Im a native speaker I have no idea about half of this rules I just use them. But anybody who take effort to learn and use this mess deserve admiration.
Polish is literally one of the hardest languages I have ever tried, it is harder than Russian and on par with Arabic. I am trying hard to learn it, after Russian I will start with Polish.
@@BroodingEdgelord That would be a hell of achievement. BTW maby ishoud learn Sapnis I like the sound and a melody of a languge. On top of that It is much easier to pronounce spanish words then let say german
Oof, to my native Polish ear your 'ś' and 'sz' comparison sounded as if you said 'sz' twice. And not gonna lie, the hard-coded subtitles were a bit annoying, especially considering the poor translation. Other than that, it was great to see how non-natives might look at my language, and you presented it in a really fun way, kudos :D
Incredible video! As a native Croatian speaker I’m amazed by how similar the grammar is to Croatian. In many cases it’s almost identical, and so many of the quirks and exceptions also apply to Croatian. Grammatically it’s even more similar than Russian I’d say. But phonetically it’s kind of alien because of the extreme palatalization
I think there may be a historical reason for it. Slavic settlement in Alpine region was West Slavic specifically, but West Slavic continuum was broken after Hungarian invasion into Pannonia and German push into modern Austria. So proto-Slovens became isolated from rest of West Slavs, but not complitely isolated from Slavs because of South Slavs. So after 1000 years of isolation Slovenian is no longer classified as West Slavic but as South Slavic. But the all of Western Slavs did not just sit idle and consume South Slavic/Bulgarian influence, but they also exerted their own influence near by. So Serbo-Croation could catch up some Western Slavic characteristics due to Alpine Slavs, which should also be completely absent in Macedonian and Bulgarian. My theory is that if Croatian is more similar to Polish than Russian then Slovenian should be even more similar to West Slavic languages.
@@Hadar1991a couple of my students (we're native Polish speakers) have recently been to Slovenia for holidays, and they said that Slovenian was remarkably similar to Polish, to the point they were able to communicate without using English at all
@@tomaszgarbino2774eee that's bullshit, I'm Polish and I don't understand Slovene and Serbo-Croatian at all, and Bulgarian and Macedionian even less so. Eastern Slavic tongues are slightly easier to understand to us, Western Slavs but they're still difficult.
I'm absolutely impressed how you were able to learn Polish to this level, hats off to you. Even I as a native speaker got a headache watching this, our language is a bit messed up 😂 Awesome video nonetheless. Loved the memes too, they cracked me up. I want to just point out something about the sentence at 33:23 . To make it more natural you would need to add "to" before or after "jest" . So the sentence would look like: "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo TO jest lepsze dla ich lwów." Or "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo jest TO lepsze dla ich lwów". Don't ask me why exactly as I cannot explain it in linguistic terms, maybe someone smarter will help. Another thing though, I know you used this sentence to show how the words change forms but I'm not sure this structure of the sentence is right for what message you would try to convey in it in real life. It just sounds a bit _weird_ this way. I would for example rather say "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi dla dobra ich lwów" which essentially means "Our friends cleaned the brick door for their lions' good/wellbeing". I hope you understand what I mean, some expressions just don't translate well 1 to 1. Unless I'm taking nonesense, then someone for sure will correct me LOL.
TO serves the role of an object in a second part of the sentence about lions. ..., bo jest lepsze dla ich lwów -> ... because is better for their lions. See the lack of an object here? I agree with the above comment though, the sentence sounds weird and would not probably be contructed by a natural user that way.
@@WIWLO123 The "to" is the subject and is referencing "the cleaning". Without it the inferred subject is "one" and is referencing "the doors that were cleaned". The first one ("the cleaning") is singular so "jest". The second one ("the doors") is plural so "są" -> "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów".
Jeez, I really and deeply admire you for all the effort taken in order to make this video. Like really, my brain got totally fried despite being a 100% native speaker that uses the language all the time and grew up totally immersed by it. I'm wondering how people manage to learn all of that mess even as children. Though I must admit, this heavily fusional grammar can be quite handy, making the information quite condensed within a single word, and this free word order is surprisingly fun. Overall, one can have quite a lot of fun playing with this ridiculously complex grammar, sometimes even by making mistakes on purpose. By the way, I hope you had a pleasant stay in Poland!
The last sentence "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi bo jest lepsze dla ich lwów". There is a mistake. Actually there are two but one is understandable. It should be "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo są lepsze dla ich lwów". - jest -> są: The subject of the second part ("bo są lepsze dla ich lwów") is inferred "they" ("one": "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów") and is a reference to those doors. The verb is "to be" ("są"). The noun "drzwi" is plural, "one" is plural so the verb "to be" needs to be plural. There is only one plural present tense form of "to be" and it is "są". The subject and the verb has to agree with respect to number and grammatical gender. If the subject is in its nominative form (almost always) there are no exceptions. - a comma: In Polish there are very strict rules about placing a comma. In this case it is needed. The rules are base on the function and the structure but are often simplified to "what is connecting the sentences?". In case of "bo" ("because") the comma is always there. - "ich" cannot be replaced with "swoich" here, both mean "their": The whole thing is a complex sentence that is constructed from two simple sentences. The part "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów" answers the question "why did they do it?". The subject of this sentence is the door. "ich" is in a different sentence than the people who did it. "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi dla swoich lwów" - "Our friends cleaned the brick door for their lions" is a single simple sentence so we use "swoich" because we are referencing the subject and "ich" would be wrong.
So much respect for you and amount of effort put in this 30 minutes! I'm native and it was fun watching this video. :D I've laughed a few times just realizing how crazy my language is for foreigners. xD
Very thorough and beatiful video❤ To add some interesting info, due to being descended from Proto Indo European, polish has many cognates and （due to European sprachbund) borrowings, like the words mentioned in the video: widziec -> latin: vidare, english: vision lubic->german: lieben, english: love moc->german: mogen, english: may
Polish word love - miłość has Slavic origins - very old.... English language has not this Slavic flexibility... When you 10 time repeat it..., you know that.
@@sebastianb9460 In Bulgarian ''милост'' (milost) is mercy, while in Polish is ''łaska'' and ''ласка'' (laska) is caress. For love we have unique word ''обич'' (obič) which comes from ''обичай'' (običaj) - custom tradition, just like how we also have ''нрави ми се'' (nravi mi se) just like the Russian ''нравится'' (nravitsia).
as a person from Poland I really liked the video, it gives interesting insight into the language even though speak it natively. the part about young people sometimes skipping the ł sound was really good, because I really do that and it's quite common, actually. so I loved it really, although the subtitles are a bit all over the place, (to jest, it is, takes the nominative, so "to jest przegląd języka polskiego"), but I wouldn't change them, since it's not like crucial
damn, I got lost even tho I'm a native Polish speaker 💀 (the best part is even if you say something incorrectly, it's quite likely that someone will correct you)
Small trivia. Polish also has some slight agglutination in some verbs in the past tense. Examples in first person singular masculine: pisałbym [pi-sał-bym/pisał-bym] ("I would write") czytałbym ("I would read") jechałbym ("I would go/ride") chciałbym ("I would want") napisałbym ("I would have writen" or "I would have finished writing") przeczytałbym ("I would have read" or "I would have finished reading") pojechałbym ("I would have went")
Amazing. You have made a few minor errors in your Polish but on the other hand I have made a few errors just typing this sentence so let's call it even. My hat it off to you sir, hugely impressive language skills.
1:20 The numbers can often vary a lot in this case, from 40 to 60 milion native speakers because it hard to count polish people outside of people (from 5 to 20 million).
2:31 "g" has actually two palatal equivalents (because of two palatalizations) - ż and dz. "k" has cz and c respectively. 8:21 "verb" in this case is actually called "orzeczenie", which refers specifically to inflected verbs. 11:20 you missed an acute. It would be "mężczyźni" 12:06 Not irregular at all! All penultimate "e" and "ie" disappear in conjugations, and with them, soft consonants become hard again. 13:36 Mostly -owi, but many nouns also have -u, like brat -> bratu, pies -> psu etc 15:06 a "cluster" in this environment would be "zbitka". Skupisko means gathering (not only of humans) 15:55 Long forms are used as either first or last word of a sentence. Elsewhere the short form is used. 17:32 Also followed by profession name, like "panie inżynierze" (mr. engineer (?)), "panie nauczycielu". "ksiądz" is a pronoun used to refer to Catholic priests. 20:04 Should be "zgadzają się". "związywać się" means "to bound *self"
the Polish subtitles have multiple issues from the get go. Do you want me to pedantically correct them all here? EDIT no really, I just resorted to reading English text whenever it appears and ignoring Polish subtitles altogether, they're so bad
I am so incredibly glad I learned all this crap when I was a little child. I learned a few foreign languages in my life and I feel like this one would just brake me if I had to start from scratch.
@@netkvCzech is actually extremely easy in comparison to Polish, Serbian or Russian. Even Slovak is more complex than Czech, but at the same time easier for Poles to understand, less Germanic influences still.
Splendid video! Really happy to learn so much about something so normally casual to me. I have just a few remarks that I managed to contrapt. Polish 'r' is actually a tap not a trill. Second less important one is a very cool feature of the possibility of moving the verb ending from the verb onto a conjunction in the past tense or an adjective in past and present tense: Wiem, że to widziałeś - I know that you saw it Wiem, *żeś* to widział Wiem, że to widzieliście - I know that you (pl) saw it Wiem, *żeście* to widzieli Ładna jesteś - you're pretty *Ładnaś* Unfortuantely this feature is growing obscure, my guess is that it could be considered archaic or rural. Another thing is the almost extinct pastperfect: Past tense: szedłeś pastperfect: szedłeś *był* I said almost because (to my understanding) it happens that *one* verb still carries this form as its past tense!: Powinienem - I should Powinienem *był* - I should have This verb is probably one of the most awkward in the whole language since it doesn't have any handy future form and can't even form a normal infintive form: Robię - robić Powinienem - *mieć powinność*
30:49 since the verb kopnac is a perfective verb, you cannot make an active participle, so there is no kopnacy in polish, you should make kopiacy from an imperfective verb kopac 'to dig (with a spade), to kick (with a leg)' 😅
As a native speaker of Czech, I find the section on phonology (and specifically the historical reasons for the weirder parts of the phonology and orthography) very fascinating! So when I use Czech rules to try pronouncing Polish words and names, I sound like I'm speaking Polish from 500 years ago! I guess Czech phonology is more conservative. We still have Ř, Ó is still a long O sound...
A part I find very interesting is that Czech does have a tandem of O/U (written with ů), but it happened in different environments than the Polish shift (I don't know the specifics of the Czech shift sadly)
"Tandem" means they switch based on the environment. I believe now there's a spelling rule that if long U is at the start of the word, it's ú, but if not, then it's ů. But think about a word like nůž, its genitive form is nože (and all its other case forms have O as well). That's the grammatical role of ů, to my understanding.
Great video! You are very good at explaining complex grammatical details. I want you to do more videos on that type about other languages. I want to ask you can you do a language overview of Esperanto?
32:52 Weird sentence. Nasi koledzy oczyscili ceglane drzwi (never heard of such doors), bo... TO (it) jest lepsze dla ich lwow. Or: bo tak (=that way) jest LEPIEJ (adv.) dla ich lwow. Why lions? 😅
34:01 no, its not because "it is too ambigous", it is because the possessive adjective appears in another clause (i. e. with a reference to another verb); if you make a simple sentence oczyscili drzwi dla swoich lwow that will mean: they cleaned up the doors for their (own) lions. But if you say: oczyscili drzwi dla ich lwow... Now that is "ambigous"! because you dont know if the door cleaners are the lion owners (probably not) 😂
Jeśli naciągać definicję to możnaby to uznać za stronę pośrednią, coś w rodzaju strony biernej z konstrukcją strony czynnej, np.: "kościół się buduje" jest równoznaczny do "kościół jest budowany". Muszę jednak przyznać, że tamto konkretne zdanie brzmi dość dziwnie
9:36 My Polish teacher always taught me that Singular nouns are divided into Masculine, Feminine and Neuter, but Plural nouns are divided into 2 genders: Masculine and Non-masculine. (Męskoosobowe, Niemęskoosobowe)
Gives Chinese vibes. Middle Chinese had separate coronal stops, affricates, and nasal in plain, retroflexed, palatalized, and both retroflexed and palatalized series. They also give rise to separate sounds in Mandarin that aren't transparent as to their origins.
Error in the Polish subtitles. Nowoczesny = modern as in a new version of something. Współczesny = modern as in a time period or current times. It shouldn't be "nowoczesny polski" but "współczesny polski". You'd describe a new iPhone as "nowoczesny" but not a language.
10:54 there is a bunch of neuter nouns that end in e with a tail below like "imie," = "a name"; "ciele," = "a calf", and also some loans from latin in -um like muzeum, akwarium (neuter), while album is... masculine! 😅
album kiedyś było ono, jeszcze w Lalce jest w takiej formie. tak samo kiedyś planeta, kometa, satelita były męskie. dziś tylko satelita a i to często już ludzie mówią ta zamiast ten
Prędzej powiedziałbym właśnie "no to chodźmy" albo nawet "no to jedziemy". "A więc zacznijmy" jest nieco nadęte, jeśli sytuacja nie byłaby stosowna nie użyłbym tego zwrotu
Taka ciekawosta, "żeż" się pisze przez ż, bo powstało jako połączenie "że" + "że", analogicznie do "co" + "że" -> "cóż", "no" + "że" -> "noż" (jak w "noż kurwa")
Great stuff!! Well done! I have only some questions. You wrote that "on the grass" should be "na trawie", withthe pronuncition of grass being 'travie'. My question is why wouldn't it be 'trafie', since the last obstruent in a word becomes devoiced? Also, shouldn't 'odpowiedź' be voiced as 'otpofieć', since we have a 'w' and because it is an exception the obstruent before it should dictate the voicing rules, meaning it should be devoiced because the obstruent before 'w' is 'p'? Yet, we have both voiceless(t, p and 'ć') and a voiced phoneme(v) in what you wrote. Did I misunderstand something? I'm also learning Polish and I'd like to know more.
@@watchyourlanguage3870 I understood what the problem in my understanding was. Basically the rule applies to consonant clusters and not to the sentence as a whole. Either way, thank you very much for your reply! It helped 😊
24:27 I cant recall if i ever use or see anywhere a frequentive sluchiwac (contrary to widywac), and generally speaking, the frequentatives are not used often nowadays 😢
Polish "acute" when handwritten, should be correctly written in top to bottom direction and almost vertical as opposed to real acute which is bottom left to top right.
Southern Brazil, especially Parana, but also Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. Brazilian government even repressed Polish immigration into Brazil because they got worried that that Poland may try to annex Parana. There is no evidence on such plans by Poles, but it there where any, Austrian failed painter made sure that Poland would not have the facilities to do so. 😅
Not to my knowledge. Hebrew and Arabic come the closest among the languages I know, but both of them don’t use it in the present, which means they’re irregular. If any language does, I would guess it’d be an isolating language with no verb conjugations, but even that I’m unsure of
@@watchyourlanguage3870 Esperanto is completely regular, that's why it's so boooring. But it's obviously not a natural language so maybe not the best example. But I really like artificial languages that are naturalistic, like Quenya.
0:03 to jest przeglad. If you present sth with a phrase "this is, there is" etc. you use simply the nominative, like: This is an apple. To jest jablko.
Ciekawym co wyznacza granicę pomiędzy wykorzystaniem narzędnika a mianownika? Może zwroty osobowe? W końcu powiedzielibyśmy "on jest murarzem" a nie "on jest murarz". Gdybym miał zgadywać powiedziałbym, że w jakiś sposób kluczem jest tu "to", bądź też kontekst, w którym funkcjonuje jako copula: -kto to? -murarz -kim on jest? -murarzem Edycja: cha cha, nieuważnie przeczytałem twój komentarz, przecież sam o tym mówisz
I wouldn't really consider "zwierzęta" an irregular noun. All nouns ending in "ę" (in nominative) will decline similarly (e.g. kurczę, cielę). As for "żółw"... There is a set of nouns Enging in w and b which decline similarly. They're a small leftover from the times when soft labial consonants truly and 100% had soft equivalents (meaning - audible even when then were in the last position in a word). Just look at the inflection of words like jastrząb or Wrocław. It might be interesting for to to look into what happened with those sounds in Polish dialects of Kurpie or Mazury.
będziesz widzieć - (literally) you'll see (like regain your sense or something) zobaczysz - you'll see/ you'll get it for god sake pronounce the ł in "mógł" unless you want to sound like a villager thank you for the video!
Terrible... Muestras mi lengua materna como una losa imposible de levantar metiendo en la explicación un montón de errores. Te aconsejo preparar estos materiales junto con un nativo que sepa hablar bien y conozca la teoría (gramática, fonética etc...) Y por último: polaco no es un idioma difícil. Si tienes ganas de aprender, un buen profe que te lo explique y una actitud positiva y trabajadora en cuestión de semanas vas a ver que todo se puede, ya que se trata de una materia muy lógica y flexible (no como inglés que has de empollar a la memoria porque carece reglas)
Właściwie to jego błędy wynikały głównie z zastosowania zasad tam gdzie powinny być zastosowane wyjątki. Jak na ironię jego błędy, pomijając niektóre niedociągnięcia przy tłumaczeniu, sprawiają, że język może się wydać prostszy niż jest w rzeczywistości. Nie ma też sensu udawać, że polski to język łatwy. Zgadzam się, że zdecydowanie nie jest tak nieosiągalny jak niektórzy stereotypowo go przedstawiają, ale dla wielu osób zdecydowanie będzie stanowić znaczne wyzwanie. I proszę nie zrzędzić na angielski. To elegancki i unikatowy język.
@@bozydarboski9407 Angielski jest trudny. Unikatowy... Może i tak... Mieszanka dwóch gałęzi germańskixh z ogromnym wpływem romańskim. Język "germański" o 60% słownictwa romańskiego. Ale bez gramatyki jka w islandzki ani jak w łacinie... Po prostu przetrwał tak wieki i się dostosował... Nic unikatowego w nim nie widzę... Porównaj go z niemieckim, hiszpańskim i polskim. One są unikatowe. Elegancki... Może dialekty z dworu królewskiego, bo te z Australii, Szkocji czy USA to zdecydowanie bełkot.
@@andelcarmelmuszę przyznać, że nie rozumiem twojego podejścia do unikatowości. Sam właśnie przytoczyłeś jedną z najbardziej nietypowych i złożonych historii jaka spotkały jakikolwiek język w tak krótkim czasie kiedykolwiek, a na porównanie dodałeś języki słynne z tego, że ich rozmówcy są nadal w stanie zrozumieć się nawzajem ze swoimi licznymi sąsiadami. Po prawdzie każdy język jest unikatowy. Nawet na poziomie "dialektalnym", jeśli język różni się choćby tylko paroma słowami i wymową niektórych głosek od swojego sąsiada, już jest unikatowy. Niektóre są po prostu bardziej niezwykłe od innych. Obiektywnie mówiąc polski nadal jest bardzo zbliżony do wszystkich spokrewnionych z nim sąsiadów. Anglik z niemcem czy szwedem się nie dogadają. Polak z czechem, słowakiem, białorusinem, ukraińcem i rosjaninem - ma już większą szansę. Jeśli chodzi o brzmienie to przypuszczam, że to kwestia gustu. Mnie również niektóre akcenty w angielskim nie wpadają do ucha, ale szkocki jak i wybrane amerykańskie bynajmniej do tej grupy nie należą.
@@bozydarboski9407 dobra, niech Ci będzie, jest i unikatowy. Ale jest też nielogiczny, pozbawiony reguł, o ogromnej ilości wyjątków (popatrz chociażby na fonetykę)... Jeśli chodzi o "porozumiewalność"... Po hiszpańsku nie po rozumiesz się we Francji, po rumuńsku w Portugalii, po retoromańsku we Włoszech... A po łacinie ludowej (vulgar latin) w żadnym z tych krajów... A jak sobie porównasz dialekty hiszpańskiego to okaże się, że są one znacznie bardziej do siebie zbliżone niż angielskie. Mimo różnic fonetylycznych i słownikowych. Angielski to taki bełkot (no wiem, hiszpański karaibski trochę też), ale większość dialektów hiszpańskiego jest po prostu ładna, a angielski mniej więcej ładny to ten z dworu królewskiego i trochę hinduski...
@@andelcarmel Nie ma lepszych i gorszych języków. Każde narzecze jest z obiektywnego punktu widzenia równie przydatnym narzędziem komunikacji. Przekonanie o wyższości niektórych języków nad innymi jest wynikiem uprzedzeń, stereotypów związanych z ludźmi którzy się nim posługują i rasistowską retoryką rodem z XIX wieku. Język jeśli już może być nieprzystosowany do wykorzystania w niektórych sferach zawodowych, technologicznych lub kulturowych przez niewprowadzenie do niego odpowiedniego słownictwa. stwierdzenie, że język nie posiada reguł jest z góry błędne i może wynikać tylko z niezrozumienia ich i historii języka. Jeśli chodzi o nieregularności w Angielskim to można je podzielić na dwie grupy: gramatyczne i ortograficzno fonetyczne. Gramatyczne wyjątki w angielskim ograniczają się do czasowników posiłkowych, form przeszłych i imiesłowowych niektórych czasowników (swoją drogą w dużym stopniu pokrywających się z niemieckimi), dosłownie garstki słów z nieregularną liczbą mnogą i kilku dziwactw w słowotwórstwie w większości zapożyczonych. Jeśli chodzi o niesławną ortografię angielskiego to jest ona wypadkową właśnie jego niezwykłej historii i w istocie może stanowić problem uczącym się tego języka. Jeśli mowa o językach romańskich niestety poza pobieżnym poznaniem gramatyki łaciny klasycznej nie miałem z nimi osobiście jeszcze żadnego większego kontaktu. Spotkałem jednak raz pewną włoszkę, która stwierdziła, że rozumie francuski, który brzmi dla niej "śmiesznie". Coś mi to przypomina.. Jeśli chodzi o brzmienie, to tu po prostu nie da się zgodzić, bo jest to w pełni subiektywnie, całkowicie zależne od gustu
as czech, polish to me mostly sounds like funny old czech with simplified grammar and nonsense fricatives, and oh god so much borrowed words (ż being same as rz is unholy)
Czech has a lot of borrowings too especially young people use a lot words of english orgin. So czech isn't super special. To me Czech always sounds weird! Not cute as some people say, but weird. Especially your placement of accent in words and long vowels (they sound ugly to me). I prefer Slovak language more than Czech but that's my personal opinion.
Please stop bickering. Calling any language out for "sounding funny" without an ounce of wit is inobservant, ignorant, egocentric and simply rude. You think it sounds funny because our languages are close enough to be somewhat intelligible but distant enough to have some major differences.
![POLISH - World's Most Difficult Language | ft. Arlena Witt & Mówiąc Inaczej [Kult America]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sGJ8mor6Qpw/mqdefault.jpg)
Im a native speaker I have no idea about half of this rules I just use them. But anybody who take effort to learn and use this mess deserve admiration.
You my sir speak a gigachad language. Pozdrowienia z Grecji 🇬🇷♥️🇵🇱
Polish is literally one of the hardest languages I have ever tried, it is harder than Russian and on par with Arabic. I am trying hard to learn it, after Russian I will start with Polish.
Imagine a Spanish speaker learning 25 different variants of usted (formal version of you)
@@BroodingEdgelord That would be a hell of achievement. BTW maby ishoud learn Sapnis I like the sound and a melody of a languge. On top of that It is much easier to pronounce spanish words then let say german
Oof, to my native Polish ear your 'ś' and 'sz' comparison sounded as if you said 'sz' twice. And not gonna lie, the hard-coded subtitles were a bit annoying, especially considering the poor translation. Other than that, it was great to see how non-natives might look at my language, and you presented it in a really fun way, kudos :D
Incredible video! As a native Croatian speaker I’m amazed by how similar the grammar is to Croatian. In many cases it’s almost identical, and so many of the quirks and exceptions also apply to Croatian. Grammatically it’s even more similar than Russian I’d say. But phonetically it’s kind of alien because of the extreme palatalization
I think there may be a historical reason for it. Slavic settlement in Alpine region was West Slavic specifically, but West Slavic continuum was broken after Hungarian invasion into Pannonia and German push into modern Austria. So proto-Slovens became isolated from rest of West Slavs, but not complitely isolated from Slavs because of South Slavs. So after 1000 years of isolation Slovenian is no longer classified as West Slavic but as South Slavic. But the all of Western Slavs did not just sit idle and consume South Slavic/Bulgarian influence, but they also exerted their own influence near by. So Serbo-Croation could catch up some Western Slavic characteristics due to Alpine Slavs, which should also be completely absent in Macedonian and Bulgarian. My theory is that if Croatian is more similar to Polish than Russian then Slovenian should be even more similar to West Slavic languages.
@@Hadar1991a couple of my students (we're native Polish speakers) have recently been to Slovenia for holidays, and they said that Slovenian was remarkably similar to Polish, to the point they were able to communicate without using English at all
@@Hadar1991 supposedly, one dialect of Slovenian has retained nasal vowels (like Polish).
@@tomaszgarbino2774eee that's bullshit, I'm Polish and I don't understand Slovene and Serbo-Croatian at all, and Bulgarian and Macedionian even less so. Eastern Slavic tongues are slightly easier to understand to us, Western Slavs but they're still difficult.
There’s a third word for ‘and’ in Polish! It’s ‘oraz’, and it has the exact same function and meaning as ‘i’.
Also the archaic "tudzież". It's often mistakenly thought of as "or" to the point that its meaning has almost shifted
@@bozydarboski9407 Właśnie sprawdziłem "tudzież" to dzisiejsze "oraz" zawsze myślałem, że jest to "albo" / "lub (też)"
@@bozydarboski9407 diki słownik translates it to "as well" 🤔
I'm absolutely impressed how you were able to learn Polish to this level, hats off to you. Even I as a native speaker got a headache watching this, our language is a bit messed up 😂 Awesome video nonetheless. Loved the memes too, they cracked me up.
I want to just point out something about the sentence at 33:23 . To make it more natural you would need to add "to" before or after "jest" . So the sentence would look like: "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo TO jest lepsze dla ich lwów." Or "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo jest TO lepsze dla ich lwów". Don't ask me why exactly as I cannot explain it in linguistic terms, maybe someone smarter will help. Another thing though, I know you used this sentence to show how the words change forms but I'm not sure this structure of the sentence is right for what message you would try to convey in it in real life. It just sounds a bit _weird_ this way. I would for example rather say "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi dla dobra ich lwów" which essentially means "Our friends cleaned the brick door for their lions' good/wellbeing". I hope you understand what I mean, some expressions just don't translate well 1 to 1. Unless I'm taking nonesense, then someone for sure will correct me LOL.
TO serves the role of an object in a second part of the sentence about lions.
..., bo jest lepsze dla ich lwów -> ... because is better for their lions. See the lack of an object here?
I agree with the above comment though, the sentence sounds weird and would not probably be contructed by a natural user that way.
@@WIWLO123 The "to" is the subject and is referencing "the cleaning". Without it the inferred subject is "one" and is referencing "the doors that were cleaned". The first one ("the cleaning") is singular so "jest". The second one ("the doors") is plural so "są" -> "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów".
Jeez, I really and deeply admire you for all the effort taken in order to make this video. Like really, my brain got totally fried despite being a 100% native speaker that uses the language all the time and grew up totally immersed by it. I'm wondering how people manage to learn all of that mess even as children. Though I must admit, this heavily fusional grammar can be quite handy, making the information quite condensed within a single word, and this free word order is surprisingly fun. Overall, one can have quite a lot of fun playing with this ridiculously complex grammar, sometimes even by making mistakes on purpose. By the way, I hope you had a pleasant stay in Poland!
The last sentence "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi bo jest lepsze dla ich lwów". There is a mistake. Actually there are two but one is understandable. It should be "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo są lepsze dla ich lwów".
- jest -> są: The subject of the second part ("bo są lepsze dla ich lwów") is inferred "they" ("one": "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów") and is a reference to those doors. The verb is "to be" ("są"). The noun "drzwi" is plural, "one" is plural so the verb "to be" needs to be plural. There is only one plural present tense form of "to be" and it is "są". The subject and the verb has to agree with respect to number and grammatical gender. If the subject is in its nominative form (almost always) there are no exceptions.
- a comma: In Polish there are very strict rules about placing a comma. In this case it is needed. The rules are base on the function and the structure but are often simplified to "what is connecting the sentences?". In case of "bo" ("because") the comma is always there.
- "ich" cannot be replaced with "swoich" here, both mean "their": The whole thing is a complex sentence that is constructed from two simple sentences. The part "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów" answers the question "why did they do it?". The subject of this sentence is the door. "ich" is in a different sentence than the people who did it. "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi dla swoich lwów" - "Our friends cleaned the brick door for their lions" is a single simple sentence so we use "swoich" because we are referencing the subject and "ich" would be wrong.
Vous êtes l'un des meilleurs youtubeurs linguistiques que j'ai trouvé.
So much respect for you and amount of effort put in this 30 minutes! I'm native and it was fun watching this video. :D I've laughed a few times just realizing how crazy my language is for foreigners. xD
Very thorough and beatiful video❤
To add some interesting info, due to being descended from Proto Indo European, polish has many cognates and （due to European sprachbund) borrowings, like the words mentioned in the video:
widziec -> latin: vidare, english: vision
lubic->german: lieben, english: love
moc->german: mogen, english: may
Grammar is what defines a language family the most, not vocabulary.
English is clearly Indo European...yet grammatically extremely different. The similarity is retained in the vocabulary.
Polish word love - miłość has Slavic origins - very old.... English language has not this Slavic flexibility... When you 10 time repeat it..., you know that.
@@sebastianb9460
What do you mean by flexibility?
@@sebastianb9460 In Bulgarian ''милост'' (milost) is mercy, while in Polish is ''łaska'' and ''ласка'' (laska) is caress. For love we have unique word ''обич'' (obič) which comes from ''обичай'' (običaj) - custom tradition, just like how we also have ''нрави ми се'' (nravi mi se) just like the Russian ''нравится'' (nravitsia).
as a person from Poland I really liked the video, it gives interesting insight into the language even though speak it natively. the part about young people sometimes skipping the ł sound was really good, because I really do that and it's quite common, actually. so I loved it really, although the subtitles are a bit all over the place, (to jest, it is, takes the nominative, so "to jest przegląd języka polskiego"), but I wouldn't change them, since it's not like crucial
damn, I got lost even tho I'm a native Polish speaker 💀
(the best part is even if you say something incorrectly, it's quite likely that someone will correct you)
Small trivia. Polish also has some slight agglutination in some verbs in the past tense. Examples in first person singular masculine:
pisałbym [pi-sał-bym/pisał-bym] ("I would write")
czytałbym ("I would read")
jechałbym ("I would go/ride")
chciałbym ("I would want")
napisałbym ("I would have writen" or "I would have finished writing")
przeczytałbym ("I would have read" or "I would have finished reading")
pojechałbym ("I would have went")
Amazing. You have made a few minor errors in your Polish but on the other hand I have made a few errors just typing this sentence so let's call it even. My hat it off to you sir, hugely impressive language skills.
1:20 The numbers can often vary a lot in this case, from 40 to 60 milion native speakers because it hard to count polish people outside of people (from 5 to 20 million).
2:31 "g" has actually two palatal equivalents (because of two palatalizations) - ż and dz. "k" has cz and c respectively.
8:21 "verb" in this case is actually called "orzeczenie", which refers specifically to inflected verbs.
11:20 you missed an acute. It would be "mężczyźni"
12:06 Not irregular at all! All penultimate "e" and "ie" disappear in conjugations, and with them, soft consonants become hard again.
13:36 Mostly -owi, but many nouns also have -u, like brat -> bratu, pies -> psu etc
15:06 a "cluster" in this environment would be "zbitka". Skupisko means gathering (not only of humans)
15:55 Long forms are used as either first or last word of a sentence. Elsewhere the short form is used.
17:32 Also followed by profession name, like "panie inżynierze" (mr. engineer (?)), "panie nauczycielu". "ksiądz" is a pronoun used to refer to Catholic priests.
20:04 Should be "zgadzają się". "związywać się" means "to bound *self"
18:38 there is also a form dwoje used for: 1.mixed groups, 2. plurale tantum (like dwoje drzwi 'two doors') 😅
the Polish subtitles have multiple issues from the get go. Do you want me to pedantically correct them all here?
EDIT no really, I just resorted to reading English text whenever it appears and ignoring Polish subtitles altogether, they're so bad
I am so incredibly glad I learned all this crap when I was a little child. I learned a few foreign languages in my life and I feel like this one would just brake me if I had to start from scratch.
31:56 there should be a comma before A if youre going to split two clauses.
26:44 actually we translate english "you'll see" more often than not with a perfective form, i. e.: "zobaczysz / zobaczycie" 😅
Yessirr!!! Been waiting for this
Thanks for the video
I now surely think that polish is the hardest slavic language lol
my man you haven't even read/heard czechish
@@netkv
I really did lol
I saw alot of people agree you, but I still believe Polish is harder
@@netkv I have and it's much easier and more regular than Polish.
@@netkvCzech is actually extremely easy in comparison to Polish, Serbian or Russian. Even Slovak is more complex than Czech, but at the same time easier for Poles to understand, less Germanic influences still.
Splendid video! Really happy to learn so much about something so normally casual to me. I have just a few remarks that I managed to contrapt. Polish 'r' is actually a tap not a trill. Second less important one is a very cool feature of the possibility of moving the verb ending from the verb onto a conjunction in the past tense or an adjective in past and present tense:
Wiem, że to widziałeś - I know that you saw it
Wiem, *żeś* to widział
Wiem, że to widzieliście - I know that you (pl) saw it
Wiem, *żeście* to widzieli
Ładna jesteś - you're pretty
*Ładnaś*
Unfortuantely this feature is growing obscure, my guess is that it could be considered archaic or rural.
Another thing is the almost extinct pastperfect:
Past tense: szedłeś
pastperfect: szedłeś *był*
I said almost because (to my understanding) it happens that *one* verb still carries this form as its past tense!:
Powinienem - I should
Powinienem *był* - I should have
This verb is probably one of the most awkward in the whole language since it doesn't have any handy future form and can't even form a normal infintive form:
Robię - robić
Powinienem - *mieć powinność*
Literal, no entiendo por qué acabaste aprendiendo este idioma.
10:23 hej sokoły! 🇵🇱♥️♥️♥️
I do those kinds of example words intentionally, glad you noticed!
@@watchyourlanguage3870 your channel is a hidden gem, I'm really glad I found it
30:49 since the verb kopnac is a perfective verb, you cannot make an active participle, so there is no kopnacy in polish, you should make kopiacy from an imperfective verb kopac 'to dig (with a spade), to kick (with a leg)' 😅
I'm completely lost during the verbs
I swear Polish is a conlang made by a sadist
As a native speaker of Czech, I find the section on phonology (and specifically the historical reasons for the weirder parts of the phonology and orthography) very fascinating! So when I use Czech rules to try pronouncing Polish words and names, I sound like I'm speaking Polish from 500 years ago! I guess Czech phonology is more conservative. We still have Ř, Ó is still a long O sound...
A part I find very interesting is that Czech does have a tandem of O/U (written with ů), but it happened in different environments than the Polish shift (I don't know the specifics of the Czech shift sadly)
@@watchyourlanguage3870 Intersting, what does "tandem" mean in linguistics? I just know ů as "long u". Did it used to be pronounced different from ú?
"Tandem" means they switch based on the environment.
I believe now there's a spelling rule that if long U is at the start of the word, it's ú, but if not, then it's ů. But think about a word like nůž, its genitive form is nože (and all its other case forms have O as well). That's the grammatical role of ů, to my understanding.
Great video! You are very good at explaining complex grammatical details.
I want you to do more videos on that type about other languages. I want to ask you can you do a language overview of Esperanto?
32:52 Weird sentence. Nasi koledzy oczyscili ceglane drzwi (never heard of such doors), bo... TO (it) jest lepsze dla ich lwow. Or: bo tak (=that way) jest LEPIEJ (adv.) dla ich lwow. Why lions? 😅
34:01 no, its not because "it is too ambigous", it is because the possessive adjective appears in another clause (i. e. with a reference to another verb); if you make a simple sentence oczyscili drzwi dla swoich lwow that will mean: they cleaned up the doors for their (own) lions. But if you say: oczyscili drzwi dla ich lwow... Now that is "ambigous"! because you dont know if the door cleaners are the lion owners (probably not) 😂
Yeah I feel like he missed out on our reflexive pronouns, especially since they are quite handy and simple to understand
I’m actually scared, how has polish retained the vocative! 😦
I wanted to insert a long comment complaining about tons of errors in this video, but I accidentally closed the tab.
Damn, so early that the video is too long for anyone to have finished yet
whoo, new videoo!!
0:50 "Cyrylica się wynalazła" means "Cyrillic invented itself". A script cannot invent itself! "Użyją" is the future tense, the present is "używają"!
Jeśli naciągać definicję to możnaby to uznać za stronę pośrednią, coś w rodzaju strony biernej z konstrukcją strony czynnej, np.: "kościół się buduje" jest równoznaczny do "kościół jest budowany". Muszę jednak przyznać, że tamto konkretne zdanie brzmi dość dziwnie
@@bozydarboski9407 Bo obcokrajowcy raczej słabo mówią po polsku, jeśli w Polsce nie przebywają. Powinno być "cyrylica została wynaleziona".
9:36 My Polish teacher always taught me that Singular nouns are divided into Masculine, Feminine and Neuter, but Plural nouns are divided into 2 genders: Masculine and Non-masculine. (Męskoosobowe, Niemęskoosobowe)
Gives Chinese vibes. Middle Chinese had separate coronal stops, affricates, and nasal in plain, retroflexed, palatalized, and both retroflexed and palatalized series. They also give rise to separate sounds in Mandarin that aren't transparent as to their origins.
Goated video
"simply" = "po prostu", while "prosto" means "straight" 😅
While has other context - like during, when... For example when you programming you have while loop - and it is not same like simple.
30:40 "czuty" is possible, but not in use, instead say rather "odczuwany" :)
The cz, sz, rz have stopped being soft at least since 16c. 😅
"rz" is only etymologically a "soft" counterpart to "r". Polish doesn't have a soft "r". Russian, Ukrainian and Bulgarian do.
Error in the Polish subtitles.
Nowoczesny = modern as in a new version of something.
Współczesny = modern as in a time period or current times.
It shouldn't be "nowoczesny polski" but "współczesny polski". You'd describe a new iPhone as "nowoczesny" but not a language.
*współczesny but yes, you're right
@@annafirnen4815
Dziękuję nie wiem dlaczego ale w mojej wymowie jakoś W zanika w S.
@@modmaker7617that's just the tip when it comes to the Polish subtitles in this video
@@modmaker7617To się nazywa uproszczeniem grupy spółgłoskowej. Z jakiegoś powodu u mnie nie występuje.
How in the name of god did you make a native speaker stop understanding my language
10:54 there is a bunch of neuter nouns that end in e with a tail below like "imie," = "a name"; "ciele," = "a calf", and also some loans from latin in -um like muzeum, akwarium (neuter), while album is... masculine! 😅
album kiedyś było ono, jeszcze w Lalce jest w takiej formie. tak samo kiedyś planeta, kometa, satelita były męskie. dziś tylko satelita a i to często już ludzie mówią ta zamiast ten
Żesz. Po polsku nie mówi się "no to chodźmy", raczej "a więc zacznijmy".
Prędzej powiedziałbym właśnie "no to chodźmy" albo nawet "no to jedziemy". "A więc zacznijmy" jest nieco nadęte, jeśli sytuacja nie byłaby stosowna nie użyłbym tego zwrotu
Taka ciekawosta, "żeż" się pisze przez ż, bo powstało jako połączenie "że" + "że", analogicznie do "co" + "że" -> "cóż", "no" + "że" -> "noż" (jak w "noż kurwa")
Hey, a great video. By the way, if you would like to make a video about ukrainian, I could help, as a native, with some stuff
That rough Slavic accent turns me so on.
świętnie.
Love it
Great stuff!! Well done! I have only some questions. You wrote that "on the grass" should be "na trawie", withthe pronuncition of grass being 'travie'. My question is why wouldn't it be 'trafie', since the last obstruent in a word becomes devoiced? Also, shouldn't 'odpowiedź' be voiced as 'otpofieć', since we have a 'w' and because it is an exception the obstruent before it should dictate the voicing rules, meaning it should be devoiced because the obstruent before 'w' is 'p'? Yet, we have both voiceless(t, p and 'ć') and a voiced phoneme(v) in what you wrote. Did I misunderstand something? I'm also learning Polish and I'd like to know more.
The devoicing happens in word-final position. The obstruents mentioned in this comment are all not at the end of the word
@@watchyourlanguage3870 I understood what the problem in my understanding was. Basically the rule applies to consonant clusters and not to the sentence as a whole. Either way, thank you very much for your reply! It helped 😊
@@sledgehog1 ya
24:27 I cant recall if i ever use or see anywhere a frequentive sluchiwac (contrary to widywac), and generally speaking, the frequentatives are not used often nowadays 😢
Sluchiwac not, but przesłuchiwać... - maybe more often :).
16:50 missed oni chan opportunity
🇰🇿🤝🏻🇵🇱
man i love the polish memes in this sprinkled throughout
Polish "acute" when handwritten, should be correctly written in top to bottom direction and almost vertical as opposed to real acute which is bottom left to top right.
Actually there is lud 'folk, nation' - ludy 'nations', comp. ludzie (people) :)
31:58 mozemy zaglosowac NA (not naD 'above, over') ptaki albo NA wEze. (Check out the nasal vowel change)
31:48 On jest najmilsza osoba, jaka znam (= i know = i ever knew in my life); i myself would use ktora znam. Mily = nice (in a sense "polite to me")
1:15 BRAZIL?????? Bruh im Brazilian. Where the hell are these polish speaking hiding?? LOL
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Brazilians - actually it is a thing. Paraná seems to still have a lot of polish descendants
Southern Brazil, especially Parana, but also Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. Brazilian government even repressed Polish immigration into Brazil because they got worried that that Poland may try to annex Parana. There is no evidence on such plans by Poles, but it there where any, Austrian failed painter made sure that Poland would not have the facilities to do so. 😅
Lots of info, even though im Polish, I can learn from it, well summarized.
32:44 Jak O GUBI kreske (imperfect aspect, since you describe a frequentative action (every time), or an action in process (just now))
POLSKA GUROM
Wowowowoowowo
32:42 tak mowicie o czasie (LOC.) w ciagu dnia
31:58 never begin a sentence with a short pronoun form CI "to you", rather right after the first word: moglbym CI dac sok lub / albo winogrona.
Great video!
Has any language regular verb "to be" ?
Not to my knowledge. Hebrew and Arabic come the closest among the languages I know, but both of them don’t use it in the present, which means they’re irregular. If any language does, I would guess it’d be an isolating language with no verb conjugations, but even that I’m unsure of
@@watchyourlanguage3870 Esperanto is completely regular, that's why it's so boooring. But it's obviously not a natural language so maybe not the best example. But I really like artificial languages that are naturalistic, like Quenya.
0:03 to jest przeglad. If you present sth with a phrase "this is, there is" etc. you use simply the nominative, like: This is an apple. To jest jablko.
Ciekawym co wyznacza granicę pomiędzy wykorzystaniem narzędnika a mianownika? Może zwroty osobowe? W końcu powiedzielibyśmy "on jest murarzem" a nie "on jest murarz". Gdybym miał zgadywać powiedziałbym, że w jakiś sposób kluczem jest tu "to", bądź też kontekst, w którym funkcjonuje jako copula:
-kto to?
-murarz
-kim on jest?
-murarzem
Edycja: cha cha, nieuważnie przeczytałem twój komentarz, przecież sam o tym mówisz
The "it's" in "because it's better for their lions" should be rendered as "to", "jest to" or "to jest". "Jest" alone sounds very ungrammatical.
Icelandic Languag Overview Pls!
0:04 nie ma co marnowac czasu na wstep (for introduction)
TAAAKKKKK
34:52 nie dbaja O gramatyke, or nie przejmuja sie gramatyka, nie zwracaja uwagi NA gramatyke :)
I wouldn't really consider "zwierzęta" an irregular noun. All nouns ending in "ę" (in nominative) will decline similarly (e.g. kurczę, cielę).
As for "żółw"... There is a set of nouns Enging in w and b which decline similarly. They're a small leftover from the times when soft labial consonants truly and 100% had soft equivalents (meaning - audible even when then were in the last position in a word). Just look at the inflection of words like jastrząb or Wrocław. It might be interesting for to to look into what happened with those sounds in Polish dialects of Kurpie or Mazury.
drzwi są lepsze not drzwi jest
31:44 podobaL mi SIE ten film (1. Not podobalO, since film is masculine, 2. podobac SIE always with SIE) = I enjoyed the film 😅
będziesz widzieć - (literally) you'll see (like regain your sense or something)
zobaczysz - you'll see/ you'll get it
for god sake pronounce the ł in "mógł" unless you want to sound like a villager
thank you for the video!
Im Polish and this confuses me.
"Drzwi" is plural. Should be "są lepsze".
Co to znaczy wernakularny? 😮
Mówiony
POLSKA BIAŁO-CZERWONI
funny polish memes
Iam the 10,000th subscriber
Massive flex, thanks!!
@@watchyourlanguage3870 your welcome
Swahili! Pls!
you should do hindi !
Dlaczego ja to oglądam?
ż and rz are not the same sound lol
it is
but it wasnt in the past
Terrible... Muestras mi lengua materna como una losa imposible de levantar metiendo en la explicación un montón de errores. Te aconsejo preparar estos materiales junto con un nativo que sepa hablar bien y conozca la teoría (gramática, fonética etc...)
Y por último: polaco no es un idioma difícil. Si tienes ganas de aprender, un buen profe que te lo explique y una actitud positiva y trabajadora en cuestión de semanas vas a ver que todo se puede, ya que se trata de una materia muy lógica y flexible (no como inglés que has de empollar a la memoria porque carece reglas)
Właściwie to jego błędy wynikały głównie z zastosowania zasad tam gdzie powinny być zastosowane wyjątki. Jak na ironię jego błędy, pomijając niektóre niedociągnięcia przy tłumaczeniu, sprawiają, że język może się wydać prostszy niż jest w rzeczywistości. Nie ma też sensu udawać, że polski to język łatwy. Zgadzam się, że zdecydowanie nie jest tak nieosiągalny jak niektórzy stereotypowo go przedstawiają, ale dla wielu osób zdecydowanie będzie stanowić znaczne wyzwanie. I proszę nie zrzędzić na angielski. To elegancki i unikatowy język.
@@bozydarboski9407 Angielski jest trudny. Unikatowy... Może i tak... Mieszanka dwóch gałęzi germańskixh z ogromnym wpływem romańskim. Język "germański" o 60% słownictwa romańskiego. Ale bez gramatyki jka w islandzki ani jak w łacinie... Po prostu przetrwał tak wieki i się dostosował... Nic unikatowego w nim nie widzę... Porównaj go z niemieckim, hiszpańskim i polskim. One są unikatowe. Elegancki... Może dialekty z dworu królewskiego, bo te z Australii, Szkocji czy USA to zdecydowanie bełkot.
@@andelcarmelmuszę przyznać, że nie rozumiem twojego podejścia do unikatowości. Sam właśnie przytoczyłeś jedną z najbardziej nietypowych i złożonych historii jaka spotkały jakikolwiek język w tak krótkim czasie kiedykolwiek, a na porównanie dodałeś języki słynne z tego, że ich rozmówcy są nadal w stanie zrozumieć się nawzajem ze swoimi licznymi sąsiadami. Po prawdzie każdy język jest unikatowy. Nawet na poziomie "dialektalnym", jeśli język różni się choćby tylko paroma słowami i wymową niektórych głosek od swojego sąsiada, już jest unikatowy. Niektóre są po prostu bardziej niezwykłe od innych. Obiektywnie mówiąc polski nadal jest bardzo zbliżony do wszystkich spokrewnionych z nim sąsiadów. Anglik z niemcem czy szwedem się nie dogadają. Polak z czechem, słowakiem, białorusinem, ukraińcem i rosjaninem - ma już większą szansę. Jeśli chodzi o brzmienie to przypuszczam, że to kwestia gustu. Mnie również niektóre akcenty w angielskim nie wpadają do ucha, ale szkocki jak i wybrane amerykańskie bynajmniej do tej grupy nie należą.
@@bozydarboski9407 dobra, niech Ci będzie, jest i unikatowy. Ale jest też nielogiczny, pozbawiony reguł, o ogromnej ilości wyjątków (popatrz chociażby na fonetykę)... Jeśli chodzi o "porozumiewalność"... Po hiszpańsku nie po rozumiesz się we Francji, po rumuńsku w Portugalii, po retoromańsku we Włoszech... A po łacinie ludowej (vulgar latin) w żadnym z tych krajów... A jak sobie porównasz dialekty hiszpańskiego to okaże się, że są one znacznie bardziej do siebie zbliżone niż angielskie. Mimo różnic fonetylycznych i słownikowych. Angielski to taki bełkot (no wiem, hiszpański karaibski trochę też), ale większość dialektów hiszpańskiego jest po prostu ładna, a angielski mniej więcej ładny to ten z dworu królewskiego i trochę hinduski...
@@andelcarmel Nie ma lepszych i gorszych języków. Każde narzecze jest z obiektywnego punktu widzenia równie przydatnym narzędziem komunikacji. Przekonanie o wyższości niektórych języków nad innymi jest wynikiem uprzedzeń, stereotypów związanych z ludźmi którzy się nim posługują i rasistowską retoryką rodem z XIX wieku. Język jeśli już może być nieprzystosowany do wykorzystania w niektórych sferach zawodowych, technologicznych lub kulturowych przez niewprowadzenie do niego odpowiedniego słownictwa. stwierdzenie, że język nie posiada reguł jest z góry błędne i może wynikać tylko z niezrozumienia ich i historii języka. Jeśli chodzi o nieregularności w Angielskim to można je podzielić na dwie grupy: gramatyczne i ortograficzno fonetyczne. Gramatyczne wyjątki w angielskim ograniczają się do czasowników posiłkowych, form przeszłych i imiesłowowych niektórych czasowników (swoją drogą w dużym stopniu pokrywających się z niemieckimi), dosłownie garstki słów z nieregularną liczbą mnogą i kilku dziwactw w słowotwórstwie w większości zapożyczonych. Jeśli chodzi o niesławną ortografię angielskiego to jest ona wypadkową właśnie jego niezwykłej historii i w istocie może stanowić problem uczącym się tego języka. Jeśli mowa o językach romańskich niestety poza pobieżnym poznaniem gramatyki łaciny klasycznej nie miałem z nimi osobiście jeszcze żadnego większego kontaktu. Spotkałem jednak raz pewną włoszkę, która stwierdziła, że rozumie francuski, który brzmi dla niej "śmiesznie". Coś mi to przypomina.. Jeśli chodzi o brzmienie, to tu po prostu nie da się zgodzić, bo jest to w pełni subiektywnie, całkowicie zależne od gustu
as czech, polish to me mostly sounds like funny old czech with simplified grammar and nonsense fricatives, and oh god so much borrowed words (ż being same as rz is unholy)
The same could be said about y being same as i in Czech xd
Though it would have been indeed nicer if we had kept the ř sound, IMHO.
"with simplified grammar" - lol, what? Czech's grammar is more simple and regular, stop being delusional, you'll never be special
Czech has a lot of borrowings too especially young people use a lot words of english orgin. So czech isn't super special. To me Czech always sounds weird! Not cute as some people say, but weird. Especially your placement of accent in words and long vowels (they sound ugly to me). I prefer Slovak language more than Czech but that's my personal opinion.
Please stop bickering. Calling any language out for "sounding funny" without an ounce of wit is inobservant, ignorant, egocentric and simply rude. You think it sounds funny because our languages are close enough to be somewhat intelligible but distant enough to have some major differences.
Hah, and Czech sounds funny to Poles ;)
I cannot get your pronunciation of Ř, it just sounds like a funny R lol
13:37 exceptions for masculine dative: bratu, ojcu, panu, Bogu, diabłu, czartu, księdzu, księciu, chłopu, chłopcu, psu, kotu, lwu, łbu, światu.