I’m trying to give you the simplest explanation ever. Here it is:
Definite conjugation: I see the tree. – Látom a fát.
Indefinite conjugation: I see a tree. – Látok egy fát.
The definite conjugation requires verbs conjugated with the definite suffixes, while the indefinite conjugation requires verbs conjugated with the indefinite suffixes. And what’s the difference?
If you talk about a specific/definite thing/person, you conjugate the verb with the definite suffixes. If you talk about an indefinite/unknown thing/person, you conjugate the verb with the indefinite suffixes.
Here’s the key to know when you should use one or the other:
DEFINITE AND INDEFINITE ARTICLES!
Take a look at the definite example: Látom a fát. You see the definite article, which means I see a definite tree. I know exactly what tree I’m talking about.
Take a look at the indefinite example: Látok egy fát. You see the indefinite article, which means I see a tree of some sort. I don’t know what tree it is. I’ve never seen it before.
NOTE! Purely intransitive verbs cannot be conjugated with the definite suffixes. Such verbs express existence or motion: van (to be), megy (to go), jön (to come)…
It is a vital grammatical rule because you can’t avoid using it!
WHAT IF THERE IS NO DEFINITE OR INDEFINITE ARTICLE IN THE SENTENCE?
USE THE INDEFINITE CONJUGATION IN THESE CASES:
– If there is no article at all, apply the indefinite conjugation.
– Indefinite numerals and indefinite pronouns also cause the verb to be conjugated with the indefinite suffixes.
– This rule is also visible if the noun is plural: Fákat látok. – I see trees. It is because the indefinite article is not used in the plural. If it is expressed with néhány (some), that’s no problem because it is an indefinite numeral!
USE THE DEFINITE CONJUGATION IN THESE CASES:
– The demonstrative pronouns require the verb to be conjugated with the definite suffixes given the fact that those pronouns refer to something specific/definite.
– Proper names (John, David, Bugs Bunny…) also need the definite conjugation since names already refer to a specific/definite person.
More examples:
Nézem a lányt. – I‘m watching the girl.
Nézek egy lányt. – I‘m watching a girl.
Azt a lányt nézik. – They‘re watching that girl.
Sok lányt néznek. – They‘re watching a lot of girls.
A fiúkat szereti. – She loves the boys.
Fiúkat szeret. – She loves boys.
Néhány fiút szeret. – She loves some boys.
Sehány fiút nem szeret. – She doesn’t love any boys.
NOTE! The nouns in such sentences are in the accusative case because follow/precede a transitive verb! (Remember the accusative case: Látom a folyót.)
Besides, different pieces of information in a conversation may allude to something determined or undetermined and then the answer has to agree with it.
In the following examples, the stress is on the verb. What is important is whether I’m watching the/a girl or I’m doing something else with her. To makes things simple, I’ll use the Present Simple Tense in English.
-Nézed a lányt? -Igen, nézem (őt).
-Do you watch the girl? -Yes, I watch her.
-Nézel egy lányt? -Igen, nézek (egyet).
-Do you watch a girl? -Yes, I watch one.
Next time, we’ll finally get to how to conjugate verbs. Bye now! 🙂
Hunlang's Blog 
very good explanation, thanks.
LikeLike
Thank you!
LikeLike
I’ve spent days trying to figure out indefinite and definite conjugation. You’ve explained it in minutes:)
This site is now very much bookmarked.
Koszi:)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nagyon szívesen! 🙂
LikeLike
Your explanation and examples are very helpful! Köszönöm szépen.
LikeLike
Your explanation with examples made the difference very clear! Köszönöm szépen.
LikeLike
Igazán nincs mit. You’re welcome.
LikeLike
Thanks for your blog.
What you have written is clear and helpful – as far as it goes. But your examples are straightforward cases where there is a direct object with a definite article, etc. I’ve read a couple of Hungarian grammars and pestered some Hungarians, but I’m still struggling to understand the rule that governs the use of the definite conjugation with more complex examples.
A kártyára írok. I am writing in the card. There’s a definite article. But I think this is the indefinite conjugation because the card is an indirect object and the direct object is actually what I am writing and that’s not specified.
But what about this sentence: Beül az autóba? She gets into the car. There is a definite car – the car – that she is getting into, so isn’t that the direct object of the verb? And there is a definite article ‘az’. It’s not any old car, but THE car. But it’s still the indefinite conjugation. Why?
Is the rule that you have to have a definite article and a noun that has a t on the end (so no suffixes like -ba -ra, -bol etc) in order for it to qualify for the definite conjugation?
LikeLike
Hi there,
1. A kártyára írok. – You’re right about that. We don’t know what I write on the card, so we use the indefinite conjugation.
2. Beül az autóba. – Your’re right about that, again. There is no direct object with -t object suffix, only a locative suffix -ba.
The definite conjugation is required because there is a specified object/person ending with -t.
Látom a házat. – I can see the house.
Kérjük azt a tál húslevest. We’d like to have that bowl of meat soup.
BUT
Látok valamit a házban. – I can see something in the house. (something=indefinite)
Kérünk egy tál húslevest. We’d like to have a bowl of meat soup. (a bowl=indefinite)
I hope it helps a bit. 🙂
LikeLike