to be cost-effective versus to pay

Discussion in 'Polski (Polish)' started by Baltic Sea, Dec 26, 2012.

  1. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Witam wszystkich bardzo serdecznie!

    It would be cost-effective for you to sell this house at a lower price.

    It would pay for you to sell this house at a lower price.

    Polskie tłumaczenie - wg mnie - brzmi: Opłacałoby ci się sprzedanie tego domu po niższej cenie.

    Skoro wyrażenia "to be cost-effective" i "to pay" są synonimami, to czy można je stosować wymiennie.

    Dziękuję. Źródło: wyobraźnia.
     
  2. R.O

    R.O Senior Member

    Polish
    Hej!
    Na pewno nie w każdym kontekście. Trzeba pamiętać, że "cost-effective" to słówko typowo biznesowe, więc w zdaniu "Opłaca się uczyć języków" chyba lepiej użyć "It would pay you..." niż "It would be cost-effective...". Natomiast w twoim zdaniu, wydaje mi się, słów tych można użyć zamiennie, z tym że ja zdecydowanie użyłbym "cost-effective", jako że zdanie ma wydźwięk marketingowy.
     
  3. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    Hi, Baltic. Yes, I agree -- it really depends on the context. Also, in business-like writing you cannot use casual ci. You have to tell us where this excerpt is from. Another thing, I would replace sprzedanie with an infinitive.
     
  4. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Dziękuję. Jakie inny synonimy "opłaca /ci/ się zrobić ...." po angielsku możecie podać, używane w codziennej mowie?
     
  5. R.O

    R.O Senior Member

    Polish
    "Profitable" is the first one that comes to my mind.
     
  6. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Do you mean "It's profitable for me to do something"?
     
  7. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    Beneficial, perhaps, but which language are you translating it into? I thought it was English to Polish? Profitable is Ok, if someone wants to make money on the sale.
     
  8. R.O

    R.O Senior Member

    Polish
    I don't think "beneficial" works here. Still, we don't have a full context so it's difficult to pass judgments.
     
  9. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    I would like to translate the phrase "opłaca /ci/ się zrobić ...." into English, of course. Could you state some everyday phrases that convey the meaning of "opłaca /ci/ się zrobić ...." in English, regardless of the variety (AE, BE, etc.).
     
  10. audiolaik

    audiolaik Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    Hi,

    Which language should I use now because I'm a little bit confused.

    I see nothing wrong with cost effective as well as economically viable.:) Of course, the latter sounds definitely more professional, at least to me. The point is what you mean by opłacać się. If you mean bringing the best possible advantages in relation to cost, then don't hesitate and make use of cost effective. But if the intended meaning is slightly different (just producing a profit) then use profitable.To me, both cost effective and profitable sound equally business-like.

    A&AJnr

    PS Financially beneficial sounds good enough?:)
     
  11. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    It may be really good for you to sell the house at a lower price. (colloquial). It may be beneficial (or profitable -- depending on what kind of profit he gets) for you to sell the house at a lower price. (slightly more formall). I would not use cost-effective here.
     
  12. audiolaik

    audiolaik Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    What about the following context: The owner of the house can't afford to maintain the property and turns to a financial advisor. They prepare some budget saving scheme. So, selling the house is part of a bigger plan, not a single financial operation. Would it change your opinion, LilianB?

    If we reverse the situation (the owner doesn't sell the house, which affects his financial situation), can we say that this operation isn't cost effective?

    A&AJnr
     
  13. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    This sounds really as if you were trying to stretch the meaning, or the usage of the word. I would personally only use the term in reference to production -- energy and time saving measures and things like that.
     
  14. audiolaik

    audiolaik Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    Thank you, LilianaB, for your answer. I've just looked up the word in a business English dictionary and found the following sentence:

    source: Longman Business Dictionary

    Another dictionary, published by Oxford, suggests that one use the expression when discussing methods, investments and ventures.

    Of course, I might be stretching the meaning or usage, as it usually refers to investing money, not saving.
     
  15. dreamlike

    dreamlike Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    It would pay off to sell this house now, at a lower price.

    I strongly advise you against using the phrase from your first post, namely "It would pay for you to sell this house at a lower price."
    First off, the usual way of saying it is 'it doesn't pay to'. Secondly, I'd use it in a different context, one that actually does not have much to do with money.

    It doesn't pay to be nice these days.
    It doesn't pay to be wise.
    It doesn't pay to get angry.

    and so on and so forth

    Of course, it might well be used in money-related contexts, but I rarely, if ever, see it used this way.

     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2012
  16. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Thank you all very much for all the answers and examples. :)
     
  17. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Thank you Dreamlike, too.
     
  18. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    Perhaps you can say something like that; Selling you house at a lower price now may pay off in the long run. I would still not use cost-effective here. As to the examples from the Oxford and Longman Dictionaries: they are perfect, but they are not the same as the proposed sentence related to the sale of the house.
     
  19. R.O

    R.O Senior Member

    Polish
    As for "It would pay for you...", I think it should be "It would pay you to...". And I wouldn't say the negative version is usually used. However, as stated above, without further, more specific context we're unable to help.
     
  20. dreamlike

    dreamlike Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    My point was that the more common construction is "It (does not) pay(s) to be" rather 'it would pay you to', at least in my experience. I've just looked it up, and it is not necessarily so, but well... :D
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2012
  21. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    I don't know which version is more correct. I can only guess that 'it would pay you to' is 100 %, but what about 'it would pay for you to'. I found such structure in an English Grammar book whose author I don't remember. Is 'it would pay for you to' version correct or not?
     
  22. LilianaB Senior Member

    US New York
    Lithuanian
    Maybe: It may pay to sell your house now at a lower price (than lose all the money, if you wait too long).
     
  23. Baltic Sea Senior Member

    Polish
    Why, the version "It would pay for you..." I saw a few months ago was written by an author who is/was a native speaker.
     
  24. dreamlike

    dreamlike Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    Baltic, being a native speaker of English, or any other language, for that matter, means very little. There are different levels of language proficiency and more importantly, knowledge.
    How many Poles do you know with a poor grasp of Polish who say things that are not be imitated? I know quite a few of them. :)

    'It would pay for you to' sounds unnatural to me, if not plain wrong. You could start a thread about it the English forum, but you can rest assured that, as suggested by K.O., 'It would pay you to', no 'for', is a better option.
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2012
  25. R.O

    R.O Senior Member

    Polish
    The question is how many of them write textbooks? That is not to say, of course, that all English native speakers who write textbooks for learners are infallible but I'm sure their language proficiency is at least as good as that of Mr Average, if not better. Unfortunately, we don't even have the most important thing here, which is the title of that book and its author.
    Actually, I could've picked that nickname, it appears much stronger than R.O.. ;)
     
  26. dreamlike

    dreamlike Senior Member

    Poland
    Polish
    Well, I gathered from Baltic's post that he just come across a native speaker writing that somewhere on the internet, not necessarily in a textbook. Google yields several results for 'it would pay for you to', but their number is not large enough for me to believe it's idiomatic.

    My apologies! :eek:
     

Share This Page