Putin announces divorce

blunomore

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
26,789
Reaction score
22
Location
Not yet CT ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-gwS4QTMpI

They made the statement in Russian but there are English subtitles :D

I know nothing about the Russian culture and way of doing things, so am intrigued by the names they refer to each other as. He refers to her as Lyudmila Alexandrovna and she refers to him as Vladimir Vladimirovich.

I presume Lyudmila Alexandrovna is her first name and maiden surname. Are married Russian women always called by their maiden names?

And why does she call him Vladimir Vladimirovich? Where does "Putin" feature?

Other cultures are fascinating :)
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-gwS4QTMpI

They made the statement in Russian but there are English subtitles :D

I know nothing about the Russian culture and way of doing things, so am intrigued by the names they refer to each other as. He refers to her as Lyudmila Alexandrovna and she refers to him as Vladimir Vladimirovich.

I presume Lyudmila Alexandrovna is her first name and maiden surname. Are married Russian women always called by their maiden names?

And why does she call him Vladimir Vladimirovich? Where does "Putin" feature?

Other cultures are fascinating :)

Just their full names. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Lyudmila Aleksandrovna Putina (née Shkrebneva). They actually have interesting naming conventions.

They have a first name, a middle name, and a surname.

The middle name (patronymic) consists of his or her father’s first name accompanied by a suffix meaning "son of" or "daughter of". Men are *father's name*-evich, or -ovich, and girls are *father's name*-ovna, or -evna.

So Vladimirovich means son of Vladimir, and Aleksandrovna means daughter of Aleksandr.

Surnames have masculine and feminine forms, which is why she's Putina. Anna Karenina is the feminine form of Karenin etc.
 
Last edited:
Just their full names. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Lyudmila Aleksandrovna Putina (née Shkrebneva). They actually have interesting naming conventions.

They have a first name, a middle name, and a surname.

The middle name (patronymic) consists of his or her father’s first name accompanied by a suffix meaning "son of" or "daughter of". Men are *father's name*-evich, or -ovich, and girls are *father's name*-ovna, or -evna.

So Vladimirovich means son of Vladimir, and Aleksandrovna means daughter of Aleksandr.

Surnames have masculine and feminine forms, which is why she's Putina. Anna Karenina is the feminine form of Karenin etc.

So in their statement they basically referred to each other by their first and middle names; why is that, I wonder?
 
So in their statement they basically referred to each other by their first and middle names; why is that, I wonder?

Dunno. Maybe just a formal way of announcing something? Like when Zuumbie is formally announced they often say "Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma", sometimes with the added-on phony salutation of "Dr".
 
Just their full names. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Lyudmila Aleksandrovna Putina (née Shkrebneva). They actually have interesting naming conventions.

They have a first name, a middle name, and a surname.

The middle name (patronymic) consists of his or her father’s first name accompanied by a suffix meaning "son of" or "daughter of". Men are *father's name*-evich, or -ovich, and girls are *father's name*-ovna, or -evna.

So Vladimirovich means son of Vladimir, and Aleksandrovna means daughter of Aleksandr.

Surnames have masculine and feminine forms, which is why she's Putina. Anna Karenina is the feminine form of Karenin etc.
I've always wondered about the *vic, fascinating. Thanks for that :)
 
Like when Zuumbie is formally announced they often say "Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma", sometimes with the added-on phony salutation of "Dr".

He was humbled by the awarding of an honorary doctorate in Humane Letters to him by Texas Southern University (TSU) in Houston.

He was awarded the degree for his leadership as well as his passion for education in government and community through the Jacob Zuma RDP Education Trust. The President was also lauded for the new partnership he has facilitated between South Africa, CAMAC International, University of Houston, Texas Southern University and the Jacob G Zuma RDP Education Trust to promote education. The partnership will see some South African students studying at Texas Southern University and the University of Houston.

The TSU honour adds to the following honorary degrees received by the President;

Honorary Doctorate in Law by the University of Zambia, 2009
Honorary Doctorate of Literature from the University of Fort Hare, 2001
Honorary Doctorate of Administration from the University of Zululand, 2001
Honorary Doctorate of Philosophy from Medical University of Southern Africa, 2001.

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politi...b/en/page71656?oid=258049&sn=Detail&pid=71656

How do they decide these things? So random!!!
 
So if you have a sex change in Russia do you also change your middle name?
Guess you would have to otherwise it's a giveaway eg Vladimir Aleksandrovna.
 
University of Zambia awarded the Honorary Doctorate in Law in 2009 as they must respect his abilities to avoid going to court. Not many can emulate such a [-]fine[/-] achievement.
 
Ideology. You forget Zuma is highly respected progressive comrade spending 10 years with Madiba on Robben Island for your freedom.

I find this version more accurate:
Now we know that Number One has no urgent vision or strategy to arrest our decline. He is either not capable of that kind of leadership, or he is too obsessed with out-foxing his opponents inside his party and with his private life and the enrichment of his clan. Or both.

I have been told by several senior ANC figures over the last few years that I should keep in mind that Zuma became president of the ANC by accident and circumstance rather than being the best man for the job.

I understand that. The dynamics inside the ANC during late 2006 and 2007 were such that the majority wanted Thabo Mbeki to be replaced as party leader and president of the country. Zuma was the only available battering ram with which Mbeki could be pushed off his throne in December 2007.

Despite the fact that the ANC became even more divided after he took over the leadership; despite the growth of a culture of corruption, tenderpreneurship and nepotism under his watch; and despite his many blunders and personal scandals he was re-elected in December 2012.

I can even understand the explanations for that: the feeling that the wrong people were on the slate opposing him; the fact that Zulu-speakers had become the centre of ANC power and ousting him would have jeopardized that; the considerations of continuity; the role of the SACP and certain Cosatu leaders; etc.

But now South Africa is in real trouble. And the leadership of the ANC knows as well as I do that Zuma is the main stumbling block in the way of successful actions and strategies to whip the country back into shape and put us back on a firm path of integrity, self-respect, hope and progress.

They also know full well that he is playing very dangerous games with the National Intelligence Agency, Crime Intelligence and the National Prosecuting Authority to make sure he has the dirt on all his opponents and to control the dirt others have on him.
They also know that whatever the spin, Zuma was at the heart of the Guptagate scandal and that his unholy relationship with this family and other wealthy individuals has not ended. They know that he, his family and his clan continue to benefit financially from his position as president of the country.

I can understand why the ANC leadership doesn’t pull a Polokwane on him now, especially with an election less than a year away.
I also understand that there are a few powerful cabinet ministers and trade union leaders whose entire careers and future wellbeing depend on their blind loyalty to Zuma.

But surely there must be enough decent democrats and patriots left in the top echelons of the ruling party who know that it is time to confront Zuma, to take some of his power away, to rescue the country from his dubious leadership?

What are they afraid of?

Credit to Max du Preez
 
I find this version more accurate:

Credit to Max du Preez

You would quoting an old ANC lackey like Du Preez. How else could he explain Zuma coming to power of his precious party but by some fluke. :rolleyes:


The ANC is more than just a political party. It is a national movement. Every South African that supported an end to apartheid and white rule is a part of that movement. It is the symbol of our liberation and emancipation and thus belongs to us all. So when the ANC celebrates its centenary next month, we should all celebrate.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=254325204630803&id=100001599776156

Perhaps you should look at Zuma's role in ending political violence in Natal in the early 90s for which he received plenty of praise from the likes of Du Preez.
 
Last edited:
So in their statement they basically referred to each other by their first and middle names; why is that, I wonder?

Because it would have been rude to call each other "that lazy *********** ************** *************** that deserves to be *********** ********** ************" in public.
 
wow. that was a strained interview. you could see the cogs turning as they calculated their responses.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X