Polish Equivalent of "Read"/ "Say"

< Previous | Next >
Status
Not open for further replies.

LilianaB

Banned
Lithuanian
It is not the same. This sentence is not really my favorite register. Anyhow, let's take na ulcy leży rozbita butelka i cieknie woda. Leję się czy jest rozlane, woda leje się czy jest rozlana. No difference to me. By the way, is there a particular liking for graphic language in Poland these days? I do not mean the aspect here. I am not sure if this is the best example. let's take: O czym się mówi i co jest mówione? Which one is more correct?
 
Last edited:
  • dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Nice try, Liliana, but what you've just written is not the same, either. Woda leje się z butelki, as opposed to "pisze" - you won't say that something "pisze" from newspaper - it's written in the newspaper, or, as they say in English, the newspaper reads. The last might be logical in English, but it's not logical in Polish. As to the question whether "leje się czy jest rozlane" - if the water still spills from the bottle, it's "leje się", if there is no water in the bottle, and it's all over the road - then it's "woda jest rozlana".

    As regards your last question, do you mean descriptive approach towards language rathen than prescriptive one?
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    You are right, maybe this was not the best example because of the aspect. I mean graphic language. I also posted another example of the construction I meant in my edited post which might be better to illustrate the problem.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    I couldn't decide whether you meant "language description/descriptivism" or "graphic language" (editing your post after someone's reply is not a nice thing to do :p). I don't know if there's a particular liking for it these days, but it's certainly helpful in explaining some things -- it makes it easier for people to grasp them, and it illustrates them nicely.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    I did not edit my post after your reply: I edited it much earlier, almost right away. You must have worked on your post quite a long time: this is why this has happened.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    When I posted my reply, your post still read "descriptive language" not "graphic language". Let's not split hairs, though, it's not that important.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    No. I have no reason to lie. I corrected it almost two seconds after I wrote it. Then I edited the post the second time after I thought about the example with the leaking water, which might not have been the best one due to the aspect.

    Maybe posts appear delayed.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    All right, Liliana, maybe my internet connection is at fault for that, or the forum was not working properly for the moment.

    LilianaB said:
    O czym się mówi i co jest mówione? Which one is more correct.
    More context wouldn't go amiss. It's hard to decide withouth any context. By the way, it has little to do with "pisze/jest napisane" problem, the only things those two have in common is passive and active voice.

    It should be: co się mówi vs
    co jest mówione, by the way.
     
    Last edited:

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    That's true, but what does that have to do with "pisze vs jest napisane"?

    Mówi się, że zamordował swoją żonę.
    Ciekawe co tam pisze się na ten temat w Rzeczpospolitej - it would be very colloquial thing to say, and I don't hear it that often. In fact, I don't know if this even exist, or I just made it up. Anyway, it would mean something along the lines of - I wonder what's Rzeczpospolita's journalists take on this matter.

    But: Powiedz mi co jest napisane w tym artykule, bo nie mam okularów ze sobą.
     

    BezierCurve

    Senior Member
    For those who can't accept "tu pisze" in colloquial speech there's a way... Just think of that expression as of one of those sentences where you leave out the obvious subject (assuming it's "autor" here).

    By the way, there are more exceptions than logical reasons in Polish grammar and before anyone will start arguing about that just think of double negation, the future tense construction (using past tense forms) or a single rule without an exception.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Having given it some thought, I think "pisze się na temat" exits. "Zobaczmy co pisze się na ten temat w dzisiejszej prasie" - in a television press review, after some important even the night before.
     

    ryba

    Senior Member
    I'd like to say that it seems possible to me that many things we take for granted may not be so.

    First, you guys agree there seems to be a lexical gap, that we could use a short and handy expression for 'it reads'. Then you talk about tu pisze as if it were a neologism that "those lazy folks" started to use at some point to fill that gap, not caring it's actually incorrect (e.g. #28). You assume it just somehow wasn't there or has always been considered incorrect, and it's only lately that some linguists generoulsly admitted it to the bosom of colloquial language.

    Now, who's going to tell me that (tu) pisze, (że) wasn't present in the Polish language as early as many centuries ago? (I'm waiting.:D) And, if it was, who's going to prove to me it was considered incorrect, say, in the 18th century, and by whom? (I'm waiting.:D) Maybe it is a germanism, maybe a very early one. Maybe not. Is Serbian (tu) piše (da) a germanism, too? That would explain its presence in both Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian and in Polish. Or maybe it's just a parallel evolution? Maybe in most Slavic languages they do say tu pisze, and only in Poland there was once some influential structuralist who, in early 20th century, arbitrarily decided it was incorrect, because it "lacked logic"? All that definitely calls for a thorough investigation. Who said all things have to be logical in a language? Have you heard about grammaticalization and lexicalization? Should we stop saying O co chodzi? just because, on the structural level, the construction is not transparent and seems not to make sense when given a literal reading?

    If my memory serves me (and I'm pretty sure it does), my grandparents did say things like Co tu pisze?, and they were both from highly educated families (they were from Kałusz; grandpa studied in Lwów, grandma's father in Vienna and Heidelberg) and were literate in several languages and eloquent as hell. As I already said several pages ago, I believe that were it not for an educational campaign against pisze, no one would ever question its correctness. People would be too familiar with it to consider its internal logic problematic (most of us still ARE, let's face it).

    Let me get this straight. When I was Primary School, I was used to saying "tu pisze", too - but I've been fortunate enough to have kind people around me who helped me stamp out this bad habit. "Perfect command of Polish language" and saying "tu pisze" are mutally exclusive. It's like a driver who caused three accidents in three days would claim to be a perfect driver.
    Naturally, my teachers also tried to repress this "devious" usage. It worked. Whenever anyone said Co tam pisze? there was someone else in the classroom rushing with the ardor of a neophyte and the pride of an apt learner to correct their classmate's mistake. I did it once or twice myself. Maybe thrice. It's only when I started to study languages at an academic level that I liberalized my views on the matter.
     
    Last edited:

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    and only in Poland there was once some influential structuralist who, in early 20th century, arbitrarily decided it was incorrect, because it "lacked logic"? If that's true, it was a wise thing to do, and thank god for that sage structuralist! :)

    Should we stop saying O co chodzi? just because, on the structural level, the construction is not transparent and seems not to make sense when given a literal reading? I don't want to sound rude, but you took it too far in your zeal to prove your point. That's not a valid argument. "O co chodzi?" makes no literal sense, that's true, but it's an idiom - and it has to be that way, whereas "Tu jest napisane" is a mere statement of fact, and logic is something that wouldn't go amiss, really.

    I believe that were it not for an educational campaign against pisze, no one would ever question its correctness. People would be too familiar with it to consider its internal logic problematic (most of us still ARE, let's face it). People are idle by nature, and they are certainly idle when it comes to thinking about the language they use (most of them, at least). I wouldn't expect them to make the effort to give it some thought. Had they thought about it, though, I'm certain they would dissmis it as illogical. Because of the inbred laziness of some specimen, it was a good thing that an educational campaign, as you call it, took place. You know, sometimes you have to make people aware of their mistakes. Back in the time, there was only a handful of people who would correct a person saying "tu pisze". Now I hear people correcting each other all the time. I think there is a growing realisation of the imporatance of language correctness in our society - which is a good thing. I will always deem "tu pisze' incorrect, for the sole reason that it's illogical. And I couldn't care less about other languages. You can call that ignorant, and you'd probably be right, but that's my take on this thing.
     
    Last edited:

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    I personally like tu pisze, and I absolutely agree with you Ryba. Probably somebody introduced the Russicism jest napisane and included it Polish grammar books. Even Mickiewicz had a lot of Russian constructions in his writing.
     
    Last edited:

    ryba

    Senior Member
    Should we stop saying O co chodzi? just because, on the structural level, the construction is not transparent and seems not to make sense when given a literal reading? I don't want to sound rude, but you took it too far in your zeal to prove your point. That's not a valid argument. "O co chodzi?" makes no literal sense, that's true, but it's an idiom - and it has to be that way, whereas "Tu jest napisane" is a mere statement of fact, and logic is something that wouldn't go amiss, really.
    Tu pisze is idiomatic as well. You may consider it incorrect or accept it in lower registers of speech only, if you like, but it does exist, and, as a way of expressing the idea, it is quite idiomatic. Certainly less idiomatic than chodzić o coś, but more idiomatic than być napisane, which is just a regular collocation and has no metaphor to it. Exactly my point. Only (very) common or useful lexical items possessing a high degree of idiomaticity survive in a language. Otherwise, they just die out or become marginal, replaced by more transparent constructions. The most important reason why (tu) pisze, (że) survived up until now is its high usefulness. If there existed a more literal way of expressing the idea of 'chodzić o coś', would you prefer it over chodzić o coś?
    I personally like tu pisze, and I absolutely agree with you Ryba. Probably somebody introduced the Russicism jest napisane and included it Polish grammar books.
    Thank you. From what you wrote here and in your previous posts, I take it that Russian doesn't have an expression equivalent to (tu) pisze, (że). It would be interesting to learn how other Slavic languages deal with it.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    Silesian has tu pisze. After all it is an old Slavic dialect. Russian does not have tu pisze: it has an equivalent of jest napisane. I suspect that Czech and Slovak have tu pisze too, because they have many constructions similar to Silesian.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    I don't know why you persistently equate "tu pisze" z "chodzić o coś", what kind of similarity those two bear, to your mind? Also, I can't understand the appeal "tu pisze" has to you guys, it's so sloppy and repulsive, my ears hurt when I hear it. :D
     

    Thomas1

    Senior Member
    polszczyzna warszawska
    Tu pisze is idiomatic as well. You may consider it incorrect or accept it in lower registers of speech only, if you like, but it does exist, and, as a way of expressing the idea, it is quite idiomatic.
    [...]
    Do you find it acceptable in any kind of text?
     

    ryba

    Senior Member
    Silesian has tu pisze. After all it is an old Slavic dialect. Russian does not have tu pisze: it has an equivalent of jest napisane. I suspect that Czech and Slovak have tu pisze too, because they have many constructions similar to Silesian.
    Thank you, it's good to know that!
    I don't know why you persistently equate "tu pisze" z "chodzić o coś", what kind of similarity those two bear, to your mind?
    When I wrote it, I only had in mind their superficial "lack of logic" and the fact that both have a certain degree of idiomaticity, and yet the former is deemed incorrect by many, while the latter is accepted as perfectly normal. If you come back to the post in which I mentioned it, you'll notice I did so to undermine the argument about the supposéd lack of logic in saying tu pisze:
    Who said all things have to be logical in a language? Have you heard about grammaticalization and lexicalization? Should we stop saying O co chodzi? just because, at the structural level, the construction is not transparent and seems not to make sense when given a literal reading?
    But now that you're asking... :D In fact, both the monotransitive chodzić [o coś] (gdzieś) and pisać [coś] (gdzieś) share certain striking similarities:

    Tutaj pisze, że nie można odkrywać kart.
    Tutaj chodzi o to, że nie można odkrywać kart.

    W instrukcji pisze, że nie można odkrywać kart.
    W tym zdaniu chodzi o to, że nie można odkrywać kart.

    W instrukcji pisze, żeby nie odkrywać kart.
    W tym zdaniu chodzi o to, żeby nie odkrywać kart.


    W instrukcji pisze (coś) o odkrywaniu kart.
    Tu chodzi o nieodkrywanie kart.


    Tu pisze coś innego.
    Tu chodzi o coś innego.


    Tu coś pisze.
    Tu o coś chodzi.


    Do you find it acceptable in any kind of text?
    Yes, in any kind of text (if it fits well). :) Except very formal ones, perhaps, but it's just because I'd probably want something more recherché there, instead. In fact, the only thing that might stop me from using it might be the fear that someone might think I do not know it's incorrect (hahaha), although I also know that my intellectual status might elevate the notoriously mistreated locution to new levels of prestige if I used it. :D
     
    Last edited:

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    You can either use both constructions in writing or none of them. I would personally not use either one too often in writing. W ksiazce pisze sounds informal but w ksiazce jest napisane sounds informal as well. Autor pisze, or autor przedstawia.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Liliana, are you woman at the helm of Polish language to say which construction one "can" use in writing and which not? I would never, ever use "tu pisze" in writing, regardles of the register of the text, and it is inadvisable to do so. "W książce jest napisane" is far from being informal - I'd say it's semi-formal. "Autor pisze" or "autor przedstawia" are strikingly different phrases, used in different contexts, when one wants to convey a completely different thing.

    ryba said:
    Tu pisze is idiomatic as well. You may consider it incorrect or accept it in lower registers of speech only, if you like, but it does exist, and, as a way of expressing the idea, it is quite idiomatic
    Ryba, there is a fine line between "idiom" and "idiomatic", but it exists. We have to draw a distinction between "idiom" and "idiomatic", because it's not one and the same. "O co chodzi" is a fully-fledged idiom, whereas "Tu pisze" is barely idiomatic, and it owes it's minute idiomatic nature to people who misuse it. We don't need the faintest degree of idiomaticness to convey the idea that something reads something.

    A way to go, guys, I eagerly anticipate your next defensive campaign, I can hear "poszłem" crying for your help, and there are plenty of more! :)
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    Dreamlike I am not telling you which construction to use: it has nothing to do with my being a woman. As far as you helm goes, I am not sure what you are really trying to say. W ksiazce jest napisane is not publishable Polish, according to my standards.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Any native speaker would have no difficulty whatsoever to understand what I meant by using the phrase "at the helm of". Dictionary is an ingenious invention.
    2. A position of leadership or control:
    at the helm of the government


    Can you make the effort to underpin your opinion with some arguments? One or two wouldn't go amiss.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    I know what at the helm means, since I love ships: I just have no idea what your entire sentence was supposed to mean, not that there is anything wrong with it grammatically. You do not have to worry about poszlem: I hate it myself.
    I do not think anybody could be on the helm of language: language has life on its own. Someone can be at the helm of linguistic organization trying to prescribe rules of language usage, but language is a kind of a Captain Nemo's ship with a course of its own, at least to a certain extent.
     
    Last edited:

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Try posting it in English section, they will be more than glad to help you. The usage of "at the helm of" (I can give you a hint, I meant figurative usage) is my context is perfectly clear and correct.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    It is sometimes hard to tell, Dreamlike, what you mean because of your overuse of idioms. It is a good exercise though: it keeps one afloat with all the idioms that have ever existed in the English language.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    This is probably a waste of my time, but I'll write it anyway to make a few things clear.

    You didn't refer to the points I made on "pisze/jest napisane", but focused on the expression I used instead. As far as you helm goes, I am not sure what you are really trying to say. That's a very disparaging remark, and you wrote it only to create a false impression that using language poses some difficulty for me, and therefore I can't discuss with you on equal terms. All it takes to dispel your doubts is a modicum of imagination and the lecture of dictionary entry. When I provided you with definitions and you realised that "at the helm of" has figurative meaning, and I used it properly, you kept splitting hairs saying Someone can be at the helm of linguistic organization. Treat "At the helm of Polish language" as a mental shortcut - if this matters to you this much.

    You didn't bother to provide me with some arguments for your theory that "W ksiazce jest napisane is not publishable Polish, according to my standards", but kept harping on the expression instead. The same thing happened in the thread "Nowy/Nowego", when Thomas1 asked you to provide some sources. With all due respect, but discussing with you is not an easy thing to do, and I think I'm not alone in my impression.

    And my parting remark - You do not have to worry about poszlem: I hate it myself. if you hate it yourself, you will find it useful to know that to most of Poles (those who care about their language), "tu pisze" sounds equally atrocious as "poszłem".
     
    Last edited:

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    I don't have any sources: it is based on my knowledge, years of studying, years of professional use of certain languages: do you imagine I keep all the books from my Universities at home: I would need ten rooms at least. All I know is all you get. I hardly ever check any dictionaries at all. Sometimes for fun.
     

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    It is better to know all than to know too little: no one knows all, perhaps the Almighty. And it is still better to know what one wants to know and is interested in than to be arrogant just for the arrogance's sake.
     

    ryba

    Senior Member
    Dreamlike, please, you must be kidding.
    Liliana, are you woman at the helm of Polish language to say which construction one "can" use in writing and which not? I would never, ever use "tu pisze" in writing, regardles of the register of the text, and it is inadvisable to do so. "W książce jest napisane" is far from being informal - I'd say it's semi-formal. "Autor pisze" or "autor przedstawia" are strikingly different phrases, used in different contexts, when one wants to convey a completely different thing.
    What Liliana meant was just that, in formal texts and in written texts, other constructions sound better. For instance, "Św. Paweł Apostoł pisze w liście do Koryntian (…)" and "Ewangelia głosi (…)" sound better (more precise, and thus, more serious) than either "W liście do Koryntian jest napisane (…)" or "W liście do Koryntian pisze (…)". Don't pretend you don't see it.

    Ryba, there is a fine line between "idiom" and "idiomatic", but it exists. We have to draw a distinction between "idiom" and "idiomatic", because it's not one and the same. "O co chodzi" is a fully-fledged idiom, whereas "Tu pisze" is barely idiomatic, and it owes it's minute idiomatic nature to people who misuse it. We don't need the faintest degree of idiomaticness to convey the idea that something reads something.
    First, you condemn pisać [coś] (gdzieś) because it's more idiomatic than być napisane (remember the line in which you said you like być napisane more "[f]or the sole reason that it's more logical"?). It is idiomatic because people who employ it make it so.

    Then, I give you the example of chodzić [o coś] (gdzieś), whose degree of idiomaticity is higher (so, according to your sole criterium, you should condemn it even more). Again, it is idiomatic because people who employ it make it so.

    And you end up insisting chodzić [o coś] (gdzieś) is OK, because people who use the language made it idiomatic, while pisać [coś] (gdzieś) is not OK, because people who misuse the language made it idiomatic. Oh, come on, you must see how biassed and subjective your view is.
    A way to go, guys, I eagerly anticipate your next defensive campaign, I can hear "poszłem" crying for your help, and there are plenty of more! :)
    Now I can see you were kidding. You just can't be serious.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    No, I'm totally in earnest, ryba. And please don't resort to eristic tricks to prove your point, and undermine mine, saying that "I must be kidding", "You can't be serious".

    That being said, I might've missed the point of your posts or you just didn't make things clear. I agree that "Św. Apostoł pisze w liście.... (...)" sound a way better than the alternatives, and the text achieves more serious overtones because of that. But, prey, what does that have to do with "pisze vs być napisane"? :eek:

    Can you grasp the difference between the two?
    (1.) "W liście do Koryntian pisze, że....."
    "W liście do Koryntian jest napisane, że..."
    (2.) "Św. Apostoł pisze w liście do Koryntian..."
    "Ewangelia głosi..."


    In the first instance one makes no mention of the author, and lays emphasis on the content of the letter rather than the author. In the second instance we're dealing with the name of activity - writing - which had been conducted by the Apostle. As I pointed it out in my previous post: "Autor pisze" or "autor przedstawia" are strikingly different phrases, used in different contexts, when one wants to convey a completely different thing. " And I don't condemn such usage. I loathe "tu pisze" used to say that some piece of text is written somewhere. :eek:

    LilianaB said:
    Unfortunately, this is very serious, from what I have known so far about Dreamlike, nothing bad is being meant. Just an observation.


    I will refrain from commenting this one, I don't want to bicker with you - it would be a complete waste of my time!
     
    Last edited:

    BezierCurve

    Senior Member
    Looks like "tu pisze" will need yet another generation of speakers to pass before it gets legalized... It all really depends on how many people persecuted for its usage as children will become parents or teachers and how badly their memories affected their idiolects.

    I suppose "poszłem" will take a little longer.

    I wonder what we're actually fighting about. Language evolution never stops, so I guess we're only arguing about what point in time it takes now. It's like... arguing where the sea ends while watching its tidal move.

    I think it would make more sense to apply some sort of research (or maybe just a simple poll) to see how far this process has gone so far. So, say, as for today 85% of speakers use "tu pisze" on daily basis of which 20% think that their parents wouldn't be happy to hear them speak.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Wow, you have the audacity to share your hopes that one day "poszłem" will become acceptable on a language forum. That's the spirit! Any other common, glaring mistakes that you would wish to become permissible? Now that you are out in the open with your attitude towards language mistakes you don't have to control yourself anymore.

    BezierCurve said:
    So, say, as for today 85% of speakers use "tu pisze" on daily basis of which 20% think that their parents wouldn't be happy to hear them speak.


    Most of people I know use the form "jest napisane", be they educated or uneducated people.

    Liliana, if you can tell the difference between "someone" pisze "something" and "something" pisze "somewhere", I feel sorry for you. It's not the same.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Are you capable of any normal discussion, answering someone's else arguments, providing yours, instead of labelling your interlocutors as God knows who? What a faulty comparison. PRL censors used to impose censorship on the content, not the form.
     

    dreamlike

    Senior Member
    Polish
    And you're unable to justify your opinions, have normal discussion with people. The way you discuss with people just repels me. And it's not only my opinion. ("nothing bad is being meant. Just an observation.") Handy to know about, Liliana, I wonder where did I try to impose censorship on the content :D
     
    Last edited:

    LilianaB

    Banned
    Lithuanian
    Be repelled then, what can I do. Yes, you were trying to tell Bezier Curve, how he dared to say something or claim something. People can say whatever they want: whatever they feel they have to express.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    < Previous | Next >
    Top