I hate to post such a basic question, but seeing as I am having a much better time with the much dreaded declensions than Polish verbs (thanks to my experience with German), I think it's time to look for help. I have to be honest, I don't get the aspectual pairs or how to determine which verb is a pair to which other verb. As I understand it, Polish has three tenses: Present, Past and Future. There is also the Imperative. Polish doesn't have compound tenses like English. There are various classes of conjugation only for the present tense. I think the past tense is broken into three sets of conjugation based on gender, likewise Future. I get the infinitives. That's all I know. I don't know about participles, gerunds etc. I think having a big picture view of the entire verb system will help me a lot. As mentioned earlier, verb aspect is something I don't get. What would the composite verb mean? I have some verbs I am looking at from Duolingo which do not turn up anywhere. Here are a few examples:
cieszyć się (to enjoy)
bawić się (to play/toy)
dziać się (to happen)
śpieszyć się (to hurry)
zaczynać się (to start/begin)
When I look up the first word in the listed verb I get a different meaning. For instance, cieszyć means 'to rejoice'. Why is się there in all of these verbs? Is this to do with aspect?
Imperfective verbs have three tenses: present, past and future, the last being a compound tense (except in the case of być "to be"). Perfective verbs have a past tense and a simple future tense, the latter formed on the same pattern as the present tense of imperfective verbs. Both types also have imperative and conditional forms. The dictionary form of a verb is the infinitive, which usually ends with -ć (occasionally with -c).
linguoboy wrote:English makes a completely different set of aspectual distinctions--progressive vs simple, perfect vs imperfect, etc. that doesn't map exactly to the perfective vs imperfective distinction.
yellow hoist wrote:Which is why learning English tenses made my head hurt during English lessons
I never fully grasped that in English.
Or is it
I have never fully grasped that in English
I have never been fully understanding that
linguoboy wrote:Could you use both the perfective and imperfective here in Polish and what would be the distinction? Or is only the perfective acceptable?
Thus, przeczytałem książkeę implies completion: I read the book to the end, and now I'm finished with it. It views the act of reading as an indivisible whole. Czytałem książkeę
księżycowy wrote:Note that the conditional works the same way, keeping in mind that the clitic verbs are from a different conjugation of być. (I assume the historical aorist conjugation, but I don't know for sure.)
silmeth wrote:And to add to your, very good, explanation, I’d just say that Polish imperfective verbs are mostly used when English uses the continuous tenses: I was reading – czytałem, I’ll be doing that when you come – będę to robić, kiedy przyjdziesz, etc.
That's not a 1-to-1 correspondence, but it is a pretty good rule of hand.
yellow hoist wrote:Nigdy w pełni tego nie zrozumiałem.
Nigdy w pełni tego nie rozumiałem.
Surely both are correct. I cannot really feel any practical difference in meaning between the two.
silmeth wrote:Czech actually retained the aorist forms (bych, bys, by, bychom, byste, by), bych and bychom might have survived in some Polish dialects (as also some other relics of aorist in other verbs), but I am not sure.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests