"To jest wasz krab i wasza ryba."

Translation:This is your crab and your fish.

March 27, 2016

This discussion is locked.


Do you always have to reiterate possession when the gender of the noun changes? Could you not say "wasz krab i ryba"?


"Wasz krab i ryba" is understandable, people say this way often, but... to be honest I am not sure whether this form is correct. I've tried to find some professional opinion on the matter, unfortunately I couldn't find anything. I think it's ok to skip the second possessive, unless you say things like "mój ojciec i przyjaciel", because this one my be a little bit confusing - it's hard to say whether you mean your father, who is also your friend, or two different persons. To sum up - for me it's natural to say "wasz krab i ryba" :)


no, your sentence is wrong - in Polish "crab" is masculine noun and "fish" is feminine noun so aright is "wasz krab i wasza ryba"


If i'm not mistaken, this phrase isn't correct. It could be "This is your crab with your fish" or "These ARE your crab and your fish". Am I wrong?


Seems that it's 'technically wrong, but in very common use'... I don't know what to do here. I added the plural version, but I think it would be better to leave the singular as the default, not to confuse people.


Thanks a lot for adding plural


Saying "THESE ARE your crab and fish" is definitely wrong in English. I dont think that even lazy-ish native speakers would say that.

Basically... (assuming that they're both for one person)... we may not necessarily go as far as always saying "this is YOUR crab AND YOUR fish"

But even if we lazily leave out the second 'your' and say "this is your crab and fish" we still wouldn't change the this is to these are.

That is the worse version.

However, coming back to the original question.... Would you say wasz krab i wasza ryba both times if the gender changes? Or would you find another way?

And conversely, if the gender DOESNT change (and we are talking to the same one person).... Would u say "to jest twoja koszula i ryba" or "to jest twoja koszula i twoja ryba" or maybr even "to " ?


I just now tried this in 2 Indian languages to see how we deal with it there, and I just noticed something very peculiar. (I didn't even know we do this haha!!)

Since I can't use Indian vocab here, let's just say 'm' is a masculine noun, and 'f' is a feminine noun.

If we are not gonna use the word my twice (eg. "Where is mój m and moja f?") then we can merge both mys into one (so... "where is my m and f?")

But we can ONLY do it if the first my is feminine.

So "where is moja f and m?" is totally fine, but we cannot say "where is mój m and f?"

Lol. Such weird patterns languages have.

Maybe Polish has a similar pattern? Maybe a native speaker can try some examples out and see if they also find a pattern which they didnt previously realise


For some reason it didn't accept what I put, and yet it is the version given: to jest wasz krab i wasza ryba.


I grew up speaking Polish though I didn't learn grammar. When I read this sentence, I thought it might be a waiter bringing food to the table. The waiter puts a plate of crab for the gentleman and fish for the lady. 'Jest' seems correct in this sentence.


Similar question as below regarding plural: Is it correct in Polish to use jest here before the two nouns?


Why is it nominative (wasza) and not accusative (waszą)?


For two reasons...

1) the object (and by extension its entire phrase- so its adjectives, possessive pronouns etc) will only decline to accusative if there is a verb acting on it which requires the object to be in accusative. There are certain rules of how to work out/learn/memorise which verbs require accusative but there is no such verb in this sentence

2) You may have actually meant to ask why is wasza not in instrumental as the verb byç (jest) does usually require its object to be in instrumental.

However, with być that only happens if both the subject AND object are already defined (so let's say the objects are called X and Y)

X jest Y requires Y to decline to instrumental

To jest Y means we have replaced the X with a dummy pronoun and hence the rule of " 'noun is noun' uses instrumental" doesn't apply here.


Paul jest moim synem

To jest mój syn

Anna jest moją córką

To jest moja córka

Or more relevantly...

Nemo jest waszą rybą

To jest wasza ryba

However, in reply to your actual question, there is no verb here which requires accusative

The only verb in this sentence is być and that generally requires instrumental

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