So explain why "jest" is not used here. Can you say " Zupa jest smaczne jedzenie"?
Zupa to smaczne jedzenie = Zupa to (jest) smaczne jedzenie [ "jest" is understood] = Zupa jest smacznym jedzeniem. I'll let someone who knows Polish grammar explain that.
That explains it. Using "jest" triggers the instrumental case, whereas "to" without (jest) would not.
Don't mind this post. I just need a way to find this useful thread later.
Same... the translation under to also says "this is" and if jest is implied couldn't this also mean "this soup is tasty food"?
jenretten, that is what i thought too. i looked back at the tips and hints and see the "to + (adj?) noun" construction which might help.
Yes after redoing a few more lessons I think I understand... hopefully!
"To" here is the verb and you would have to add the correct demonstrative pronoun for the sentence I wanted to say, but I was thinking zupa was neuter to use "to" instead of "ta". So the correct version of my sentence would be either of these?
Ta zupa jest smacznym jedzeniem = this soup is tasty food (jest requires instrumental endings) or Ta zupa to smaczne jedzenie = this soup is tasty food (to requires nominative endings)
thanks. and how do you determine the masc. and femin. of the different types of food
Most masculine nouns end with a consonant.
Most feminine nouns end with -a.
Neuter nouns end with -o, -ę or -um.
I'm talking about the basic, Nominative forms, of course.