Just to point out, dinner would be 'obiad' which in Poland is eaten quite early as opposed to other countries. We usually eat obiad during the range of hours from 2 - 4 pm. Supper would be 'kolacja' and would be a more lighter meal eaten from about 6/7 pm onwards. There is no word for lunch in polish, instead we just copy it and say lunch.
I'm a native English speaker. Dinner and supper are actually the same meal. Supper is just a less commonly used term. The three main meals we eat are EITHER breakfast, lunch, and dinner OR breakfast, lunch, and supper. Although, when we group them like this, I don't think we ever use the term supper.
However, when my Polish friends come over, they are resistant to calling lunch by the Polish term obiad. They use the English word and call it lunch, because it is so early for them. So, I see your point. However, I do think that, technically, lunch is obiad and dinner kolacja.
Absolutely! The thing is, the names of the meals are associated with the time of the day in English, and with the content (and respect) of the meal in Polish. That is why your Polish friends struggle with calling the lunch "obiad"... Polish "obiad" is just the most substantial and the most important (the whole family gathering) meal of the day.
English speaker would grab a sandwich or soup on the go and call it lunch, but Polish one would consider it just that, a sandwich or soup, without even giving it the name of any meal, god forbid "obiad"... :-) Some would call such lunch just a 2nd breakfast - "drugie śniadanie".
The way you describe it, they're still "lunch" and "dinner" in America, respectively. Between 2:00-4:00 is still lunch, and after 6:00 is dinner. If you're 80 years old, then dinner might be at 4:00. Some people call a late dinner "supper," but it's not common. I guess "brunch" might be "lanć" in Polish, since it falls between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.
"Dinner" is the main meal of the day. Whether that takes place around the middle of the day or in the evening differs between regions of the United States and between regions of the United Kingdom, and also by social class. it tends to be dependent on climate (hotter regions tend to have the main meal in the evening) and social class (if you do heavy manual labour you are more likely to eat a substantial meal at midday) and a host of other factors.
Am I right in thinking that obiad works in the same way, and that kolacje is "the final meal of the day"?
This one confused me because I was tempted to put dinner & tea. Where i'm from North East Uk, We have breakfast (when we wake up), sometimes brunch, Dinner, Tea and then anything after that is supper.
Breakfast = Up to 10am Brunch = 10/11am Dinner = 12/1pm Tea = 4-6:30pm Supper = 7pm onwards
Obviously many people in the uk are different and i think people down south call it lunch and dinner..
While for a language learning course I can understand tea being too confusing to use as a global translation of the evening meal's name I am surprised at how many seem to kick back against it. It is a common term for that meal in Scotland (and elsewhere) even if it isn't the one they use or is used in their region.
Dinner can't be avoided, as it is a much more common word than supper. ;-) Excluding the term brunch, Breakfast is the first meal of the day, lunch the second (or mid-day, if you skipped breakfast), and dinner the third.
As a side note, Brunch is between the breakfast and lunch times of day (the term is literally just squishing the two words into one: BR-eakfast and l-UNCH). This term is slightly more vague. For me, it is only called brunch if it comes between the times of breakfast and lunch AND it is eaten to replace at least breakfast and probably also lunch. For me, it should also be bigger than a normal breakfast to be called brunch. If I simply slept in and ate a late breakfast, it would still be called breakfast--especially if I still planned to eat lunch. That's why I say this term is more vague. It's more open to whatever the speaker thinks of when they think of Brunch.
Przy braku kontekstu oba czasy są poprawne. I am eating to czynność w tej chwili, a I eat to czynność rutynowa, powtarzalna. Czynność ciągła byłaby zdefiniowana przez przysłówek określający chwilę bieżącą, np. teraz = now, w tej chwili = at the moment, a czynność rutynowa przez dodanie częstości, np. zawsze = always, często = often.
If no context is given both tenses are acceptable. I am eating is an action performed at the moment of speaking and I eat is a routine, repetitive action. The continuous one would be determined by an adverb of time, e.g., now, at the moment and the routine one - by adding an adverb of frequency, e.g., always, often.
This is so because the Polish present simple tense I eat = jadam went out of use so there is practically only one tense to express both meanings.