This is the place to post your translation requests in English or Polish and to help others with your skills and knowledge. Important: Always give the context of your enquiry!

Page

|

#

| Search | Guidelines | New Question

Term:

by GoEng, 2012-03-13, 09:26  Spam?  87.218.78...

I need to translate this sentence and it´s kind of urgent. If you please...

i dopytam sie z tymi pigulkami bo im bardziej mysle o naszych popedach

to to sie moze naprawde zle skonczyc

Thanks in advance

Term:

by Catesse (AU), 2012-02-08, 02:56  Spam?  ...

On the assumption, judging by entries elsewhere, that pronouns with verbs should not be entered in square brackets [-], I re-opened or changed 5 entries. Paul has just ruled, on the EN-DE forum, that this form is acceptable.
The computer will not allow me to revoke the re-opens, and I think that if I changed my entry (which the computer might also not allow) there would be outvotes recorded for some people. I have therefore asked Paul to resolve this dilemma. Please do not vote on these entries at all, until he has done so.
I regret this misunderstanding.

Answer:

by Heflamoke (DE/HU), 2012-02-08, 03:45  Spam?  ...

Hello Catesse. You cannot revoke, but you can change your vote to the original version which automaticly results into a "revoke" or "non-reopened"-status. For the majority of the entries it works that way. If your entries there wont work with the mentioned method, just ignore what I said. There are sometimes exceptions where it doesnt work.

Answer:

by Catesse (AU), 2012-02-08, 05:24  Spam?  ...

What does this do to the record of anyone who has voted for the re-opened form?
I presume that it has the same effect as a self-delete, but I am not sure.
I shall experiment with one of the entries and see what happens.

Answer:

by Catesse (AU), 2012-02-08, 05:31  Spam?  ...

It turns out to be more complicated that I realised. Some of them did, in fact, have to be re-opened, as the forms were classed as verbs, when it should have been [none].
I like your form with (-) on the Polish side, and the pronoun given as non-optional on others. Amost everybody is still asleep, so let's wait for other responses.
I did dispose of one of the entries where there was no apparent technical problem.

Answer:

by Heflamoke (DE/HU), Last modified: 2012-02-08, 05:35  Spam?  ...

Oh no, if someone already voted its not possible. I didnt check what entries you refered to, so I thought you reopened them and they are still without votes.
The way I mentioned should work for all reopens nobody else voted for.

Edit: I only opened those entries, so they fit into the guidelines (inflected verbs -> [none]. I think the form you chose and which I adepted to, is pretty much optimal.

Answer:

by Paul (AT), 2012-02-08, 11:14  Spam?  ...

I just did some cleaning up, now everything should be fine again.

Answer:

by Catesse (AU), 2012-02-08, 11:38  Spam?  ...

Thanks, Paul.
I don't particularly like the decision, as, for example, "musimy" already = "we must". However, as long as we are all singing from the same songsheet, it does not matter much how things are formatted.

Answer:

by Paul (AT), 2012-02-08, 11:45  Spam?  ...

Yes, I admit this version also has its downsides, but I think it's a better solution than having these very basic terms move down the search results when more translations are added.

Term:

by Paul (AT), 2011-08-20, 07:47  Spam?  ...

I'm just re-posting this to make sure it gets seen by everyone! See also #610105

After some discussion by e-mail we changed the guidelines and the standard abbreviations.
The GL text is now as follows:

For clarity, the case used with prepositions and verbs should be indicated with the corresponding inflections of kimś and coś and case tags, using pre-programmed tags (e.g. kogoś/coś [acc.] or kogoś [gen.]).

If a verb can be used with both direct and indirect objects, both cases should be indicated in the correct or usual order (e.g. dać komuś [dat.] coś [acc.]).

Term:

by Catesse (AU), Last modified: 2011-08-02, 09:34  Spam?  ...

This has been on my mind for a long time. Polish nouns are sometimes treated in the plural in ways that drive a non-native speaker crazy trying to look up the original form in a dictionary. If you came across a word such as "mężowie" without knowing it beforehand, you might never think that what you should be looking for is "mąż". I therefore propose that we should henceforth consider making separate entries for nouns that change not only their endings but also an internal vowel or a final consonant, particularly if it is a fairly short word with the change close to the beginning.
This would not entail re-opening old entries, and it would not be obligatory, it just adds another option.
There are some sites where perfectly regular and obvious plurals are being entered massively, particlarly EN-NL, and Paul...
» show full text

Answer:

by Paul (AT), 2011-08-02, 11:14  Spam?  ...

Translation entries don't have anything to do with inflection entries, contribute-wise.
Only when a user searches for a word, the dict.cc search results page combines both types of entries into one page to present all the information currently useful to the user.
So, if you enter "mężowie" and the English counterpart in the translation section of dict.cc, this will not interfere with the inflections in any way.

Term:

by Catesse (AU), 2011-07-24, 06:04  Spam?  ...

I thought that we had decided that, because Accusative and Genitive are not the same across all genders, we would use [+ acc.] and [+gen.], instead of form often used in dictionaries, i.e. "kogoś".  They would certainly be more helpful to non-native Polish speakers. Similar case with "kimś".
I don't think that this is explicit in the Guidelines, but they are the forms pre-programmed on the site.
Can we settle this before the matter gets out of hand? To change the form we have been using would entail a dreadful amount of work on old entries, and would make dict less useful. If it is decided to  use "kogoś" and "kimś", I think that the case should be stated in addition, because it is needed.

Answer:

by agnieshka (PL), 2011-07-24, 08:44  Spam?  ...

I totally agree with Barbara. It doesn't make sense to non-native Polish speakers to see an entry e.g. "pocałować". With such an entry, the person is able to translate something from Polish to English, but not the other way round.

Answer:

by admin (AT), 2011-07-31, 23:02  Spam?  ...

the argument is right; and we've (at least kinda) standardized the [+ acc.] etc. forms...
So if everyone agrees - we could include the preference for these forms over kogoś etc. into the guidelines!!

Answer:

by Paul (AT), 2011-08-02, 10:57  Spam?  ...

For clarity, the case used with prepositions and verbs should be indicated with the corresponding case tags ([+acc.], [+gen.]), rather than with inflections of kimś and coś.

If a verb can be used with both direct and indirect objects, both cases should be indicated in the correct or usual order (e.g. dać [+dat.] [+acc.] instead of dać komuś coś).

Answer:

by Paul (AT), 2011-08-19, 17:13  Spam?  ...

After some discussion by e-mail we changed the guidelines and the standard abbreviations.
The GL text is now as follows:

For clarity, the case used with prepositions and verbs should be indicated with the corresponding inflections of kimś and coś and case tags, using pre-programmed tags (e.g. kogoś/coś [acc.] or kogoś [gen.]).

If a verb can be used with both direct and indirect objects, both cases should be indicated in the correct or usual order (e.g. dać komuś [dat.] coś [acc.]).

I hope this way it'll work out!

Term:

by Catesse (AU), Last modified: 2011-04-03, 05:48  Spam?  ...

I should like to initiate a discussion on how we should handle the addition to GL 8 regarding transitive and instransitive verbs. In brief, my current thoughts on the matter:
As it is not obligatgory to mark intransitive verbs with [intrans.], I think that we should ignore this. Polish verb sites look cluttered enough even without it. However, this means that we need to become very conscientious about indicating the transitive verbs in some way.
Transitive verbs: I think that it would be in accordance with the spirit of the instructions to continue to place [dok.] and [niedok.] at the end of the line. How shall we handle the transitive verbs? [trans.] is not used, but it should be indicated that the verb is in fact transitive by showing sth. or sb., with the equivalent in Polish, OR by providing an actual...
» show full text

Answer:

by khasara, 2011-06-21, 14:23  Spam?  178.1.61...

why call them trans.or intrans.or dok. or whatever when they are called in Polish przechodnie and nieprzechodnie?

Answer:

by Catesse (AU), 2011-06-21, 14:52  Spam?  ...

The dok. / niedok. decision was made nearly two years ago. Those are the Polish terms.
The trans. / intrans. was discussed at length on other sites and decided ages ago. On EN-PL, those of use who have been doing the greater part of the work since the site was founded decided that for Polish it was better to indicate that a verb was transitive by giving an example showing the case used, and that it was not necessary to indicate intransitive verbs, as there were already enough problems with Polish verbs. Most non-native speakers of Polish would not have a clue what was meant by "przechodni" etc, and the native speakers probably would not need to be told.

Term:

by MIKEXR, 2010-11-05, 22:37  Spam?  67.170.140...

JAN: Basiu po twoim wyjezdzie okazlo sie ze jestem w ciąży. Nie wiedzialem jak Ci o tym powiedzieć. Pisze do Ciebie bo przecież nasze dziecko musi miec oboje rodziców. Mike już wie Czesć Co u ciebie jak tm nowa praca
Pozdrawiamy Ja i ono

BASIA: Nie!!! Jak moglo do tego dojsc? przeciez bylismy ostrozni! Kurcze, Jan, chyba bedziesz je musial sam wychowac...jedyna co moge zaoferowac, to wsparcie duchowe...wiesz, ze w tej kwestii zawsze mozesz na mnie liczyc
U mnie wszystko w porzadku uwielbiam moja nowa prace Lekarz super, bardzo jest ze mnie zadowolony i codziennie mowi mi, ze swietnie mu sie ze mna pracuje wiec, dobrze jest  A co u ciebie? Pewnie cie teraz ciagnie do ogorkow kiszonych i sledzikow...
Pozdrawiam serdecznie, buziaki w zderzaki!! !Basia ♥  

---

I need this into english if possible??

Answer:

by Catesse (AU), 2010-11-09, 14:31  Spam?  ...

1. This Forum site is so little used that you are not likely to get an answer for months.
2. Sorry; my Polish is not good enough to help you.
3. The general rule is that you make an attempt at translation yourself, no matter how poor the result is. (And preferably better than an automatic goodle translation; these are usually pathetic.)
4. If you register as a contributor, you will be able to make direct contact with contributors who might be able to help you.
But we are all busy with our own lives, and you might not get all that much help.
(I accessed the site today only because I pressed the wrong button.)

Term:

by Monade, 2010-08-24, 21:04  Spam?  80.171.10...

prosilabym o przetłumaczenie:
- bycie sobą
- poznanie, np. w zdaniu:
mogę ci przekazać moją wiedze, ale nie moje przeznanie.

Dziekuję z góry!

Term:

by Windfall (GB/DE), 2010-06-02, 18:26  Spam?  ...

This is something Pemug SA lists in the breakdown of its revenues. It very probably relates to construction and possibly to steel and/or some sort of facade. Any suggestions? Lightweight facades?

Term:

by Catesse (AU), 2010-05-22, 12:05  Spam?  ...

Let us all spare a thought for our Polish colleagues who may be affected by the floods.