Posts tagged w/ Grammar

Readers Ask - I Answer: Counting Things in Polish

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Oct
22
2009

I was going to stay in bed and marinate under the covers for one more day (yes, my cold has morphed into a full-blown bronchitis now) but a reader’s email made me crawl out to face the enemy. The email had that panicky and ominous tone making it sound as if the intergalactic victory of good over evil (read: Polish grammar) depended solely on me.

So here I am, at your service.

What the reader wanted was this: please tell me how to count (in Polish, of course) the following nouns: dziecko (child, neuter), nauczycielka (teacher, female), pisarz (writer, masculine), jesień (autumn, feminine), mysz (mouse, feminine), and słoń (elephant, masculine). Though I am not entirely sure if the reader wanted słoń (elephant) or słońce (sun), so just in case I think I’ll do both.

Initially, I wrote back and told him to look up my previous posts on this subject, but he responded that this is the time when grammar explanations are not enough, he needs to see how it’s actually done in practice. OK, fine by me. And actually, I just wanted to throw those words at you (all my readers in general) and see what you could come up with in terms of counting them from one to five. But since the email had the “the world is going to end on Thursday at 3PM if you don’t help me” tone, I thought I’d just get up and do it myself.

But why do I have this strange feeling that I’m doing somebody’s homework here, huh?

Ok, but here we go.

  • dziecko (child) from one to five:
  • jedno dziecko, dwoje dzieci, troje dzieci, czworo dzieci, pięcioro dzieci
  • nauczycielka (female teacher) from one to five:
  • jedna nauczycielka, dwie nauczycielki, trzy nauczycielki, cztery nauczycielki, pięć nauczycielek
  • pisarz (writer, male) from one to five:
  • jeden pisarz, dwóch pisarzy, trzech pisarzy, czterech pisarzy, pięciu pisarzy
  • jesień (fall/autumn, feminine) from one to five:
  • jedna jesień, dwie jesienie, trzy jesienie, cztery jesienie, pięć jesieni
  • mysz (mouse, feminine) from one to five (this is a tricky one and I hope I got it right):
  • jedna mysz, dwie myszy, trzy myszy, cztery myszy, pięć myszy
  • słoń (elephant, masculine) from one to five:
  • jeden słoń, dwa słonie, trzy słonie, cztery słonie, pięć słoni (and we have a whole circus!)
  • słońce (sun, neuter) from one to five:
  • jedno słońce, dwa słońca, trzy słońca, cztery słońca, pięć słońc

OK, dear reader, I hope this is what you had in mind. And I hope I managed before your doomsday deadline.

 
Posted under Grammar, Vocabulary
Tagged with , , 		2 Comments | Post a Comment

Polish Grammar - what’s the best way to explain it?

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Aug
16
2009

Every so often I am being accused that my grammar explanations are too simplistic, too crude and too “for dummies.” That I don’t use proper linguistic, or grammatical, (or whatever those long and useless terms in “serious” grammar books are called) terminology in my blog posts and that basically, it looks like I mock the subject whenever possible. Eeegadz. Really?

Oddly enough, whenever such complaints come (via email normally, not in the comments section on this blog) they come from native Polish speakers. And boy, are those speakers furious!

So, I thought it might be time to address this issue. And of course, as always, to ask your (meaning ALL my readers, not just the Polish natives who read this blog) opinion, because if there are problems with how I explain grammar, then I better rectify this issue, and I better do it fast.

So let’s begin.

  • 1.    Do I mock grammar? Far from it, actually. Actually, I’m terrified of the thing. Really. If you’re terrified of something, you generally try to avoid any contact with it whenever possible. Just like you’d do with your neighbor’s rottweiler. If you try mocking it, you may lose an arm. That’s how I feel about grammar. Except that instead of an arm, I may lose the chance to write this blog. And I wouldn’t want that to happen.
  • 2.    The lack of proper terminology. Hmmm… If that’s what you want, then read Prof. Swan’s “Polish Grammar” book. He has that terminology bit covered. Trust me! I do try to smuggle proper names for things whenever possible, but I try to do it in such a way that wouldn’t scare too much a casual learner of the language (and reader of this blog). You know, the person who just wants to study it for fun and pleasure and to communicate with the cute Polish girl next door. Also, and it’s been my experience when learning a couple of other foreign languages, many people simply don’t know any proper grammar-book terminology at all. Not even in their native lingo.
  • 3.    And that brings us to my “too simplistic” approach and “for dummies” explanations. Oh yeah? It’s easy for you to say, native Poles, but do you realize that there is a difference in how grammar is taught to native and non-native speakers of the language? Also, another thing to consider are the levels of my readers. Some are advanced learners, or already speak Polish perfectly, and some are just starting out on their Polish language adventure. And of course, I want to keep everybody happy. And let’s be realistic - it’s Polish grammar we’re talking about here. Might as well try explaining quantum physics. Though incidentally, there are nice popular science books dealing with quantum physics, explaining it in a fun and easy to understand way. The fact that there aren’t any for Polish grammar should tell you something…

And now, of course, I want to know what I should do. Should I make my grammar posts more serious and sophisticated, use fancy terminology and treat them with the respect they deserve? Or should I keep them as they are, even if Polish natives will no doubt complain that they are “for dummies”? It’s entirely up to YOU!

PS. And just so we are perfectly clear how I feel about my neighbor’s rottweiler – I hate that beast.

 
Posted under Grammar, Polish Language
Tagged with , , 		21 Comments | Post a Comment

Polish Possessive Pronouns - are they really that difficult?

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Jun
30
2009

Are Polish possessive pronouns really that difficult? I need an honest opinion here.

I have always thought they were one of those relatively straightforward bits in our convoluted language. But it turns out I might have been either mistaken or overly optimistic.

Yesterday I was asked this very complicated question:

Ok, so you say “moja książka” (my book) and “jej książka” (her book). But then you say: “On zgubił moją książkę.” (He lost my book) and because in this sentence “moja książka” is in the accusative (he lost kogo? co?) it became “moją książkę”. And when you say: “On zgubił jej książkę.” (He lost her book) only “książka” morphed into the accusative form, but not “jej”. Why is that?

And my answer: Because it’s Polish, that’s why.

But seriously, this is one of those instances when I realize that Polish possessive pronouns and their declensions can be totally incomprehensible even to the most dedicated learners (and to many Poles, too).

So, in order to make my life easier (because someone out there was bound to know the correct answer), I thought I’d ask this question to a couple of my native Polish friends. But ahem, their responses were not exactly all that helpful:

Friend #1: Dude, you’re right. This is weird. And how come I’ve never noticed this myself?
and
Friend #2: Because, duh, that’s how it is. Can’t you just tell your readers to memorize everything and stop bugging me?

I’ll ignore friend #2 for now, but yeah, friend #1 was right. We always tend to think about possessive pronouns as behaving kind of like adjectives. However, some of them think they’re special, or something.

Take a look:

  • my – mój (singular, masc.), moja (singular, fem.), moje (singular, neuter), moi (plural, masculine-personal), moje (plural, all other)
  • your – twój, twoja, twoje, twoi, twoje
  • his – jego
  • her – jej
  • our – nasz, nasza, nasze, nasi, nasze
  • your – wasz, wasza, wasze, wasi, wasze
  • their – ich

And see this? Those guys that have only one form – jego, jej and ich don’t decline. The nouns they describe decline as usual, but those pronouns themselves – don’t.

All others that have all the “adjective-looking” forms behave like good little adjectives should.

And to the question of “why is that?” my answer still stands – because it’s Polish, that’s why!

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , , 		10 Comments | Post a Comment

Concise Polish Grammar – A Handbook for Foreigners - book review

Posted by Anna Ikeda
Jun
12
2009

I finally managed to get my hands on “Concise Polish Grammar – A Handbook for Foreigners” by Magdalena Foland-Kugler (ISBN 978-83-89913-51-7) published by Exlibris.

I haven’t read this book from cover to cover yet, just briefly paged through the sections that interested me the most. What immediately jumped out at me is the fact that the examples in this book are not translated into English.

Yes, I get it, if someone is reading a Polish grammar book, he/she should have some sort of basic vocabulary already mastered. But on the other hand, if you’re preparing a Polish grammar book for English speakers, why do you treat the examples as if they were written for Poles?

The book was written by a native Polish speaker in Polish, and then translated into English. As such, it has a point view of a native Pole, as well. And unfortunately, because of that and despite its best intentions, it is barely adequate for a non-native speaker. However, it’s a very good reference for a Polish person who wants to learn Polish grammar in English. Though I’m sure this is not what the author had in mind.

The book is not totally useless, though. The grammatical tables are simple and concise, to the point of being too simple at times.
I have a feeling that the author was given a certain number of pages for this project and desperately tried to cram as much information onto them as possible. Unfortunately, our wonderful Polish grammar doesn’t take too kindly to cramming and the book is simply too short (142 pages and that includes the preface and index!) and too basic.

As most grammar books the world over, this one is also written in grammaticalese, and woe upon those who attempt to read it not knowing what analytical gradability is, for example.

I find this book to be an easy read, and the explanations – clear and adequate. But then again, I don’t have to translate the examples to understand what is being said, and I know a lot about Polish grammar already.

However, my resident non-Polish speaker hated it and even though I had ordered him to read it, he only got as far as chapter seven before demanding “that Bielec book.”

 
Posted under Grammar
Tagged with , , 		5 Comments | Post a Comment

Who’s Who in the Family

Posted by Anna Ikeda
May
22
2009

Today’s post is about something that even I have problems with. Brother’s wife wife’s brother and sister’s husband and husband’s sister and sister’s daughter’s best friend’s neighbor’s son. Or something like that.

Either I’m monumentally stupid, or it’s really easy in English. Just stick “in-law” at the end of anything you’re not quite sure of (when talking about the “other” side of the family) and voila, your work there is done. So, whether you’re talking about your wife’s sister or your brother’s wife, you simply say “my sister in-law”, right?

Well, it’s not quite so easy in Polish (why would it, it’s Polish after all!) and all these people have their own individual names.
So, to be sure I get it right (because I hardly ever get it right) I consulted a book and my aunt. And while sometimes even Polish dictionaries can’t agree on what is correct, I know for a fact that my aunt is never wrong.

OK, so here’s the list (according to the book and my aunt):

  • brother’s wife – żona brata – bratowa
  • sister’s husband – mąż siostry – szwagier
  • wife’s brother – brat żony – szwagier
  • wife’s sister – siostra żony – szwagierka
  • husband’s sister – siostra męża – szwagierka

And there’s more:

  • sister’s daughter – córka siostry – siostrzenica
  • brother’s daughter – córka brata – bratanica
  • sister’s son – syn siostry – siostrzeniec
  • brother’s son – syn brata – bratanek

And now for the fun part, because we all love our in-laws, right?

  • daughter’s husband – mąż córki – zięć
  • son’s wife – żona syna – synowa

and

  • wife’s (or husband’s) father – ojciec żony (lub męża) – teść
  • wife’s (or husband’s) mother – matka żony (lub męża) – teściowa

When it comes to people like mother’s brother or father’s brother, back in the olden days (like about 20 years ago) they were called “wuj” and “stryj” respectively. But now, they’re just called “wuj”, or diminutively “wujek”, regardless of whose brothers they are.

And how for example would my father refer to my husband’s father in Polish? I have no idea. My dad has no idea either. He just said “father of my son-in-law” (ojciec mojego zięcia). Hey, works for me!

PS. And just to see if you remember your noun cases, can you tell which one we’ve been using today to describe all these people?

 
Posted under Grammar, Polish Language, Vocabulary
Tagged with , , , , , , , 		6 Comments | Post a Comment