"Mam rybę."

Translation:I have a fish.

December 16, 2015

35 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/MixMasterTate

What is the difference between "rybę" and "ryba"?

December 16, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/gabe81
  • 1631

It's different case: ryba is nominative ('To jest ryba'), rybę is accusative ('Mam/widzę rybę')

December 16, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/bekind22

yes, Same as ParGrain asked. CAn you please explain a little more about how to know which word of fish in Polish to choose? Can you give examples of how fish would be nominative vs accusative in an English sentence? Thanks.

December 19, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/mic000

In order to give a more grammatical explanation for the examples of mati2065: Nominative is used for the subject of the sentence, i.e. when the fish does something or is described. On the other hand, when the fish is the direct object of the sentence, thus when someone does something to the fish directly, you use accusative.

December 21, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/mati2065

It was mentioned some lessons before - you can use nominative with verbs like "być" (to be) or "zostać" (to become). We are using accusative in Polish with verbs like "mieć" (to have), "lubić" (to like), "jeść" (to eat). The noun in accusative somehow describes/explain/reveal what you have/like/eat etc. Sorry for my English, I hope it helps you ;)

December 19, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/bekind22

dziękuję

December 20, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/ParGrain

What is the difference in nominative and accusative in english?

December 19, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/Sean_Roy

Nominative is used for the subject of a sentence; accusative is used for the direct object.

January 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/tu.8zPhLD72zzoZN

Nominative is also used for the predicate nominative which refers back to the subject after the verb "to be" or "to become". I am a student. I = student (same person)

March 10, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Kelirya

I know it is random, and maybe you already know it, but your surname would be spelt "Światkowski" in Poland :)

January 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Ward.Joshua

We can still see the old English case system in the pronouns. I (nom) - me (acc). He (nom) - him (acc). She - her. We - us.

I love him. She loves me. He has her. We have her.

May 14, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/PuertoRico_7213

I starting to get this

December 20, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/RedViperMartell

So Polish treats the object being possessed for "has" as a direct object? Weird. I took Latin back in the day and it just conjugated those as nominative.

December 27, 2015

https://www.duolingo.com/tu.8zPhLD72zzoZN

I also took Latin. Perhaps you need to brush up on your Latin. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Latin/Lesson_2#Case

http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookdown.pl?possess Bonum animum habere (to be of good courage) actually translates to "To have good courage" If you look carefully, courage is in Accusative case.

The nouns that come after the verb "to be" or "to become" are the ones that stay in the Nominative case because they refer back to the subject. In "I am a student.", I = student (same person).

In "I have a cat.", cat is the direct object which would be in Accusative case.

Now if you were to say "The student's cat is a small animal." "Student" would be in Genitive case, "cat" would be in Nominative case and "animal" would be in Nominative case.

March 10, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/LivingLifeform

The word "I've" in English normally isn't used in a possessive scentence unless it's with "I've got"

January 22, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/tu.8zPhLD72zzoZN

Yes, I think that the Duolingo program recognizes "I've" as also meaning "I have", but they have not programmed it to understand that this form is only used when "have" is an auxiliary or helping verb. This exists for all the languages, translating to or from English. The program would have to see if another verb were coming after it before allowing the contraction, but programming can be rather long and I don't see this being resolved too soon.

March 10, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

"I've got" is a colloquialism and grammatically incorrect. First of all got is past tense for a non-existent present tense word, or slang for "had". The present participle would be "have gotten." That's for what "I've got" is shorthand. Bad bad English

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Sean_Roy

I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. "Got" is both the simple past for the verb "to get," and can also be used as the past participle, although its use in this manner is chiefly used in the U.K. In America, we say, "I get, I got, I have gotten," while in London one often says, "I get, I got, I have got OR I have gotten." Its usage is standard, not colloquial or incorrect.

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/wendy682404

In London? The rest of the country speaks British English too you know. We never say gotten in British English, it's an Americanism.

May 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

It's wrong anyway, Americanism or not. Badok Ladoh? What the hell is that? If you can't read Russian, don't write gibberish in English.

May 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/wendy682404

Because i don't speak russian you feel you can insult me? How about a true British phrase for you? Go and ❤❤❤❤ yourself you stupid twat.

May 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

You're right. "Got" is past tense of "to get." I stand corrected--with exception. "Have got" is purely colloquial, even in London. It's shorthand for the present participle "have gotten." It's grammatically incorrect. It would be like saying "I have ate," is correct. It isn't. "I have eaten," is grammatically correct. What tense is "have got"? Present? No. "I have," or "I get," is present. Present participle? No. "I have gotten," is present participle. Past tense? No. "I got," is past. Past participle? No. "I had gotten," is past participle. "Have got" may not be wrong in colloquial speech, but it is GRAMMATICALLY non-existent.

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Sean_Roy

Hi va-diim,

Actually, "have got" is correct. It's the present perfect simple tense. (See https://www.ego4u.com/en/cram-up/grammar/present-perfect-simple). Also, either "got" or "gotten" is an acceptable past participle of "to get." Please see: https://www.google.com/search?q=past+participle+of+get&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8. Saying "I have got" is not the equivalent of "I have ate," which is clearly wrong.

And finally, here's a useful article on the usage of this phrase specifically: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-have-got-acceptable-english. Notice that the author says, "[A]ll four sources I consulted about the 'have got' issue agree that this phrase is, in fact, good English."

I think we've got it right! ;-)

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Sean_Roy

Sorry, but I did read them.

The first link was posted merely to answer your question as to what tense it was. I am aware that it doesn't mention the phrase we had been discussing.

The second link is nothing more than a Google search for the parts of speech of "to get." It shows the simple past, "got," as well as the past participle, "got" OR "gotten."

The third link describes the phrase in detail. The article states, that, yes, in a particular usage of the phrase "have got," namely, related to obligation, it is a colloquialism. That is pointed out in the last paragraph of the article.

So that others may read the article conveniently for themselves, if they so desire, I'll simply cut and paste it below, and let others glean from it whether it's "grammatically incorrect," as you say, or not.

My reason for responding is not to pick a fight with you. It's simply so that all of us can study the issue and get the correct answer, as there are many people from all over the world on this forum, and many of them are rightfully curious about what is and what's not correct in English. I'm not saying I know it all, but I think it's not right to make blanket statements saying something is incorrect when it is, in fact, correct.

Best wishes to you.


Is "Have Got" Acceptable English?

Today’s topic is whether the phrase “have got” is good English or not.

And now, Bonnie Trenga (author of this week's show) answers an e-mail from a listener, Lee, who says, “A pet peeve of mine is the frequent use of the ‘have got’ phrase, such as ‘I have got a [something or other]’ or ‘I’ve got a [something or other],’ when ‘I have a [something or other]’ is completely sufficient.”

We all have phrases that bother us. I hate it when I see “It was a chill night” instead of “It was a chilly night.” Alas, I get all bent out of shape for no reason. Much as I dislike “chill” instead of “chilly,” there’s nothing wrong with it. Likewise, all four sources I consulted about the “have got” issue agree that this phrase is, in fact, good English.

Added Emphasis

The phrases “has got” and “have got” are somewhat informal and are often contracted, as in “He’s got” and “They’ve got.” Although this expression has long been criticized as an unnecessary substitution for the verb “to have,” it is perfectly idiomatic. It simply adds emphasis (1). In American English, “have got” is an intensive form of “have” (2). For example, if I say, “I’ve got a really big TV,” I’m placing more emphasis on my possession of the TV than if I say, “I have a really big TV.” If you say you haven’t got any money, you’re stressing the fact that you’re broke. Note that you can use “has got” or “have got” only in the present tense. If you want to talk in the past tense about your enormous TV, you would say, “I had a really big TV.” You would probably use expressive intonation to add emphasis.

American English Versus British English

How often you use “have got” instead of “have” depends on where you’re from. In American speech, “the form without ‘got’ is used more than in the UK” (3), so in other words, Americans tend to say, “have” and the British tend to say, “have got.” For example, according to The New Fowler's Modern English Usage*, in Britain, you’re more likely to hear the question “Have you got this book in stock?” whereas in America, “Do you have this book in stock?” would be more common (4). As I’ve said, it’s perfectly fine to say, “have got” if you’re in America, though it is less formal than plain old “have.” Even less formal than “have got”—and probably considered objectionable by most grammarians—is simply “got” by itself. You might have heard of the Spike Lee movie “He Got Game.” I don’t think Spike considered calling it “He Has Game.” “He got” is a very colloquial way of saying, “he has.” Obligation

“Have got” also has another meaning: to indicate necessity or obligation. Saying, “have got” is a little stronger than saying, “must” (5). So if I’m running late, I might tell my friend, “I have got to go now,” with the emphasis on the word “got.” And my friend might tell me, “You have got to stop being late so often.” When we’re speaking to friends, we might leave out the “have,” as in “I got to go now.” We might even say, “I gotta go now.” These two are considered colloquial English. You shouldn’t write these two sentences in a formal English essay. You can use “must” or “have to” instead.

References

<pre>Garner, B. Garner's Modern English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003, pp. 381-82. American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005, p. 208. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences. Accessed June 26, 2008. Burchfield, R. W, ed. The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage. Third edition. New York: Oxford, 1996, p. 352. American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005, p. 216. </pre>
March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

I love when people post weblink sources that they don't read themselves hahaha! The first link you cited has no mention of "have got" whatsoever! The second link has this, which proves my point:

"In informal contexts, many speakers use have got, 've got, or simply got to mean "have" or "must." You SHOULD AVOID this usage of the verb get in your writing; instead, use have or must.

WEAK:

We have got several problems on our hands. IMPROVED:

We have several problems on our hands. UNACCEPTABLE:

We got several problems on our hands. ACCEPTABLE:

We have several problems on our hands.

WEAK:

We've got to find a solution to our problems. IMPROVED:

We must find a solution to our problems."

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

In your third web link, it says:

"Although this expression has long been criticized as an unnecessary substitution for the verb “to have,” it is perfectly IDIOMATIC. It simply adds emphasis."

An idiom is something that doesn't literally mean what it says. So "have got" like I said, is a colloquialism. It's an improper tense that is to be avoided, according to your own post.

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/wendy682404

I could reply directly to Badok Ladoh - I got is not acceptable English. I don't care what your grammatical argument is. English is a living language and native speakers say I have or I have got.

May 4, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

This argument is moot. I was saying from the beginning that it's a colloquialism! We agree! And your own citations confirm that it's idiomatic. "I feel under the weather," is also an idiom! It's OK to say it, but it's not grammatically correct to "feel under, over, or next to" anything! This argument doesn't change the fact that it's not GRAMMATICALLY proper. Hear me now: IT IS PERFECTLY OKAY TO SAY "HAVE GOT" IN ENGLISH. It is just "weak" English.

March 29, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/fdabl

Why is "I am having fish" not marked as correct?

October 18, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/va-diim

"I am having fish," in English means that I am eating or will eat fish. In Polish, Mam rybę means literally that I have a fish in my possession. Literally, "I have a fish."

October 18, 2016

https://www.duolingo.com/Truskaweczqa

nie rozumiecie polskiego a przecież to mój język ojczysty :( czemu... to prościzna np : dziadek, dżokej, herbata itd. itp.

March 29, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/smeagle2222

shouldnt i have fish be accepted?

May 23, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/Jellei

No, because that would mean that these are plural fish. There was just one fish in Polish.

May 23, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/AlisonEtte

So, if you're having fish for supper, say, a few filets, would it be singular or plural? You might not know if it's from one fish or two because you bought it at the store, let's say.

July 19, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/Jellei

I'd treat it as a mass noun and just say "Jem rybę". Like, treating it more as 'fish meat' than 'fish as an animal'.

July 19, 2017
Learn Polish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.