"Your mothers, your fathers"

Translation:Wasze matki, wasi ojcowie

December 15, 2015

This discussion is locked.


"Twoje matki twoi ojcowie" want accepted. Clearly a possibility in this day and age ..


Yeah, me too. Also I didn't even think of that, it should be irrelevant whether it's possible for one person to have two fathers or two mothers. This is linguistics, not.... familology...


Why is it wasze? Why not, "twojej mamy". I remember being told that "Mojej mamy domu" is "My mom's house," so I thought it would be similar.


This is simple Nominative, and there's nothing about possessive. "My mom's house" would be "Dom mojej mamy", but anyway that would need an apostrophe showing possession in the English sentence.

Plandeka's question is based on the fact that the sentence here is clearly a joke on the German TV series about the II World War, "Unsere Mütter, unsere Väter" (Our mothers, our fathers). The series generated much controversy, especially in Poland, but you can read about it yourself, as I don't see the need to start a political/historical debate here, there are many German learners of Polish here (Danke!) ;)


Yeah, German here learning Polish using the English duolingo :D I didn't even know this fact. I just assumed it was a regular example like all the others.


Oh! I was thinking, "Your mother's"! I don't know how I missed that but it made me very confused.


Oh, of course! How did I miss that reference?


When I did this, it only had wasze, and wasi not twoje matki, and twoi ojcowie as options, so when I put that down even though knowing it was incorrect, it came out with the right answer, but I couldn't even select the right one.


The two starred options are "Wasze matki, wasi ojcowie" and "Twoje matki, twoi ojcowie" - but as using singular 'you' is rather an unusual interpretation here, I'll leave plural version as the only starred answer.

I'm really confused as to what you mean... if it had 'wasze' and 'wasi', you can create a correct answer. The best answer, actually.


I understand the above now, but I seem to make the same mistake consistently, thinking that as I am singular, so should be the possession. So am I right in thinking (finally !) that the noun takes the m or f, or sing. and pl., and not the subject? English is so easy...at least, in this instance...


I'd love to try to answer your question, but I really don't understand it :-(


why is "tata" instead of "ojcowie" not accepted?


Mostly because "tata" means "dad", singular.

Technically the plural version of "tata" is "tatowie"... I'm not sure if I have ever heard it in my life. My guess it that at least half of the natives you ask would have problems answering the question "Hey, what is the plural of tata?". In fact it would be safe to say that the plural of "tata" is "ojcowie", because "tatowie" just... isn't really used.


What would be the plurals of "tatuś" and "mamusia"?


Well, Wiktionary says "tatusiowie" (which seems to me to be another unlikely word) and "mamusie".


Again, why doesn't "ojcow" work here? Why must it be "ojcowie?" I feel like I am witnessing a game of calvinball here.


-ów is a genitive plural ending. But since this isn't even a sentence, we use the nominative.



Why "twoje matki, twoi ojcowie" is incorrect?


Because it's really, really rare for a person to have 2+ mothers and 2+ fathers, so we're treating it as a good opportunity to show people that "twoi" and "wasi" don't mean the same.


very rarely but possible, and grammatically correct


That is true, I won't deny it, but I really think it's better to not accept things that are so unlikely, especially that many learners end up thinking that forms of "twój" and "wasz" are exact synonyms. Rejecting one in such exercises as this one may help some people notice that no, they are not synonyms.


I thought the plural forme of matka (mother) was matke? If it's a consonant it gets a -y (most of the times), and if it's an 'o' it gets a -a. I thought anything singular ending with an 'a' gets an -e when it becomes plural.


Plural words often always end with an -i in Polish (matki, dzieci, gruszki, sukienki etc), except for certain special words, mostly neutral, : jabłka, okien, psy, koty etc...


how about ' wasze mamy, wasi tatowie ' ??


Congratulations, you just used a word that I have never heard in my life, yet your answer is correct :D Added now.

But seriously, my guess is that half of the Polish people you'd suddenly ask "what is the plural of the word tata" would not know the answer or at least have to wonder for a longer moment. Technically the plural of "tata" is "tatowie", but in reality "ojcowie" is almost always used.


"Twoje matki, wasi ojcowie" is still technically correct, right? It came out as wrong on my side.


Technically yes, but I'm not sure if we should accept this, it would need some very specific context and maybe even pointing at different people... "twoje matki (looks at Adam), wasi ojcowie (looks at Ania and Kasia)".


I think one should not ignore same-sex-parents...


I'm not saying that the problem is that in this phrase we end up with same-sex parents. We actually accept "Twoje matki, twoi ojcowie" which suggests that one person has at least four parents!

I'm saying that in writing, this (mixing "twoje" and "wasi", so changing the meaning of 'you') is a very unusual phrasing and probably would need to be something like "Twoje matki, Adamie, i wasi ojcowie, Aniu i Kasiu..." to make it understandable.


Earlier in this unit fathers came up as ojcieci but now fathers has confusedly changed to ojcowie. What's the difference, please?


Which is strange, because "ojcieci" doesn't seem to be a word, and I don't see it in the course database.

Can you tell me where you found "ojcieci"?


Sorry, I can't find it. I might even have mistaken it for ojciec as the spelling for father singular. I notice that word for fathers or ojiecow seems to be an unpredictable spelling.


Fair enough! If you're interested in the full declension, you can find it here: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ojciec#Declension

BTW: *ojcowie


None-masculine personal nouns are supposed always to add an e, not an i in the plural nominative or so I have read


I've deleted your other comment because, well, one is enough. No need to repeat yourself.

You must have misremembered something. There is no such rule.



Sorry about that. I've been looking for that rule just now and annoyingly I can't find it or remember which book I got it out of , probably wrongly. It would have been great if there was just one letter always to add on but if I am correct, my new finding , alas, is a choice of four ( y, i , e or a ) and that's if they're only in simple nominative or accusative cases. The plurals are a nightmare.


Perhaps you were thinking of adjectives (as in the table halfway down this page: https://www.clozemaster.com/blog/polish-adjectives/


Has there ever been a request to provide all possible right answers when you get a question incorrect?


Some sentences have hundreds of thousands of accepted answers. Seriously. I'm afraid that such a request isn't something likely...

In the database they are put in a much shorter way, e.g. "Your [mothers/moms], your [fathers/dads]", so listing those could be technically possible, but I still would be surprised if the company agreed to that and used the engineers' time for such a feature.


Why not "twoje matki wasi ojcowie?" What if i am addressing two peoole in the conversation?


That undergoes the 'not completely impossible, but really unlikely' category. OK, if you say that out loud, if you're facing the people - maybe. "Your mothers (looks at John), your fathers (looks at Ben and Sue)". But in writing? Nothing suggests that the first "your" means something else than the second one, and I don't think that accepting such answers is the best idea.

Learn Polish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.