On 24 January 2012 11:39, kechpaja <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>  But one cannot say
>> *"Yemu nado moloko." because _nado_ cannot be an adjective, only an adverb.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you can say that. However, it wouldn't be interpreted as an adjective modifying a noun, but rather as an adverb with implied verb and accusative noun (I think).

I think that's a similar situation to "Yemu pet'."; acceptable in
speech, but formally odd. So yeah, you can say it; I should've said,
more precisely, that it's ungrammatical under the same interpretation
as "nuzhno moloko". The fact that it does mean something different
just reinforces the point- that _nado_ can only be an adverb, and not
a neuter adjective.

On 24 January 2012 11:42, Eugene Oh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I have seen such structures before -- with "dolzhen" (a synonym) I haven't,
> though.

I don't think of _dolzhen_ as a synonym; it's different both in
implication and in syntax. With semantics of "should" or "is
obligated", a construction like "On dolzhen moloko" is just straight
up ungrammatical (modulo the fact that an appropriate discourse
context *could* imply a bunch of dropped elements that would fill it
to make sense), while "Yemu dolzhno moloko" or "Yemu dolzhno pet'.",
while having good syntax, just don't make any sense, hence you don't
encounter them, any more than you'd hear an English sentence like "For
me, milk should."