Log inSign up

На полу в ванной была вода, поэтому я вытер её тряпкой.

На полу в ванной была вода, поэтому я вытер её тряпкой.
There was water on the bathroom floor, so I wiped it up with a rag.

Breakdown of На полу в ванной была вода, поэтому я вытер её тряпкой.

я
I
вода
the water
в
in
быть
to be
на
on
её
it
ванная
the bathroom
тряпка
the rag
поэтому
so/therefore
вытереть
to wipe up
пол
floor
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Russian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Russian now

Questions & Answers about На полу в ванной была вода, поэтому я вытер её тряпкой.

Why does пол become полу in на полу?

After на meaning “on (a surface)” Russian uses the prepositional case: на + (prep.).
пол is one of the nouns with an irregular prepositional form: пол → на полу (not на поле). It’s basically a fixed form you learn as a set phrase.

Why is it в ванной and not в ванне?

Because ванная here means “the bathroom (room)” and declines as an adjective-like noun:

  • в ванной = “in the bathroom”
  • в ванне (from ванна) = “in the bathtub”

So на полу в ванной = “on the floor in the bathroom,” not “on the floor in the bathtub.”

What cases are used in на полу в ванной?

Both are prepositional:

  • на полу: на
    • prepositional (location “on”)
  • в ванной: в
    • prepositional (location “in”)

Prepositional is the default “static location” case with в/на.

Why does Russian say была вода—what is была doing here?

была is the past tense of быть (“to be”). Russian often uses it to mean there was / there were in the past:

  • была вода = “there was water”

In the present tense, Russian usually drops есть:

  • Present: На полу в ванной вода.
  • Past: На полу в ванной была вода.
Why is it была, not было or были?

Past tense быть agrees with the subject in gender and number:

  • вода is feminine singular → была
  • neuter singular would be было
  • plural would be были

So была вода is correct because вода is feminine.

Why is the word order была вода and not вода была?

Both are possible, but they emphasize different things:

  • была вода often introduces new information: “there was water (there, unexpectedly / as a fact)”
  • вода была sounds more like “the water was …” (talking about water already in the conversation)

In context, была вода is a common way to report what you found.

Why is there a comma before поэтому?

Because поэтому (“therefore/so”) links two parts of a compound sentence, and Russian normally separates them with a comma:

  • ..., поэтому ... = “..., so ...”

It’s functioning like a connector between two clauses: cause → result.

Can I replace поэтому with потому что?

Not directly; they do different jobs:

  • потому что = “because” (introduces the reason clause)
    • Я вытер её, потому что на полу в ванной была вода.
  • поэтому = “therefore/so” (introduces the result clause)
    • На полу в ванной была вода, поэтому я вытер её тряпкой.

Both are correct, but the clause order/structure changes.

Why is it вытер, and what’s the difference from вытирал?

вытер is perfective past: it focuses on a completed result (“I wiped it up / wiped it dry”).
вытирал is imperfective past: it focuses on the process or repeated action (“I was wiping it / I used to wipe it”).

Here the meaning is a single finished action in response to the situation, so вытер fits well.

Why is её used, and what exactly does it refer to?

её is the accusative form of “her/it” and here means it = воду (water), because вода is feminine in Russian.
So вытер её literally = “wiped it (the water).”

Why is it тряпкой (instrumental case)?

Russian uses the instrumental case to express the tool or means used to do something:

  • вытер (чем?) тряпкой = “wiped (with what?) with a rag/cloth”

So тряпкой is instrumental singular of тряпка.

What’s the deal with ё in вытёр? Can it be written as вытер?

Yes, in many texts ё is often written as е, so you may see вытёр and вытер. They’re the same word.
In pronunciation, it’s вытёр with yo sound and stress: vy-TYOR.