"Chodzicie do szkoły."
Translation:You go to school.
32 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Because Verbs of Motion are more complicated. Until now, every Polish verb could be translated either as Present Simple or Present Continuous, but not now. So, as I wrote above:
Generally, 'chodzić' takes Present Simple: to go (on foot), to walk; and 'iść' takes Present Continuous: to be going (on foot), to be walking. Also 'to be walking' without any direction and destination is "chodzić" as well.
But the school context messes with it, because "you are going to school" can be understood as "you attend school", "you are a pupil", so yeah, it has to be accepted. But generally, there's an important difference between to go and to be going.
Still, "you are walking to school" really has to be "chodzisz".
Why is it given in the hover words as an option? I have the same question, my answer was not accepted. The one given was "You go to school".
Chodzić is a so-called indeterminate verb of motion. Those have two meanings:
1) Habitual action 2) General action, but with no direction or purpose
'Chodzicie' can therefore mean either 1) 'you go/walk' or 2) 'you (are) walk(ing)' around.
The preposition 'do' makes interpretation 2) impossible. And the hints can't see in what context the word is placed, and frankly, they shouldn't.
Yes it is wrong, it is this thing about polish verbs of motion. we have pairs like chodzić/iść where one is best translated as "is going" and other as "go"
(Ja) idę = I am going/walking - right now or in the certain future
(ja ) chodzę = I go /walk. - usually, every day, frequently
I don't understand why you're being downvoted for asking a question. Keep asking questions buckaroo :>
To understand how Polish people use chodzic and isc is tricky for me.
Let's say chodzic is present simple and means to go (on foot ) or to walk. Then can the above also be translated as you (collective you) walk to school? Does it ever mean you attend school? I assume not.
In English present simple I would tend to use go to school to mean attend school and if there is some means of travelling to school then I would use walk, cycle , go by car, go by train and the "go to" school left for the meaning of attending school. In English Present Continuous I would use I am going to school to describe intent or purpose of leaving where I am to travel ( by any means ) to somewhere else. If I wanted to be more clear I would explain how I might travel (that would require additional words: going by car, going by train) if in the context it seemed helpful and relevant to do so. Of course I guess it could also mean I am attending school. So all these possibilities must be tricky to translate. What hurts my brain is that so far I have learned (assimilated) that isc means both going to school and walking to school? Does isc include other modes of travel? For instance cycling to school?
The verb "chodzić", in contrast to "iść", refers to the repetitive activity. It
might have two meanings, "to attend (to go)" or "to walk" (to go on foot).
Chodzicie do szkoły - You (plural) go to school/You attend school/ You
are going to school (progressive aspect of the verb describes the process
of going to school or attending school, not the present moment)
Chodzicie do szkoły - You go to school (the meaning depends on the context)
Chodzicie do szkoły na piechotę - You walk to school (very clear meaning)
The verb "iść" also has two meanings, one referring to the intention of doing something, the other referring to just one episode of walking (going on foot):
Dzisiaj idziecie do szkoły - You are going to school today (no excuse)/You
are walking to school today (because the public transportation is on strike)
When talking about the way of getting there other than walking, the verb "jeździć" (multiple times) or "jechać" (once) has to be used:
(Zwykle) Jeździcie do szkoły autobusem - (Usually) You go to school by bus
(Dziś) Jedziecie do szkoły autobusem - You are going to school by bus (today)
No more confusion:
(Często) Chodzicie po mieście/po parku - You (often) walk around the city/
the park/You are walking around the city/the park (today, now, as we speak)
(Since "walking around" involves walking from place to place (very repetitive activity), the verb "chodzicie" is used here)
(Dziś/Jutro) Idę do szkoły - I am going to school (today/tomorrow)
(Dziś/Jutro) Idę do szkoły na piechotę/pieszo - I am going to school on foot/
I am walking to school (today/tomorrow)
(Dziś/Jutro) Jadę do szkoły - I am going to school (by any means but walking)
(Teraz/Dziś/Jutro)) Jadę do szkoły autobusem - I am going to school by bus (now/today/tomorrow)
(Zazwyczaj) Jeżdżę do szkoły autobusem - I (usually) go to school by bus
it is accepted answer because some dialects of English use it to mean "wy". But it should not show up as a translation, unless you wrote it this way.
Oversight, added now.
The school context is problematic. Generally, 'chodzić' takes Present Simple: to go (on foot), to walk; and 'iść' takes Present Continuous: to be going (on foot), to be walking. Also 'to be walking' without any direction and destination is "chodzić" as well.
School messes with it, because "you are going to school" can be understood as "you attend school", "you are a pupil", so yeah, it has to be accepted. But generally, there's an important difference between to go and to be going.
Why not "You are walking to school?" The tips for this lesson are very confusing.
I really hoped I made them clear... :( Perhaps this will be clearer? https://www.clozemaster.com/blog/polish-verbs-of-motion/
"chodzicie" in almost any context (unless it's 'walking around') a thing that happens 'generally', 'habitually', and therefore requires a Present Simple translation.
"You are walking to school" happens right now, or expresses a plan (You're walking to school tomorrow!), and that is "Idziecie do szkoły".
That doesn't work because it's an imperative form (giving an order or command) whereas the original Polish is just a statement of fact.
As the imperative form implies "Go to school, right now!" it would probably use a different verb and would likely be "Idź" or "Idźcie" :)
This is inconsistent. The previous question was Do you go to school? Which i translated 'Czy chodzisz do szkoły' which was wrong, answer being 'Chodzicie do szkoły'. This question was 'Chodzicie to szkoły' Which i translated to 'Do you go to school' Which is wrong. Difference being the missing question mark. But its the same sentence, how verbally do you know its a question or a statement when you use this sentence.
In the previous question, your answer was correct. So if it was rejected, unless there was a bug (unlikely, but possible), you probably made some typo and didn't notice. And then the correction, unfortunately, is not necessarily the closest correct answer to what you tried to answer. Which is obviously confusing.
In this sentence... well, there's no question mark in the Polish sentence, so you can't start the translation with "Do you" in English.
In Polish, it is enough to just change a dot to a question mark and this already changes a statement into a question. You can use "czy", like you did in the previous exercise, but it's not obligatory.
I tried "do you go to school", because sometimes I see the "do" word (czy) being omitted. Like in "jesz jabłko". However, it came out as an error. Can someone please explain why?
Simply because there is no suggestion that this is a question; as well as there being no "czy", there is also, more importantly, no "?").
Huh.. So I'd written "chodźcie do szkoły" due to my phone's autocorrect suggesting it over "chodzicie" (it was accepted, but corrected as a typo). I know ź represents "zi", so whats the actual difference? Is "chodźcie" just a homophone, and a different word entirely? Or does it represent an alternate context/grammar?
It's another correct form. It sounds close, but in "chodź-cie" you pronounce dź-ć sounds as close to each other as possible, and "chodzi-cie" have a clear "dzi", you can hear the 'i' part.
"Chodźcie" is 2nd person plural imperative form, which in theory should mean "Go to school, you guys!", but for that particular verb, imperative forms of "chodzić" do suggest that the speaker should also go. So "Chodźcie do szkoły" is more like "Let's go to school (you guys and me)".
Oh, interesting! I have a book on the basics of Polish and it states that "zi/ci/si/ni/rz" are the "same" as "ź/ć/ś/ń/ż", and that it was more of a spelling difference rather than a pronunciation one. This is good to know! Thank you for taking the time to explain, and I appreciate all the help you've given others on these forums as well! I often find my questions already answered thanks to you. You rock dude!!
I think that's what we learn at school as well, but frankly, that just works if you say them in isolation, if you just try to say "ź" and than "zi" out loud. Or if they're before a vowel.
If it was really always true, then there wouldn't be a difference between "koń" (Nominative singular) and "koni" (Genitive plural), but there is one and it's an obvious one. I always say that I'm bad at phonetics, but I think we could simplify it and say that "ni" is more like "ńi" when it's at the end of the word or before a consonant. If it's before a vowel, I guess "nie" and "ńe" would sound the same indeed. Same will apply to other pairs.
Thank you for your kind words, it's nice to be appreciated :)
Oh, I think I get it now! It seems like the difference between "koń" and "koni" is that the latter stretches the "i" sound out, where the former ends more abruptly. I suppose the closest similarity we have in English would be something like the contraction "it's," yeah? Where "it is" is a different pronunciation, has an extra syllable, and, technically, is typically used in a different context than "it's." Like, you can say "it is a car" or "it's a car," but if someone asked "is it a car?", you couldn't respond with "it's." You'd have to say "it is," because the former is awkward at best. Would you say the difference between koń and koni, or chodźcie and chodzicie would be along a similar line?
I'm not sure, the English difference seems bigger to me... but if it helps you understand that, then why not? :D
the difference between "koń" and "koni" is that the latter stretches the "i" sound out, where the former ends more abruptly
I definitely do agree with this one.