Learn Hardcore Russian: Он отказался от второго доклада, потому что устал, хотя организатор всё-таки был доволен первым. - He refused to give the second talk because he was tired, although the organizer was still satisfied with the first one.

отказаться (perfective, reflexive) – to refuse, to decline (to do something)
- pattern: отказаться от чего? – to refuse something / to back out of something
отказать (perfective, non‑reflexive) – to refuse someone (their request)
- pattern: отказать кому? в чём? – to refuse someone something

In the sentence Он отказался от второго доклада…, the meaning is he refused (to give) the second report / he backed out of the second report. That matches the pattern отказаться от + Genitive, so you need отказался.

If you said Он отказал второй доклад, it would be grammatically wrong, because отказать doesn’t take a direct object that way; it needs a person in the dative and something in в + Prepositional:

Он отказал организатору в втором докладе – even this sounds strange; normally you’d still say отказался от второго доклада in this situation.

So:

refusing a task / an offer → отказаться от чего
refusing a person (their request) → отказать кому в чём

Why do we use от and the Genitive (от второго доклада) instead of just второй доклад in the Accusative?

The verb отказаться (to refuse / back out) is almost always followed by от + Genitive:

отказаться от работы – to refuse the job
отказаться от еды – to refuse food
отказаться от второго доклада – to refuse the second report

So the structure is fixed:

отказаться от + Genitive

That’s why доклад must be in the Genitive (доклада) after от, and the adjective второй also goes into Genitive masculine singular: второго.

Using an Accusative (второй доклад) would fit verbs like делать второй доклад, готовить второй доклад, читать второй доклад, but отказаться simply doesn’t work with a direct Accusative object in this meaning.

Why is it второго доклада and not второй доклад or от второй доклад?

Three things are happening at once:

The preposition от always requires Genitive.
доклад is masculine, so its Genitive singular is доклада.
The adjective второй must agree with доклада in case, number, and gender, so it also becomes Genitive masculine singular: второго.

So:

Nominative: второй доклад – the second report (subject / basic dictionary form)
Genitive: от второго доклада – from the second report (after от)

От второй доклад is wrong for two reasons:

доклад isn’t in the Genitive form.
The adjective второй doesn’t match the case of доклад.

Why is it потому что устал and not something like так как устал or ведь устал? Are they interchangeable?

All three relate to giving a reason, but their usage and tone differ.

потому что – the neutral, standard way to say because:
- Он отказался от второго доклада, потому что устал.
- Direct, factual explanation of the reason.
так как – also “because”, a bit more formal/written, often placed at the beginning of the sentence:
- Так как он устал, он отказался от второго доклада.
ведь – closer to after all / you know / come on, often appealing to shared knowledge or justification rather than just stating a neutral reason:
- Он отказался от второго доклада, ведь он устал.
- Sounds more like: He refused the second report, after all he was tired / you know he was tired.

In this sentence потому что устал is the most straightforward, neutral explanation. You could rewrite it with так как, but ведь would change the tone, adding a nuance of justification or mild insistence.

Why do we say устал and not something like был уставшим or усталый?

Several options exist, but they are not equally natural here:

Он устал. – literally “He got tired / He is tired.”
- Past tense verb устал (perfective устать).
- Very common, neutral way to say someone is (as a result) tired.
Он был уставшим. – “He was tired.”
- Grammatically OK, but more descriptive or stylistic; sounds heavier and more bookish here.
Он был усталый. – possible but stylistically odd; усталый is more like an “inherently tired-looking” or chronically tired person, often used in literary or descriptive style.

In a causal clause with потому что, Russians pretty much always say потому что устал. It’s short, natural, and directly states the cause as a resultative state.

What does хотя do in this sentence, and how does it differ from но?

Хотя means although / even though and introduces a concessive clause – something that contrasts with what you’d expect from the main clause.

Он отказался от второго доклада, потому что устал, хотя организатор всё-таки был доволен первым.

Structure:

Main idea: He refused the second report because he was tired.
Contrasting fact: Although (despite that), the organizer was still satisfied with the first.

Но means but and usually connects coordinate clauses, not a concessive subclause. You could say:

Он отказался от второго доклада, потому что устал, но организатор всё-таки был доволен первым.

This is also correct but slightly different in feel:

With но: plain contrast between two facts.
With хотя: focuses more clearly on the “unexpectedness” of the second part in light of the first.

What exactly does всё-таки mean here? Is it “still”, “anyway”, “after all”…?

Всё-таки is a nuance word that often doesn’t translate 1‑to‑1. It combines ideas like still / nevertheless / after all / in the end.

In this sentence:

…хотя организатор всё-таки был доволен первым.

The sense is: even so, the organizer was (still / nevertheless) satisfied with the first (report).

Possible English renderings:

“…although the organizer was still satisfied with the first one.”
“…although the organizer ended up being satisfied with the first one anyway.”
“…although the organizer was nevertheless pleased with the first one.”

Всё-таки emphasizes that, despite the refusal and the tiredness, the final outcome regarding the first report was positive.

Why is it доволен первым, not доволен первый or доволен первым докладом?

The key is the verb/adjective доволен.

Доволен (pleased, satisfied) governs the Instrumental case:
- доволен кем? чем? – pleased with whom? with what?
- доволен докладом – pleased with the report
In the sentence, первым stands for первым докладом:
- Он… был доволен первым (докладом). – He was satisfied with the first (report).

So:

первым is masculine singular Instrumental (to match the implied докладом).
доволен первый would be wrong: первый is Nominative and doesn’t fit the Instrumental required by доволен.
You could explicitly say доволен первым докладом, which is fully correct and a bit clearer, but in Russian it’s very natural to drop the repeated noun when it’s obvious.

What case is первым here, and how do we know?

Первым is in the Instrumental case, masculine singular.

We can tell because:

The predicate adjective доволен takes Instrumental: доволен чем?
The understood noun is доклад in the Instrumental: докладом.
The ordinal adjective первый must agree with докладом, so it becomes первым.

Full form if you spell everything out:

Организатор был доволен первым докладом.

In short: Instrumental is required by доволен, so первым must be Instrumental.

Why is доклад omitted after первым? Is this normal in Russian?

Yes, this is very normal. When the noun is clear from context and has already been mentioned, Russian often drops it and leaves just the adjective or numeral:

Он прочитал первый доклад, но отказался от второго.
Here, второго clearly means второго доклада.

In your sentence:

…организатор всё-таки был доволен первым (докладом).

Because доклад was just mentioned (второго доклада), it’s obvious that первым refers to the first report. Repeating докладом would be correct, just slightly heavier stylistically. Omitting it is very natural and common.

Why do we see masculine past forms (отказался, устал, был доволен) even though “he” is just он once?

In Russian, past tense verbs and short-form adjectives agree in gender and number with the subject, even if the subject is a pronoun like он:

он отказался – he refused
он устал – he got tired / he is tired (as a result)
он был доволен – he was satisfied

In your sentence, он is the underlying subject of отказался and устал, and организатор (a masculine noun) is the subject of был доволен, so all predicates are masculine singular:

Он отказался… потому что (он) устал… хотя организатор всё-таки был доволен…

The pronoun он doesn’t need to be repeated before устал; Russian allows you to omit repeated subjects, but the verb still shows gender/number agreement.

Why are there commas before потому что and before хотя? Could they be omitted?

Russian uses commas more strictly than English, especially with subordinate clauses.

Comma before потому что
- Он отказался от второго доклада, потому что устал…
- потому что устал is a subordinate clause of reason (because he was tired).
- Standard rule: a subordinate clause introduced by потому что is usually separated by a comma.
Comma before хотя
- …потому что устал, хотя организатор всё-таки был доволен первым.
- хотя организатор… был доволен… is a concessive subordinate clause (although the organizer…).
- Clauses introduced by хотя also normally require a comma.

You generally cannot omit these commas in standard written Russian. They mark the boundaries of the subordinate clauses clearly.

Why is отказался in the perfective aspect? Could we use отказывался instead, and what would change?

Отказаться is perfective; отказываться is imperfective.

Он отказался от второго доклада…
- One completed decision/action: he (at some point) refused / backed out.
- Fits a single concrete event in the story.
Он отказывался от второго доклада…
- Repeated / habitual / prolonged or attempted refusing.
- Often needs extra context:
  - Он долго отказывался от второго доклада. – He kept refusing the second report for a long time.

In your sentence, we’re talking about one specific decision (he decided not to give the second report because he was tired), so the perfective отказался is the natural choice.