanks again!!1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Josefinchka!<br />
You have made me laugh like no other. We have a saying in America, and maybe it is used in Sweden and Russia as well, &#8220;Only the Good die young.&#8221;<br />
I offer a revision, in honor of the Bolsheviks the consummate Revisionists. &#8220;Only the Good are invited to Communist Heaven. But afterwards the Good are Rehabilitated.&#8221;<br />
But this makes me ask the question, &#8220;If this is semi-de-Leninisation, when did the Secret Speech take place?&#8221; Can there be de-Leninisation without a secret speech?</p>
<p>Thanks again!!1</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

