All Languages    |   EN   SV   IS   IT   RU   FR   RO   PT   HU   LA   NL   SK   HR   ES   BG   NO   FI   CS   TR   DA   PL   EL   SR   EO   |   SK   HU   FR   PL   NL   SQ   RU   NO   ES   SV   IT   DA   PT   CS   HR   RO   |   more ...

Słownik polsko-angielski

BETA Online Dictionary Polish-English: Enter keyword here!
 ąĄćĆ...
  Options | Tips | FAQ | Abbreviations | Desktop

LoginSign Up
Home|About/Extras|Vocab Trainer|Subjects|Users|Forum|Contribute!
Übersetzungsforum Englisch-PolnischPage 1 of 6   <<
Types of entries to display:     Linguistic Help Needed   Chat and Other Topics   Dictionary and Contribute!  

Polish-English Translation Forum

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:
bycie sobą; poznanie » answer
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:
lekkie obudowy » answer
by Windfall (GB), 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:
OED and English spelling » answer
by Catesse (AU), Last modified: 2010-05-15, 06:59  Spam?  
Some of you may be well ahead of me, but I have only just found this site.
Wikipedia(EN): Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(spelling)
It lists common spelling variants for words, and shows that the standard advocated by the Oxford English Dictionary is often NOT the standard adopted by The Times, The Financial Times, The Guardian and the BBC publications. In other words, the major British media and publishers reject the OED as being too American and not current best practice.
Food for thought.
This was meant to go into the EN-DE forum, but I got lost, so I'll leave it here as well.
Answer:
My experience of school in Britain  #520305
by Windfall (GB), 2010-05-24, 15:23  Spam?  
is that I got taught the variants commonly used in the newspapers rather than the variant in the OED. Finding what the OED considered the main spelling occasionally came as rather a shock as a consequence.
Term:
19th Century "é" = 20th Century "y" and/or "e" ? » answer
by dfoote (US), Last modified: 2010-04-22, 21:48  Spam?  
For example, from a 1879 work, DE REBUS AC STATU DUCATUS PRUSSIAE TEMPORE ALBERTI SENIORIS, MARCHIONIS BRANDEBURGENSIS, ILLO VERO MORTUO ALBERTI JUNIORIS
DUCAS PRUSSIAE AN. 1566-1568. :
Przedstawienia stanów nie odniosły spodziewanego skutku. Albrecht dal im ostrą odprawę. Pobór jednak uchwalono. W kilka lat późniéj stany, dbając o czystość wyznania według formuły augsburskiéj, znów śmieléj wystąpiły do księcia z prośbą o przywrócenie dawnéj ustawy kościelnéj. Było to w końcu r. 1562. Zatarg między Albrechtem a stanami z powodu spraw kościelnych jątrzéć się poczynał.  

But Microsoft Word spell-check, GoogleTranslate, and dictionaries can't interpret the "é". Does it change any of the meaning if I change all of the "é" to "y" or "e"?

Thanks.
Answer:
é should be e in this text.  #514125
by Windfall (GB), Last modified: 2010-04-26, 13:35  Spam?  
except in  jątrzéć, which I think should jątrzyć
Term:
? » answer
anonymous, 2010-03-05, 19:10  Spam?  89.104.1....
?
Term:
wpięcie » answer
by Windfall (GB), 2010-02-18, 12:11  Spam?  
Does anyone know what wpięcie means? I found it in the sentence:

Powszechne stają się kamery umożliwiające bezpośrednie wpięcie w sieć Grupy.

Cameras have become widespread, allowing direct ??? in(to?) the Group's network.
Answer:
wpięcie  #497609
by mieczj, 2010-02-20, 09:58  Spam?  83.8.61....
"wpięcie" is noun from verb "stick", probably also "stick"(?)
Answer:
Thank you  #497673
by Windfall (GB), 2010-02-20, 15:25  Spam?  
Answer:
connection  #498696
by www.tetfa.com, 2010-02-23, 12:06  Spam?  94.127.109....
You can not stick a camera into a networt, you can just connect it to the network.
Answer:
That was what I'd hoped.  #498703
by Windfall (GB), 2010-02-23, 12:16  Spam?  
I did it as connection. Ta for that.
Term:
Thing about Polish nouns » answer
by wrzosowy (PL), 2009-09-19, 02:32  Spam?  
How should I insert nouns?
I mean, should I only enter the singular form or the plural as well.
For example:
1. a bone - kość I kości
2. a bone - kość I kości {pl}

I just spotted that a new tab appeard. It's called "Inflections". But do we really have to put all the inflection in another place instead of using the main dictionary site. What's wrong with inserting two forms in one entry. The system makes it possible and it works proper when searching for the terms. So why do I have to put the same term again in a different place(Inflections). Please somebody explain that to me! It's really a lot of unnecessary work.(I know I repeat myself)

Rgds
Answer:
wrzosowy  #465084
by muhamed (BA/AT), 2009-09-29, 11:13  Spam?  
You can enter the plural as a separate entry (e.g. kości - bones); however, the point of having an inflections bar is that it helps users build the one form from the other. There are big technical issues with how the system works when "multiple" entries/forms are in the dictionary as entries - you can ask Paul and he'll be able to explain.

With a language as rich as Polish this may seem like a lot of (as you said, unnecessary) work, but as my grandma used to say, bez pracy nie ma kołaczy... :-)
Answer:
Inflections explained  #465112
by Paul (AT), Last modified: 2009-09-29, 12:08  Spam?  
Let me try to explain using an example from German-English: dict.cc: birne

If you search for "Birne" in German-English, you will find 8 translations (different meanings and different translations for the same meaning). This means that, using the old technique, you would have to add the inflection information to 8 entries, which would be a lot more work and would lead to crowded search results pages.

Using the inflection tool makes "die Birne | die Birnen" appear on top of the page. This has to be entered only once, doesn't make the pages look crowded and has one other major advantage: It is displayed not only in the German-English dict.cc, but also in the German-Polish, German-French, German-Italian, and any other language pair in conjunction with German.

Same for Polish: If you enter a Polish...
» show full text
Answer:
Complexity of the Polish inflectional system  #465171
by Thorsten1 (DE), 2009-09-29, 16:52  Spam?  
Paul, thanks for explaing (and, of course, coding) this. However, I'm not quite sure if I understand this correctly. Which inflections are to be entered into the new system and which aren't? The thing is, in English, a noun has two inflected forms, most verbs have just three. German has more, but not that many. Slavic languages, on the other hand, are much more complex in that respect: Polish, e.g. has six cases; there's a whole category called "animacy" that determines, among other things, the plural forms; verbs mark gender, etc. How are we going to handle this? (Traditional dictionaries indicate just the genitive and the nominative plural forms.)
Answer:
Thorsten: Inflection information  #465176
by Paul (AT), 2009-09-29, 17:12  Spam?  
We have developed guidance information for four word classes (adj, noun, verb, pron) in every language currently under development. If you open the review form for a German noun, then click the [+] button, you will either see the respective inflection entry or have the possibility to add one. When adding or reviewing this information, examples and specifications are given below the form field.

The inflection entry "die Beobachtung | die Beobachtungen" only has to be entered once and will be connected to every translation in every language pair that includes the German language.

If you click the [+] button within the review form for a Polish noun, then click "add inflection", you will see that we specified "nom.sg | gen.sg | pl", with the example of "dom | domu | domy". Of course we cannot cover all forms...
» show full text
Answer:
I love the idea  #466861
by Windfall (GB), 2009-10-08, 13:26  Spam?  
of showing all (or at least all irregular) Polish noun inflections. The locative singular in particular is a real pain.
Term:
Thing about verbs » answer
by wrzosowy (PL), Last modified: 2009-09-19, 02:08  Spam?  
Now I have a question about Polish verbs

How should we insert the verbs. In polish we have the perfective and imperfective form of a verb in most cases.
So should we put them in separate entries which seems unreasonable to me or should we put "I" between them?

I would suggest the following options. As an example let's take the verb "jeść"

1. to eat - jeść I zjeść {perf} (just like Thorsten has been doing right from the beginning) We can see here that there's the tag {perf} after "zjeść" so "jeść" must be the imperfective one and that's it. What's more a lot of Polish dictionaries use the tag "perf" or "pf" so I don't see a problem here!
2. to eat - jeść I zjeść [dok.] (just like it is in the guidelines) However this is the first time that I've met this kind of tag and maybe that's why it looks a bit...
» show full text
Answer:
Aspect of verbs  #462834
by Catesse (AU), 2009-09-19, 05:23  Spam?  
I don't care much either way. The custom on the English-German site has been to enter everything separately, no matter how slight the change. I don't think it works with Polish. (But then, what would I know?)
Answer:
Inflections!  #465079
by muhamed (BA/AT), 2009-09-29, 11:07  Spam?  
Given that all (or, to be precise, all bar few) Slavic verbs have an imperfective and perfective aspect, and that these aspects come coupled together, the inflections bar was programmed to both show the appropriate conjugated forms of the verb and help users see the couplings between verbs - a fact most non-Slavic learners of Polish (and any other given Slavic language) would readily complain about.

For example, although odpowiadać and odpowiedzieć are coupled verbs (the one being perfective, the other imperfective), they still have different forms (compare e.g. odpowiedział to odpowiadał) and should be presented to the learner as separate verbs (which, in essence, they are). The "coupling" through the inflections function is, in fact, an added extra (just as you would find it in, say, Wiktionary,...
» show full text
Answer:
Aspect of verbs  #465160
by Catesse (AU), 2009-09-29, 15:34  Spam?  
One point, muhamed, is that Thorsten and I have been arguing to have the Perfective and Imperfective aspects of the Polish verbs placed in the one entry. Paul has said that there are technical reasons why that cannot be done. I don't see how this can be so, as it was already being done quite successfully.
Anyway, it is now in the guidelines on the English-Polish site that dok. and niedok. forms must be entered separately, as per wrosowy above. There is a lot of work to be done to alter the old entries to this form, and I am far from confident with the Aspect of Polish verbs. I don't think I can do it.
Personally, I am not entirely confident that this will stand; I can foresee that, if we move all the verbs at present entered under the same tag into separate tags, then some day we - or our successors - are...
» show full text
Answer:
Muhamed  #465173
by Thorsten1 (DE), 2009-09-29, 17:03  Spam?  
Sorry, I had meant to discuss this earlier, but didn't have the time. I can live with any consistent format for Slavic verbs; and I do agree that having perfective and imperfective verbs in separate entries improves readability. However, it is important to help users identify the pefective counterpart of an imperfective verb and vice versa. You said that the inflections tool provides a way to couple the perfective and imperfective versions of an aspect pair; however, I'm not sure what this coupling should look like. Could you perhaps make a sample entry in the Polish dictionary (or any other Slavic dictionary) to demonstrate this method? Thanks in advance!
Answer:
Catesse  #465187
by Paul (AT), Last modified: 2009-09-29, 18:44  Spam?  
I'm quoting some of your statements to make it easier to follow the discussion.

Paul has said that there are technical reasons why that cannot be done. I don't see how this can be so, as it was already being done quite successfully.

If you look at pages like dict.cc: Angehörige or dict.cc: Angestellte several problems become visible.

1. With the old rules the same inflection information had to be entered time and time again, for each entry. This still worked more or less while we had only one language pair (German-English). But for all the other pairs that include the German language, the same information has to be entered tens or hundreds of times again.

2. The pages look cluttered, especially pages like dict.cc: Angehörige that contain inflection...
» show full text
Answer:
Thorsten  #465217
by muhamed (BA/AT), 2009-09-29, 23:41  Spam?  
Paul actually quoted a sample entry (in this same forum, discussing nouns) in post #465176: the idea to couple perfective and imperfective verbs is to include their respective "counterpart" in the flexion information (apart from the infinitive, the present tense form and the singular male third person past form). As in the example Paul quoted: robić | robię | robił || zrobić (where zrobić is the "coupled" counterpart and would appropriately appear in the surch results)

One way (which, at least in my view, makes sense) of knowing that a verb is perfective would be the lack of a present form for it (as in zrobić | - | zrobił || robić - perfective verbs having a future form which morphologically resembles the present of imperfective verbs).

One possible upgrade of the inflection feature would be to include...
» show full text
Answer:
Decisions  #465228
by Catesse (AU), 2009-09-30, 05:49  Spam?  
4; Paul: the links you gave in your email to me: none of them can be retrieved. Is this because they include http at the start?
However, I presume that they referred to the Angehörige / Angestellte entries. Yes, I see the point indeed.
4; All: When this has been sorted out irrevocably to the satisfaction the more knowledgeable contributors on this site, I shall do whatever I can to put my meagre knowledge at the service of the site. I just don't like being mucked around and putting in a lot of work that might have to be undone. Particularly when, as in the case of what I do on sites that I find confusing, the work has been so difficult for me.
Having found out how to split entries, etc. I can forge on with some verbs already entered by others. That is virtually automatic donkey work that anybody with some patience could do. But I should like to be told, after I have gone a little way, whether I am doing it correctly, before I make too many mistakes.
Answer:
Catesse  #465288
by Paul (AT), 2009-09-30, 12:40  Spam?  
I'm not sure why the links didn't work. But I'm glad you see what I mean and the reasons for the concept became clear.
Term:
The thing about Polish adjectives » answer
by wrzosowy (PL), Last modified: 2009-09-19, 03:36  Spam?  
Thorsten(thank God for him) was the first person to insert any data in the English-Polish version. However when inserting an adjective he gives its 3 forms in the singular i.e. the masculine I feminine I neuter, e.g.: "stary I stara I stare"

However, I'd also suggest inserting the 3 forms in the plural as well because they can be difficult for a foreigner to find in a standard dictionary. As an example let's take the adjective "mądry"(wise): Singular: mądry I mądra I mądre but plural is mądrzy(mężczyźni) I mądre(kobiety) I mądre(dzieci) "Men are wise" - Mężczyźni są mądrzy, "Women are wise" - "Kobiety są mądre", "Children are wise" - "Dzieci są mądre"
Actually, we don't have to insert all 3 forms in the plural, the first 2 are enough cause in the plural an adjective in the neuter is always the same as...
» show full text
Answer:
Adjectives  #462833
by Catesse (AU), 2009-09-19, 05:20  Spam?  
I have been following the pattern, although I see no need for all three forms of the adjective (Nominative singular) unless there is an irregularity.
Answer:
Please don't use this form anymore!  #462918
by Paul (AT), Last modified: 2009-09-19, 16:17  Spam?  
This pattern was used when the multilingual beta phase started, but over the course of time I realized that it doesn't work out technically. So I came up with a new way of entering inflections. Here's how to do it:

1. Enter only one form (the main form) as the translation
2. In the review form there are buttons labeled with a plus sign [+]. Click the button next to the Polish word.
3. If there already is an existing inflection entry, it will appear now. If not, the link "add inflection information" appears.
4. Enter or review the inflection, following the example pattern that appears.

In case of any questions, please ask me!
Answer:
I'm confused  #467189
by Windfall (GB), Last modified: 2009-10-09, 15:01  Spam?  
Are the inflections we're supposed to be including for adjectives just the nominative singular ones for m/f/n? Or are we supposed to be adding the plural as well? What about other cases? I can't quite see the logic to why nominative singular m/f/n ones should all be there, but none of the others. These are easy to predict. It's generally the nominative masculine personal plural that I find most of a nightmare and hardest to predict  and the rules for it hardest to master (I can't remember whether or not it has rules that work in all cases, but if it does, it's a large body of rules involving letter changes that vary by stem ending and not a simple add x to the stem rule).

In case it's a search thing (although I'm not convinced that if you can't turn the adjective you're interested in into its nominative masculine...
» show full text
Answer:
The forms we include are listed below the inflection input field.  #467194
by Paul (AT), 2009-10-09, 15:20  Spam?  
nowy | nowa | nowe | nowi || nowszy | najnowszy
positive.m | f | n | m-personal.pl || comparative.m | superlative.m

We can only include the most important forms. Huge (complete) inflection tables would be too difficult to handle.
Answer:
Sorry, I'm probably missing something  #467195
by Windfall (GB), 2009-10-09, 15:28  Spam?  
Is that inflection table somewhere else?

I went to check http://enpl.contribute.dict.cc/?action=edit&id=26776
and I looked at the guidelines to see what we were supposed to be doing, but I couldn't see the pattern of inflections I was supposed to be using.
Also, shouldn't the comparative and superlative be separate entries matching the English comparative and superlative, or have I misunderstood the inflection table? Assuming I haven't, does that mean the English entry should be
new || newer | newest ?
Answer:
At a page like http://enpl.contribute.dict.cc/?action=edit&id=26776 ...  #467198
by Paul (AT), 2009-10-09, 15:44  Spam?  
you'd have to click the [+] button that's located next to the Polish input field. This will open a new section within the page, giving information about an already existing inflection entry and allowing you to add a new one, if there is none yet.

Can you find the button?
If not, maybe I could post a screenshot to make this clearer.
Answer:
I've found the button  #467200
by Windfall (GB), 2009-10-09, 15:51  Spam?  
http://enpl.contribute.dict.cc/?action=edit&id=26776

What I'm not getting is where the table is that shows me which inflectional information I'm supposed to include. A screenshot might be helpful. Alternatively, have you got a link to one that's definitely correct so I can look at that? I'm still not 100% certain of how a complete, correct adjective entry (that's unlikely to get reopened and changed later) would look.
Answer:
The correct translation entry in this case would be "brudny - dirty".  #467207
by Paul (AT), 2009-10-09, 16:01  Spam?  
The inflection entry is a different, additional thing. It only has to be entered and verified once and will then be applied to all translations of "brudny" in both Polish-English and Polish-German. It's an additional piece of information you don't have to work on if you just want to verify the translation.

What you see on http://enpl.contribute.dict.cc/?action=edit&id=26776 if you click the [+] button next to the field that contains "brudny" is an already submitted inflection entry that still needs to be verified. Clicking "review" takes you to the form that contains an explanation.
Inflections  #467208
Answer:
If the inflection feature is too complicated - don't worry. It's not mandatory to use it.  #467210
by Paul (AT), Last modified: 2009-10-09, 16:21  Spam?  
The only thing to watch is that the translation itself doesn't contain multiple forms.
Correct translation pair:   "brudny - dirty"
Incorrect translation pair: "brudny | brudna | brudne - dirty"
Answer:
Got it.  #467211
by Windfall (GB), Last modified: 2009-10-09, 16:22  Spam?  
Your latest comment was the really helpful one. Thank you.
Answer:
Because the inflection feature is monolingual, it should be easy to fill in for native speakers.  #467213
by Paul (AT), 2009-10-09, 16:23  Spam?  
Term:
Guidelines? See German forum! » answer
by Paul (AT), 2009-08-03, 23:13  Spam?  
Please use the German forum for questions about guidelines, at least for the time being, as most of the discussions about rules are the same for German and English and we need to discuss them in one place.
http://depl.forum.dict.cc/
back to top | home© 2002 - 2017 Paul Hemetsberger | contact
Polish-English online dictionary (Słownik polsko-angielski) developed to help you share your knowledge with others. More information!
Links to this dictionary or to single translations are very welcome! Questions and Answers
Remove Ads