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." -l.