Pretty much what I was going to ask. Just bumped into the same "wrong" answer as well.
I am just making sure, but saying "Czy to nowe wino?" would have exactly the same meaning, correct? Would the "jest" would be implied in my sentence?
Yes, you are allowed to do that. Or you could use just „to” here.
„To” isn't a true verb. When you use it in the "is" sense, what you in fact do is that you create a verbless sentence with „jest” that is simply assumed to be there.
In this case is 'to' used to mean 'this' not as working with 'jest' or as a replacement for 'jest', to mean 'is,'? We seem to have 2 experts giving opposite interpretations i thought the first explanation but now i'm confused
Mine and br0d4's interpretations are in fact complimentary. When "to" is used in a sentence without a verb, it's just like "to jest" and you can switch between the two. Then the literal meaning of "to/to jest" is simply "this is", but in some English sentences that would sound weird, so it's then translated as "is". When "this is" fits, translate as "this is".
There are also other meanings of "to" that are not used here.
In Polish nouns have gender: masculine (divided into 3 subtypes), feminine or neuter. All other words that go with nouns (adjectives, pronouns, numerals, verbs etc.) have do adjust its declension and conjugation (verbs - except present tense) to the gender of nouns.
English "new" has therefore 3 forms in Polish: "nowy" (masculine), "nowa" (feminine) and "nowe" (neuter).
Almost all nouns that end with vowel -o (and -e, -ę or -um) are neuter, hence "new wine" has to be "nowe wino"
In english you say is this wine new, not is this new wine. Hence my answer is correct
You say it if you know it is wine. That translates to "Czy to wino jest nowe?".
You say it if you know it's wine. That translates to "Czy to wino jest nowe?".