"The crab is an animal."

Translation:Krab jest zwierzęciem.

August 26, 2016

This discussion is locked.


can someone clear up for me when to use to and not jest


Both are perfectly fine here: Krab to zwierzę or Krab jest zwierzęciem.

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


"To krab jest zwierzęciem", was my answer. As I thought adding the "to" to the beginning would indicate this crab in particular...


Do not discard your sentence yet. Incidentally, it is correct, but not here. It is the little "to", which gives the sentence a totally different meaning: "To krab" means "It is the crab which...", so "to" doesn't define the crab, but indicates the crab and distinguishes it from the crowd:

To krab jest zwierzęciem - It is the crab, which is an animal (others are not)


I did the same thing, thinking "to krab" would be like "the crab". I guess not.


Wrong, because each gender has its own "the/this/that" word.

"Ten krab" (masculine)

"Ta kobieta" (feminine)

"To dziecko" (neuter)


Once I got further into the lessons - I understood there is a difference.


why not zwierzem? why zwierzeciem?


The Instrumental form of "zwierzę" is "zwierzęciem".

The word "zwierz" exists and its Instrumental would indeed be "zwierzem", but that's a rather dated, a bit poetic (?) word and usually denotes some large, wild animal.


I dont get this, krab to zwierze or krab jest zwierze, whats the difference


Whatever is after "to" - doesn't change. After "jest" - nouns change. A correct sentence with it is "Krab jest zwierzęciem".

This is called the instrumental case. Masculine and neuter words end with -em, feminine with -ą (including all a-ending masculine nouns such as mężczyzna).


Why is 'Krab jest zwierzeciem' wrong?


Apart from the lack of a special character (zwierzeciem -> zwierzęciem), which is accepted anyway, everything here looks fine. The answer should have been accepted.


I wrote this answer and it was rejected


The click options doesn't offer "jest" as an option, only "to"


Doesn't seem to be any problem, since you can create a correct answer. "Krab to zwierzę".


What's the difference between using zwierzę and zwierzęciem?


One is Nominative (and Accusative as well), the other is Instrumental.

For example, this sentence could be translated with two versions: "Krab to zwierzę" and "Krab jest zwierzęciem".


Is there a difference on how both would be perceived, or is it just preference on which is used, in this case?


My personal view is that "Krab to zwierzę" is more like "A crab = an animal" and "Krab jest zwierzęciem" is more... descriptive. In most cases the Instrumental form sounds superior to me, although a moment ago I was commenting on "This animal is a tiger" and I'd use "To zwierzę to tygrys" there... because "This animal = a tiger" makes more sense there.


Why doesn't it accept zwierzęciem on the fill-in-the-blank? Is this an error? It seems to only accept "Krab to zwierzę".


If you have one blank and the first two words are "Krab to", then "zwierzęciem" would be wrong.

The two correct variants here are "Krab to zwierzę" ('to' + Nominative) and "Krab jest zwierzęciem" ('jest' + Instrumental).


I went for just "Krab jest zwierzem". Why do we have to have the more complicated "Krab jest zwierzeciem"?. The longer word is harder to remember.


Because that's a different word (=beast). The instrumental case of zwierzę (=animal) is zwierzęciem.


Yes, my Collins dictionary confirms the instrumental case of zwierze (animal) is zwierzeciem but I don't understand why this word has to have such a long ending (of ciem) compared with most other instrumental endings having shorter ones such as just em.


I don't quite follow you. The Berlitz polish dictionary has beast as zwierze, which is the SAME word as for an animal. It would be quite easy to give the instrumental ending as zwierzem. The e is already there. The word just needs an m. The ciem ending seems peculiar and unlike other instrumental endings.I hope I am making myself clear.

  • 2464

The form "zwierzem" is already a thing in Polish, it is Instrumental of "zwierz" http://sgjp.pl/leksemy/#5085/zwierz - an archaic form of "zwierzę".

EDIT: if you meant "zwierzęm" - then nope, the ending -ęm does not exist in Polish grammar, you need to deal with it.


Take another look at your dictionary and you will see that there's an ę at the end, which is an entirely different letter from e. And -ęm is not a valid instrumental ending, therefore you can't just add an -m.

The word actually contains an -ęt in its stem (with /ci/ being the softened conterpart of /t/), so the declension is completely regular apart from one form, which is "zwierzę". The /t/ just gets omitted here.



Thanks for your reply. The occasional squiggle under the e is not very conspicuous and easy to miss. I've also since found someting in tips advising zwierze is an exception to grammar rules.

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