Нет бы ему прочитать формулировку вопроса, он выкрикнул ответ.

Here нет бы is an idiomatic expression, not a literal no.

In this sentence, нет бы ему прочитать формулировку вопроса... means something like:

• He should at least have read the wording of the question
• Instead of that, he...
• Rather than doing the sensible thing, he...

It often expresses irritation, criticism, or exasperation.

So the whole sentence has the flavor of:

• Instead of reading the question properly, he blurted out an answer.

This construction is fairly colloquial and often sounds a bit emotional.

Because Russian often uses the dative + infinitive pattern to say that something is expected, appropriate, possible, or desirable for someone to do.

So:

• ему прочитать = for him to read
• more naturally: him reading / him to read

In this sentence, the dative marks the person who is supposed to perform the action.

Compare:

• Тебе бы отдохнуть. = You should get some rest.
• Мне бы поспать. = I’d like to sleep / I should sleep.
• Ему бы сначала подумать. = He should think first.

So ему is not the direct object; it means for him.

Because прочитать is perfective, and the speaker is talking about a single completed action that should have happened before he answered.

• читать = to read, be reading, read in general
• прочитать = to read through, to read completely

Here the idea is:

• He should have read the wording of the question through / actually read it first

If you used читать, it would sound less focused on completing that one specific action.

So прочитать fits the situation better: one concrete, completed action that would have been sensible to do first.

Because формулировку is the direct object of прочитать, so it is in the accusative case.

• формулировка = wording, formulation
• accusative singular: формулировку

Then вопроса is in the genitive because it depends on формулировка:

• формулировка чего? = the wording of what?
• вопроса = of the question

So:

• прочитать формулировку вопроса = to read the wording of the question

This is a normal noun + noun pattern:

• начало книги = the beginning of the book
• конец фильма = the end of the film
• текст письма = the text of the letter

Russian often joins clauses with just a comma, especially when the relationship is obvious from context.

Here the structure is roughly:

• Instead of doing X, he did Y.

So the comma marks a contrast between:

• what he should have done: ему прочитать формулировку вопроса
• what he actually did: он выкрикнул ответ

In English, you would usually need something like:

• but
• instead
• and instead

Russian can leave that unstated.

You could think of it as an asyndetic contrast: the contrast is there even without a conjunction.

Not necessarily. Russian often omits conjunctions when the contrast is already clear.

Still, a speaker could say something like:

• Нет бы ему прочитать формулировку вопроса, а он выкрикнул ответ.

That would make the contrast even more explicit.

Without а, the sentence is still natural and idiomatic. In fact, the version without a conjunction can sound a bit sharper and more compact.

Yes, it could often be omitted in conversation if the subject is already clear, but keeping он is very natural here.

Compare:

• Нет бы ему прочитать формулировку вопроса, выкрикнул ответ.
• Нет бы ему прочитать формулировку вопроса, он выкрикнул ответ.

The version with он is clearer and more balanced stylistically. It emphasizes the person’s actual behavior in contrast to what he should have done.

So он is not strictly required by logic, but it is very normal and helps the sentence feel complete.

Выкрикнул means shouted out, cried out, or blurted out loudly.

It suggests that he did not answer calmly or thoughtfully. It adds a sense of impulsiveness, loudness, and lack of restraint.

Compare:

• сказал ответ — not natural here; Russian would not usually say this
• ответил — answered
• выкрикнул ответ — shouted out the answer

So выкрикнул ответ gives a stronger negative impression:

• he didn’t even bother reading properly
• he just shouted the answer

That fits well with the speaker’s annoyed tone.

Yes, it is understandable and natural enough. It means he shouted out the answer.

That said, Russian speakers might also say:

• выкрикнул ответ
• выкрикнул свой ответ
• прокричал ответ
• сразу ответил
• выкрикнул, не дочитав вопрос

The original wording is fine. It paints a vivid picture of someone calling out an answer too quickly.

It is mildly to strongly reproachful, and somewhat colloquial.

The speaker sounds annoyed, as if saying:

• Honestly, he could at least have read the question first.
• Typical — instead of reading the question, he just yelled out an answer.

The construction нет бы... often carries:

• criticism
• sarcasm
• impatience
• hindsight judgment

So this is not a neutral description. It clearly shows the speaker’s attitude.

Yes. This pattern is very flexible.

For example:

• Нет бы тебе позвонить заранее.
  You should have called in advance.

• Нет бы мне проверить адрес.
  I should have checked the address.

• Нет бы им сначала спросить.
  They should have asked first.

So the structure is commonly:

• Нет бы + dative + infinitive

It expresses that someone failed to do the sensible or expected thing.

No. A literal translation would sound very unnatural in English.

This is one of those cases where the Russian structure should be understood as an idiom, not translated word for word.

Natural English renderings would be:

• Instead of reading the wording of the question, he shouted out an answer.
• He should have read the wording of the question, but he shouted out an answer instead.
• Rather than read the question properly, he blurted out an answer.

So it is better to learn нет бы + dative + infinitive as a fixed expressive pattern.