"It is not a port, it is a farm."

Translation:To nie jest port, to jest farma.

March 12, 2016

This discussion is locked.


Is the second 'to' really needed?


Yes, it is. Unless you decide to go with 'tylko', which is something similar to 'but', but it's more like... you're correcting someone's claim.


You could also say "To nie jest port, tylko farma". Literally, "it is not a port, rather a farm."


And it is an option worth adding. Which I did.


Can I say something like: To jest nie port, ale farma ?


It is not a port/harbor, it is a farm - To nie jest port, to (jest) gospodarstwo/
To nie port, to gospodarstwo / To nie port, ale/lecz/tylko gospodarstwo


I added "lecz", everything else was already accepted.


I don't understand why it is not correct to write "to nie jest portem to jest farmÄ…"


Let's focus just on the second part: "It is a farm". You cannot use Instrumental in such a sentence. It would be as treating "it" as some kind of a noun, but it's a dummy pronoun. It's a "This is Y" sentence and such sentences use Nominative. Same applies to the first clause, it's just negated.

More info here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/16373167


Why is to required at all? one so often omits the subject pronoun but here , for some reason , it seems to be required


Not when the subject is the dummy pronoun "to" (reminder: a dummy pronoun is used when all of "[this/that/it]" or "[these/those]" (sometimes "they") make sense in English.


I think I understand.


"Gospodarka" for "farm"?


It seems risky to me. I believe it's dated, and I don't see it as a word that denotes a specific place, but rather as the... idea of the land that you own... I'm not sure if that makes sense. It's also mostly used for the economy (not the science that you can study, but 'the Polish economy', for example).

"gospodarstwo" would be fine though.

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