Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Native language
    Sbaeneg/Castellano (Venezuela)
    Age
    22
    Posts
    1,591

    Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Hello everyone!


    I was talking to a Polish person and the phrase dać klapsa came up. Then I wondered when the masculine noun is supposed to end in -a and when no ending. I asked her if you'd say sierpa and she says it doesn't sound well and it's rather sierp in the accusative, then we tried several other nouns and tried two websites that decline nouns. There was disagreement regarding some words, one website says that, for example, kompas takes no ending in the accusative while the other says it takes -a, the same happened with plecak, but other nouns didn't take -a. Now both of us are confused.

    Is there any rule of some kind to know when to put -a for masculine nouns in the accusative and when to use nothing, or is it possible to add -a as optional?


    Thank you in advance!
    Username: Suzumiya. 所詮この世は弱肉強食。強ければ生き、弱ければ死ぬ。-志々雄真実

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Luimneach, ROI
    Native language
    Polish
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Hi!

    This subject has been discussed recently in Slavic Languages forum; please see post #3 and then 2 other replies by Thomas: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2559222
    Last edited by BezierCurve; 25th February 2013 at 9:33 PM. Reason: Cosmetics.
    I appreciate your corrections.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Native language
    Sbaeneg/Castellano (Venezuela)
    Age
    22
    Posts
    1,591

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Thank you!, I read the entire post, but I am not sure I understood well. I know that both the genitive and the accusative end in -a and it says there that it's possible to use the genitive ending -a for masculine nouns when you mean the accusative. If I understood well, you'd put no ending for inanimate nouns? if so, dać klaps is possible?

    Thanks again!
    Username: Suzumiya. 所詮この世は弱肉強食。強ければ生き、弱ければ死ぬ。-志々雄真実

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Luimneach, ROI
    Native language
    Polish
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Yes, you understood it well (it's about inanimity).

    if so, dać klaps is possible?
    This is one of the few exceptions and "dać klapsa" is a fixed phrase.
    I appreciate your corrections.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    US New York
    Native language
    Lithuanian
    Posts
    5,825

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    I don't really know what the rule is, if there is one at all. It is not as simple as animate versus inanimate nouns. Sometimes it is connected with the partitive use -- then the Genitive is used instead of the Accusative. At other times it really varies in my opinion -- we have daj mi śledzia but daj mi pióro. (both masculine, inanimate). The Accusative for inanimous always has the same ending as the Nominative in the Masculine, I think. It is just that sometimes the Genitive is used with dać. Daj mi klapsa (Gen.). (in fact daj mi śledzia may be a partitive use, as with other foods).




  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Native language
    Sbaeneg/Castellano (Venezuela)
    Age
    22
    Posts
    1,591

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Thank you, sir!


    Lily, what you say makes sense, I too had thought of that when I saw klapsa and other -a's. Although I'll stick to the rules and learn the exceptions over time.
    Last edited by 涼宮; 25th February 2013 at 11:13 PM. Reason: Lily's post hadn't showed up!
    Username: Suzumiya. 所詮この世は弱肉強食。強ければ生き、弱ければ死ぬ。-志々雄真実

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    US New York
    Native language
    Lithuanian
    Posts
    5,825

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Yes, klapsa is definitely a Genitive, and it is treated as partitive use here, for some reason, or as something indefinite -- general, as opposed to a concrete object pointed to.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Native language
    Polish
    Posts
    2,598

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    I never realised that we use a Genitive in that way.
    Other examples: Dać bobu. Dać ognia. Dać buzi.

    But: Dać słowo. Dać sygnał. Dać plamę.
    And in the negative : Nie dać słowa. Nie dać sygnału. Nie dać plamy.

    Check "Użycie form fleksyjnych - dopełniacz."
    Source of examples: the Free Dictionary.
    Last edited by wolfbm1; 26th February 2013 at 12:56 AM.
    We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Luimneach, ROI
    Native language
    Polish
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Yes, klapsa is definitely a Genitive, and it is treated as partitive use here, for some reason, or as something indefinite -- general, as opposed to a concrete object pointed to.
    I'd argue with that, as other nouns in colloquial use follow simply the -a pattern (with their Genitive being different). Example:

    Chcesz jogurta? (vs. correct form: "jogurt" and Genitive "jogurtu").

    But I think you are right about the partitive.
    I appreciate your corrections.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Native language
    Polish
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,105

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by BezierCurve View Post
    Yes, you understood it well (it's about inanimity).



    This is one of the few exceptions and "dać klapsa" is a fixed phrase.
    The situation is that there is a good deal of both confusion and inconsistency regarding the accusative endings of inanimate masculine nouns in Polish. I some cases the animate (or genitive) case ending with inanimate nouns are accepted in written (even formal) language, in other they are accepted in colloquial language, or not generally accepted but used by certain social groups. The form “dać klapsa” has been accepted probably on reasons of euphony.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Native language
    polszczyzna warszawska
    Posts
    10,624

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by 涼宮 View Post
    [...]if so, dać klaps is possible?[...]
    It is. The meaning of 'klaps' changes, however. In this particular case, 'klaps' means 'clapperboard' (Spanish: claqueta).

    In the case of 'dać klapsa', where 'klaps' means 'spank', the accusative is the same as the genitive.

    I think it's best to treat the two as separate words.
    Please correct my errors! Thanks.
    Corrigez-moi, s'il vous plaît! Merci.
    Пoжaлуйcтa, иcпpaвьтe мoи oшибки! Бoльшoe cпaсибo.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Native language
    polszczyzna warszawska
    Posts
    10,624

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by 涼宮 View Post
    Hello everyone!


    I was talking to a Polish person and the phrase dać klapsa came up. Then I wondered when the masculine noun is supposed to end in -a and when no ending. I asked her if you'd say sierpa and she says it doesn't sound well and it's rather sierp in the accusative, then we tried several other nouns and tried two websites that decline nouns. There was disagreement regarding some words, one website says that, for example, kompas takes no ending in the accusative while the other says it takes -a, the same happened with plecak, but other nouns didn't take -a. Now both of us are confused.
    Could you please provide the links? I can't really imagine using the ending '-a' in sentences like:
    Widzję jej plecaka/kompasa. That would be instantly received as a gross mistake.

    Is there any rule of some kind to know when to put -a for masculine nouns in the accusative and when to use nothing, or is it possible to add -a as optional?
    Here's something that maybe useful for you:
    Formę fleksyjną biernika równego dopełniaczowi przyjmuje pewna część rzeczowników rodzaju męskiego zakończonych w M. lp na spółgłoskę, a mianowicie:
    1. W liczbie pojedynczej:
    A) wszystkie rzeczowniki żywotne, np. widzę komara, kota, łososia, nosorożca, słonia, słowika, szczupaka, szpaka, węgorza, wołu, bawołu;
    B) rzeczowniki będące nazwami osób zmarłych, straszydeł, istot nadprzyrodzonych, fantastycznych itp., np. widzieliśmy nieboszczyka, topielca, trupa, umrzyka, upiora, wampira, wisielca; namalował anioła, diabła, ducha, krasnoludka, skrzata;
    C) rzeczowniki nieżywotne będące nazwami tańców, np. tańczono poloneza, walca, fokstrota, slow-foxa, nazwami większości gier, np. grać w badmintona, w brydża, w preferansa, w hokeja, wyrobów fabrycznych, np. oglądać mercedesa, zapalić papierosa, nazwami figur szachowych i kart, np. wziąć pionka, króla, waleta, skoczka; nazwami wielu potraw, owoców i grzybów, np. zjeść gołąbka, hamburgera, kotleta, rolmopsa, śledzia marynowanego, loda, chipsa, ananasa, banana, ogórka, pomidora; znaleźć koźlarza, muchomora, podgrzybka, rydza, smardza.
    UWAGA!
    W nazwach potraw, owoców, grzybów i niektórych sportów biernik może być także równy mianownikowi, np. zjadł kotleta|kotlet, ugotował kalafiora|kalafior, kupił ananasa|ananas, przy czym w polszczyźnie potocznej typowy jest B. = D., a w odmianie staranniejszej B. = M.
    D) rzeczowniki nieżywotne w składzie utartych związków frazeologicznych z nadrzędnym czasownikiem mającym rząd biernikowy, np. dać/dostać klapsa; mieć stracha, nosa; nabić guza; dać nura, drapaka; spiec raka; utrzeć, zadzierać nosa; wywinąć kozła, młynka; zabić ćwieka.

    Nowy słownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN © Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN SA
    A few words on the partitive, or the supposedly partitive, genitive:
    The sentence:
    Zjadłem kotleta.
    can have two meanings in Polish.
    1. I ate a steak.
    2. I ate a bit of steak.

    In #1 we have to do with the accusative. This is a little more colloquial way to say 'Zjadłem kotlet.'
    In #2 'kotleta' is the genitive.
    Please correct my errors! Thanks.
    Corrigez-moi, s'il vous plaît! Merci.
    Пoжaлуйcтa, иcпpaвьтe мoи oшибки! Бoльшoe cпaсибo.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Native language
    Sbaeneg/Castellano (Venezuela)
    Age
    22
    Posts
    1,591

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Hello, Thomas!

    Sure, here you have both:

    http://www.aztekium.pl/przypadki.py?site=

    http://polish.slavic.pitt.edu/polish/

    And thank you for the information!
    Username: Suzumiya. 所詮この世は弱肉強食。強ければ生き、弱ければ死ぬ。-志々雄真実

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Native language
    polszczyzna warszawska
    Posts
    10,624

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by 涼宮 View Post
    Hello, Thomas!

    Sure, here you have both:

    http://www.aztekium.pl/przypadki.py?site=
    Suzumiya, I'm sorry to tell you that and hope you'll excuse me my boldness, but the website above is not correct . Nobody says:
    Lubię plecaka
    Lubię kompasa

    The other one, i.e. http://polish.slavic.pitt.edu/polish/ looks like a credible source .
    Please correct my errors! Thanks.
    Corrigez-moi, s'il vous plaît! Merci.
    Пoжaлуйcтa, иcпpaвьтe мoи oшибки! Бoльшoe cпaсибo.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Native language
    Sbaeneg/Castellano (Venezuela)
    Age
    22
    Posts
    1,591

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Well, my source has always been the 2nd one and the other one was provided by her . In the end, I had to trust more that dictionary.
    Username: Suzumiya. 所詮この世は弱肉強食。強ければ生き、弱ければ死ぬ。-志々雄真実

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Native language
    Polish
    Posts
    2,598

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    There is an interesting and lengthy discussion on a similar topic in Gazeta Wyborcza: "Doda ma różowy laptop" or "... ma różowego laptopa"
    and then "ma nowy komputer" not "nowego komputera"

    yet "Doda ma nowego cyfraka".
    Last edited by wolfbm1; 27th February 2013 at 12:32 AM.
    We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    US New York
    Native language
    Lithuanian
    Posts
    5,825

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1 View Post
    Suzumiya, I'm sorry to tell you that and hope you'll excuse me my boldness, but the website above is not correct . Nobody says:
    Lubię plecaka
    Lubię kompasa

    The other one, i.e. http://polish.slavic.pitt.edu/polish/ looks like a credible source .
    Yes, I absolutley agree with Thomas. It would be very low quality Polish -- some kind of idiolect, most likely. (not to comment on the rest of the site, especially the part about the whores --) Kompas and plecak have to be in the Accusative here -- the same ending as the Nominative.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Native language
    Polish
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,105

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfbm1 View Post
    There is an interesting and lengthy discussion on a similar topic in Gazeta Wyborcza: "Doda ma różowy laptop" or "... ma różowego laptopa"
    and then "ma nowy komputer" not "nowego komputera"

    yet "Doda ma nowego cyfraka".
    This discussion is confused in a very high degree. The participants mix up terms and categories. Don't read it.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Native language
    Polish
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,105

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by 涼宮 View Post
    Hello, Thomas!

    Sure, here you have both:

    http://www.aztekium.pl/przypadki.py?site=
    This is a discussion that won't make you wiser.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Native language
    Polish
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,105

    Re: Dać + accusative, -a and no -a

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1 View Post
    Could you please provide the links? I cańt really imagine using the ending '-ą in sentences like:
    Widzję jej plecaka/kompasa. [IMG]file:///C:\Users\by146\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/IMG]That would be instantly received as a gross mistake.



    Heręs something that maybe useful for you:

    A few words on the partitive, or the supposedly partitive, genitive:
    The sentence:
    Zjadłem kotleta.
    can have two meanings in Polish.
    1. I ate a steak.
    2. I ate a bit of steak.
    In #1 we have to do with the accusative. This is a little more colloquial way to say 'Zjadłem kotlet.'
    In #2 'kotletą is the genitive.
    Nr. 2 seems to me to be a pure conjecture. I can’t see any “partitiveness” in this use. A partitive construction would be “Zjadłem kawałek (trochę) kotleta.

    The phenomenon of using genitive or animate accusative endings has two reasons:
    1. A general confusion of case endings between accusative and genitive, partially caused by the partitive functions of genitive in Polish.
    2. A gradual decline in the distinction between animate and inanimate masculine nouns.

    It is symptomatic, that almost all newly imported words in Polish (especially those used by younger people) which should be classified as inanimate get almost automatically the animate declension.
    By the way, “klaps” is also an imported word.
    Last edited by Ben Jamin; 27th February 2013 at 9:04 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •