Log inSign up

Мне нельзя было оставлять мокрый пол в ванной, поэтому я сразу вытерла воду.

Мне нельзя было оставлять мокрый пол в ванной, поэтому я сразу вытерла воду.
I wasn’t allowed to leave the bathroom floor wet, so I wiped up the water right away.

Breakdown of Мне нельзя было оставлять мокрый пол в ванной, поэтому я сразу вытерла воду.

я
I
вода
the water
в
in
быть
to be
мне
me
пол
the floor
ванная
the bathroom
сразу
right away
нельзя
not allowed
оставлять
to leave
мокрый
wet
поэтому
so/therefore
вытереть
to wipe up
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Russian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Russian now

Questions & Answers about Мне нельзя было оставлять мокрый пол в ванной, поэтому я сразу вытерла воду.

Why does the sentence start with Мне, not Я?

Because нельзя (like можно, нужно, надо) commonly forms an impersonal construction in Russian. The person affected is put in the dative case:

  • Мне нельзя... = It’s not allowed for me / I mustn’t...
    So мне is dative (“to/for me”), not the subject я.
What exactly does нельзя было mean, and why is было there?

Нельзя = not allowed / mustn’t / can’t (in the sense of prohibition or unacceptable action).
Было puts the whole “not allowed” situation into the past:

  • Мне нельзя = I’m not allowed / I mustn’t (now)
  • Мне нельзя было = I wasn’t allowed / I wasn’t supposed to (then)
Is Мне нельзя было... more like “I wasn’t allowed” or “I shouldn’t”?

It can cover both, depending on context:

  • If there’s an external rule/person: I wasn’t allowed to...
  • If it’s more about norms/safety: I wasn’t supposed to / I shouldn’t have... Нельзя is generally stronger than не стоит (“it’s not worth/you’d better not”).
Why is the verb оставлять (imperfective) used, not оставить (perfective)?

Оставлять (imperfective) here expresses the general idea of leaving something (in that state), focusing on the situation/state rather than one completed act:

  • нельзя было оставлять мокрый пол ≈ I couldn’t/wasn’t supposed to leave the floor wet (as a rule / at any time in that situation).

Using оставить would sound more like a single completed action:

  • нельзя было оставить мокрый пол ≈ It wasn’t allowed to leave the floor wet (even once / as an outcome).

Both can be possible, but оставлять is very natural with “not allowed to leave something (in a certain condition).”

What case is мокрый пол, and why?

мокрый пол is accusative, because it’s the direct object of оставлять (to leave what?):

  • оставлять пол (accusative) мокрый agrees with пол in gender/number/case: masculine singular accusative (same form as nominative for inanimate nouns).
Why is it в ванной and not в ванну?

Because в ванной uses the prepositional case to mean location: in the bathroom.

  • в ванной = in the bathroom (where?) в ванну would be accusative and typically means motion into the bathtub:
  • в ванну = into the tub (where to?)
Does в ванной mean “in the bathroom” or “in the bathtub”?

It can mean either, but here it clearly means in the bathroom, because it’s paired with пол (floor):

  • пол в ванной = the bathroom floor
    If it were about a bathtub, you’d expect something like в ванне specifically referring to the tub, and context would point that way.
What does поэтому do, and why is there a comma before it?

поэтому = therefore / so. It introduces the result/consequence clause.
Russian normally puts a comma between two full clauses:

  • Мне нельзя было..., поэтому я...
    Each side has its own “mini-sentence,” so the comma is standard.
Why is я suddenly used in the second part: поэтому я сразу...?

Because the second clause is a normal personal sentence with a clear subject doing an action:

  • я вытерла = I wiped (it) The first clause is impersonal (мне нельзя было), so it doesn’t use я as a subject.
Why is the verb вытерла feminine?

Past tense verbs in Russian agree with the speaker/subject in gender and number:

  • вытерла = feminine singular
    So the speaker is presented as female (or the narrator character is female). A male speaker would say вытер.
Why is вытерла perfective, and what aspect would вытирала change?

вытерла (perfective) presents the wiping as a completed result: she wiped it up (done).
вытирала (imperfective) would emphasize the process/duration or an incomplete/ongoing action:

  • я вытирала воду = I was wiping (up) the water / I used to wipe up the water.

Here the idea is “I immediately wiped it up (and finished),” so perfective fits.

Why is it воду (accusative), and can it be omitted?

воду is the direct object of вытерла (wiped what?), so it’s accusative.
It can be omitted if context is obvious:

  • поэтому я сразу вытерла. = so I wiped it up right away.
    But including воду is clear and natural.
What’s the difference between сразу and сейчас here?
  • сразу = immediately / right away (timing relative to the situation)
  • сейчас = now (current time)
    Since the sentence is in the past, сразу is appropriate: right away (then).