Мы долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественницы.

Breakdown of Мы долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественницы.

сидеть
to sit
и
and
слушать
to listen
мы
we
у
by
история
the story
долго
for a long time
костёр
the campfire
путешественница
the (female) traveler
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Russian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Russian now

Questions & Answers about Мы долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественницы.

Why is костра in that form after у?

The preposition у (meaning by, near, at in a spatial sense) always takes the genitive case.

  • Nominative: костёр (a campfire)
  • Genitive singular: костра

So у костра literally means by/near the campfire.
The case is dictated by the preposition у, not by the verb сидели.


What exactly does долго mean here, and why is there no word for “for” (as in “for a long time”)?

Долго is an adverb meaning for a long time / long.

Russian usually does not use a separate preposition like for in this meaning. You just add the adverb:

  • Мы долго сидели = We sat (were sitting) for a long time.
  • Он долго ждал = He waited for a long time.

So долго itself covers the idea of for a long time.


Why is there no word meaning “to” after “listened” — why is it just слушали истории, not something like слушали к историям?

In Russian, слушать (to listen to) takes a direct object in the accusative case, with no preposition:

  • слушать музыку – to listen to music
  • слушать радио – to listen to the radio
  • слушать учителя – to listen to the teacher

So слушали истории means listened to stories; the verb itself already contains the idea of “to”.


What case is истории in, and how do we know it means “stories” (plural), not “story” (singular)?

Истории here is accusative plural of история (story).

  • Nominative singular: история – a story
  • Accusative plural (for inanimate nouns = same as nominative plural): истории – stories

Because слушали (listened) needs a direct object, истории must be in the accusative: listened to what?истории.
So the phrase слушали истории is naturally understood as listened to stories (plural).


What case is путешественницы, and how does it show the meaning “traveller’s stories”?

Путешественницы is genitive singular of путешественница (female traveller).

Russian often shows possession with a noun in the genitive after another noun:

  • книга студента – the student’s book
  • друг сестры – the sister’s friend
  • истории путешественницы – the traveller’s stories

So истории путешественницы literally means stories of (the) female traveller.


Could путешественницы here mean “female travellers” (plural)? How do we know it’s not plural?

The form путешественницы could theoretically be:

  • nominative plural (female travellers), or
  • genitive singular (of the female traveller).

In this sentence, its role is to depend on истории (stories) and show who the stories belong to. That requires the genitive, not a new subject in the nominative.

If we wanted stories of (several) female travellers, we would say:

  • истории путешественниц – genitive plural

So истории путешественницы is naturally read as stories of the (one) female traveller.


Why is it путешественницы (female) and not путешественника (male)? How would it look if the traveller were male?

Путешественница is the specifically female form (female traveller), and its genitive singular is путешественницы.

If the traveller were male, you would use путешественник:

  • Genitive singular (male): путешественника
  • Sentence: Мы долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественника.
    We sat by the campfire for a long time and listened to the (male) traveller’s stories.

So the ending tells you the gender of the traveller.


Why is сидели imperfective, not something like посидели? What nuance does the aspect give?

Сидели is the imperfective past of сидеть. Imperfective here describes a long‑lasting, background action without focusing on its completion.

  • Мы долго сидели у костра – We were (just) sitting by the campfire for a long time; it paints the scene.
  • Мы посидели у костра – We sat by the campfire for a while / we had a sit by the campfire (completed event, result: we spent some time sitting).

In the original sentence the speaker cares about the ongoing situation and the atmosphere, so the imperfective сидели is natural.


Why are both verbs сидели and слушали in the same simple past form? Does this mean the actions were simultaneous?

Both verbs are imperfective past plural and share the same subject мы. Linking them with и (and) in this form usually implies that the actions were simultaneous, forming one scene:

  • They were sitting by the fire
  • and at the same time they were listening to the traveller’s stories.

Russian doesn’t need a continuous form (were sitting / were listening); the simple imperfective past (сидели, слушали) already covers that idea of ongoing, parallel actions.


Is the pronoun мы necessary, or could you just say Долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественницы?

You can omit мы:

  • Долго сидели у костра и слушали истории путешественницы.

This is grammatically correct. Russian often drops subject pronouns when the verb endings make the subject clear.

However, using мы:

  • makes the subject explicit from the start,
  • can add a slight emphasis on we (as opposed to someone else).

So both versions are possible; the one with мы is just a bit more explicit.


Is there any difference between Мы долго сидели у костра and Мы сидели у костра долго?

Both are correct and mean roughly the same: We sat by the campfire for a long time.

The difference is in emphasis and rhythm:

  • Мы долго сидели у костра – neutral, долго is close to the verb it modifies.
  • Мы сидели у костра долго – puts долго toward the end, slightly emphasizing how long they sat.

Russian word order is relatively flexible; moving долго mostly affects what is highlighted, not the core meaning.


Why is it у костра and not something like на костре or возле костра? What’s the difference between these prepositions?
  • у костраby / at the campfire (very common and neutral for “sitting around a fire”).
  • возле костра / около костра – also near / by the campfire, similar meaning; возле/около often feel a bit more literal “near” than у, but here they could all work.
  • на костре – literally on the fire, used mostly in contexts like готовить на костре (to cook over a campfire). It would not be used for sitting by the fire.

So у костра is the natural choice to describe people sitting around a fire.


What is the difference between слушать and слышать? Could we say слышали истории путешественницы instead?
  • слушатьto listen (actively), make an effort to hear.
  • слышатьto hear (perceive sounds), more passive.

In this sentence слушали истории путешественницы means they were actively listening to her stories.

Слышали истории путешественницы would mean they heard the traveller’s stories (they happened to hear them / had heard them), which is a different nuance. For the idea of sitting and deliberately listening, слушать is correct.


How does Russian show things like “a traveller / the traveller” if there are no articles in the sentence?

Russian has no articles (a, an, the). Whether you understand it as a traveller or the traveller comes from context, not from a separate word.

  • If the traveller has already been mentioned, you’d naturally read путешественницы as of the traveller.
  • If she appears for the first time here, English might choose of a traveller or of a travelling woman.

The Russian form путешественницы itself does not mark definiteness; it only shows case (genitive), number (singular here), and gender (female).