"I do not see this ice cream."

Translation:Nie widzę tych lodów.

July 5, 2016

This discussion is locked.


Why lodów instead of lody?


When a verb requires normally a noun in accusative, it changes to genitive for negative statements. So, while the positive statement would be "widzę lody" ("lody" is accusative here, not nominal), it's "nie widzę lodów" ("lodów" is genitive). But even native speakers often have problems with this rule: https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/szukaj/dope%C5%82niacz%20negacji.html


Native speakers surely use Accusative instead of Genitive a lot, but in such a sentence as this one? I have problems imagining anyone saying "Nie widzę te lody"...


Sure, I don't think anyone would make an error in this case, I was referring to this rule in general.


“Nie widzę tego lodu” – isn't it a possible translation?


Not really. Ice cream is usually plural, although it's possible to use singular "lód" for one ice cream on a stick (lód na patyku), or an ice cream cone (lód w waflu/rożku, rożek lodowy, etc.).

The first meaning of "lód" is simple "ice", not an ice cream. But if you were to interpret it as a singular ice cream, it'd be "loda" (one of the many examples when a masculine word is grammatically treated as animate for no reason). In your sentence, which is perfectly grammatical, you don't see ice.


It just struck me, probably that's why lodówka is called so!


What about zobaczę here?


Here it is widze that is negated not lody. Must one use a genitive instead of a proper accusative whatever is negated in the sentence?


Yes. If you negate a verb that normally takes Accusative, you need Genitive instead.

No other grammatical case changes when negated.


why tych and not ten


Ten is singular nominative/accusative, but lodów is plural genitive. The demonstrative pronoun needs to match the noun.

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