Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / Language  % width 25

Dostał buta - genitive / accusative


Derevon 12 | 172  
1 Dec 2009 /  #1
Why is it supposed to be "buta" (genitive) and not "but" (accusative) here?
Ksysia 25 | 430  
1 Dec 2009 /  #2
It's a deliberate misuse of grammar, just for fun. The same way as we misuse the Vocative - I can say 'Lechu przyszedł', but correctly it would be 'Lech przyszedł'. Lechu is only correct when I'm calling someone over, and the misuse is purely ludic.
OP Derevon 12 | 172  
1 Dec 2009 /  #3
"dostał but" hardly gives a single hit in Google whereas "dostał buta" results in rather many hits. *Sigh* Isn't Polish hard enough already without random discrepancies like these? ;)

Perhaps one day I will understand why you say "Lubię tego batona" and not "ten baton"... Somehow I doubt it. ;)
frd 7 | 1,399  
1 Dec 2009 /  #4
Beside "Dostał buta" has got another meaning of its own. It means "he got kicked (out)", "he got fired"
Ziemowit 12 | 3,612  
2 Dec 2009 /  #5
Perhaps one day I will understand why you say "Lubię tego batona" and not "ten baton"... Somehow I doubt it. ;)

I try to find an explanation for it. A vague (and not necessarily accurate one) could be that non-personal masculine nouns/objects used by the humans for consuming take the same ending in the accusative as personal masculine nouns (hypothesis to be challenged).

Lubię tego batona, palę papierosa, jem pomidora, kalafiora, buraka (but: jem chleb, not: jem chleba, but: chleba naszego powszedniego daj nam dzisiaj).
SzwedwPolsce 11 | 1,595  
2 Dec 2009 /  #6
A vague (and not necessarily accurate one) could be that non-personal masculine nouns/objects used by the humans for consuming take the same ending in the accusative as personal masculine nouns (hypothesis to be challenged).

There are many exceptions when inanimate masculine nouns act as animate in the acc. case, but they seem to occur pretty randomly.

We should remember that in all languages there are exceptions to (almost) all grammatical rules, that don't have any obvious reason.
jump_bunny 5 | 237  
2 Dec 2009 /  #7
Dostać z buta might also mean to be physically assaulted. (As a colloquialism).
peter_olsztyn 6 | 1,098  
2 Dec 2009 /  #8
"dostał but" hardly gives a single hit in Google whereas "dostał buta" results in rather many hits.

buta is often used in another meaning:

Po wizycie u mechanika samochód dostał buta.
Marek dał buta z pracy już o 13oo.
Pokłócił się z dziewczyną i dostał buta.
Dostał buta na twarz.
Dostał buta na klate.

ale

Jurek dostał buty (two, pair) od wujka z Ameryki
OP Derevon 12 | 172  
2 Dec 2009 /  #9
but: jem chleb, not: jem chleba, but: chleba naszego powszedniego daj nam dzisiaj.

Strange, but I never reflected over why it's "chleba" in the Lord's prayer before. Is this "discrepancy" some historical relic, or would there perhaps even be a difference in meaning between "chleba" and "chleb" here?
Moonlighting 30 | 232  
3 Dec 2009 /  #10
There are many exceptions when inanimate masculine nouns act as animate in the acc. case, but they seem to occur pretty randomly.

Names of technologies are another example: "mail", "SMS".
=> Dostał maila... Dostał SMS-a...

From what I have learnt, masculine names of fruits, vegetables, vehicles, currencies, games, dances, tobaccoes and technologies get the declension of animate masculine at the biernik case.
Wildream - | 3  
3 Dec 2009 /  #11
Literally

Daj mi chleb. Means: Daj mi cały chleb (cały bochenek chleba lub ogólnie chleb). Give me bread.

Daj mi chleba. Means: Daj mi kawałek (kromkę, część) chleba. Give me a part of bread, slice, chunk.

Sorry for my English.
Ksysia 25 | 430  
3 Dec 2009 /  #12
Lubię tego batona, palę papierosa, jem pomidora, kalafiora, buraka

All incorrect. it's just a common error.

"chleba" and "chleb" here?

that's to do with number

would you like some cake - chcesz ciasta?
would you like to take this
learn polish - | 46  
3 Dec 2009 /  #13
Ziemowit:
Lubię tego batona, palę papierosa, jem pomidora, kalafiora, buraka

All incorrect. it's just a common error.

As a Polish native, I see absolutely nothing wrong with any of the above. What would the correct version be, "palę papieros"? Sounds ridiculous.
Ziemowit 12 | 3,612  
3 Dec 2009 /  #14
Ziemowit:
Lubię tego batona, palę papierosa, jem pomidora, kalafiora, buraka
----------------
All incorrect. it's just a common error.

Is it? I would judge any of the native speakers of Polish who habitually said: lubię ten baton, palę papieros, jem pomidor or jem burak, as showing some mild sort of mental defficiency.
Wildream - | 3  
3 Dec 2009 /  #15
Jem burak. is very wrong example because accusative is "buraka" - the same as genitive.
So correct:
Jem buraka.

Problems are only if accusative is diffrent from genitive but the same as nominative.

The names of things (male and neuter) are:
1. those with the accusative is the same as nominative (eg chleb, chleb)
2. those with the accusative ending -a (eg burak, buraka)
3. those with the accusative twofold form (eg cukierek, cukierek or cukierka)

For
2. No problems.
3. Polish language is alive and more and more words have this version, especially in colloquial speech.

For
1.

The verbs like "dać", "dostać", "wziąć"

Generally:

Dać chleb. Dać mleko.
Dostać chleb. Dostać mleko.
Wziąć chleb. Wziąć mleko.

But (Diffrent meaning):

Dać trochę chleba. Dać trochę mleka.
Dostać trochę chleba. Dostać trochę mleka.
Wziąć trochę chleba. Wziąć trochę mleka.

Then mental shortcuts:

Dać (...) chleba. Dać (...) mleka.
Dostać (...) chleba. Dostać (...) mleka.
Wziąć (...) chleba. Wziąć (...) mleka.

Other verbs like "jeść", "pić", "mieć"

Jeść chleb. Pić mleko. Mieć chleb. Mieć mleko.

But:

Jeść trochę chleba. Pić trochę mleka. Mieć trochę chleba. Mieć trochę mleka.

And generally we don't use mental shortcuts to them. Or they are incorrect or do not sound too good.

These principles also we apply to female nouns. Of course, they have diffrent ending in accusative 2. and 3.

Dać herbatę.
Dać trochę herbaty. Dać (...) herbaty.

Mam herbatę.
Mam trochę herbaty.
Ziemowit 12 | 3,612  
4 Dec 2009 /  #16
From what I have learnt, masculine names of fruits, vegetables, vehicles, currencies, games, dances, tobaccoes and technologies get the declension of animate masculine at the biernik case.

That's a very good explanation of Moonlighting.
fruits: Jem banan-a.
vegetables: Obieram ziemniak-a.
vehicles: Kupiłem sobie Mercedes-a.
curriencies: Kosztowało mnie to funt-a /dolar-a /frank-a.
games: Gram w tenis-a.
dances: Tańczę fokstrot-a.
tobaccos: Palę gauloise'-a.
technologies: Wysyłam sms-a.

As to "chleb", it belongs to neither of the above categories. It seems that masculine names of substances do not comply with the rule quoted by Moonlighting. It could be interesting to compare them to uncountable nouns of English, whereas those which take animate endings at the biernik case to countable nouns.

Jem chleb : I'm eating bread /// Jem baton-a : I'm eating a bar of chocolate
Jem ryż : I'm eating rice /// Jem banan-a : I'm eating a banana


The "chleb" in "Chleba naszego powszedniego ..." assumes an understood adverb before it: "dużo/wiele/trochę chleba naszego powszedniego", that is why it takes the ... genetive (!) rather than the accusative here.
OP Derevon 12 | 172  
4 Dec 2009 /  #17
This thing with chleba kind of makes sense to me. In Swedish it doesn't sound all that bad to say "att äta av bröd", literally "to eat of bread". If "batona" in "jem batona" would be genitive it would make some sense to me, but seeing as it's accusative... I don't know... I just have to accept it I guess.
SzwedwPolsce 11 | 1,595  
4 Dec 2009 /  #18
Names of technologies are another example: "mail", "SMS".

Are you sure it's not because they're imported nouns?
Moonlighting 30 | 232  
4 Dec 2009 /  #19
This thing with chleba kind of makes sense to me. In Swedish it doesn't sound all that bad to say "att äta av bröd", literally "to eat of bread". If "batona" in "jem batona" would be genitive it would make some sense to me, but seeing as it's accusative... I don't know... I just have to accept it I guess.

It's in genitive in this case because it is used with "trochę", a quantity adverb. With quantity adverbs, there are two rules to follow in Polish:

1. The elements must be in genitive (so we have "trochę chleba")
2. The verb must be in singular
(for example: "a few students go to the cinema" => "kilku studentów idzie do kina")

Are you sure it's not because they're imported nouns?

It's possible. I don't know. I didn't have the opportunity to read Polish texts with technology names other than mail and SMS. So I just believed the explanation I was given...
SzwedwPolsce 11 | 1,595  
4 Dec 2009 /  #20
In Swedish it doesn't sound all that bad to say "att äta av bröd", literally "to eat of bread".

It's actually 100% grammatical correct. If you read old Swedish literature this a very common expression, it was more common 50 years ago.

It's in genitive in this case because it is used with "trochę", a quantity adverb. With quantity adverbs, there are two rules to follow in Polish:
1. The elements must be in genitive (so we have "trochę chleba")
2. The verb must be in singular
(for example: "a few students go to the cinema" => "kilku studentów idzie do kina")

Well explained, I had almost forgotten this.
Polonius3 1,000 | 12,448  
4 Dec 2009 /  #21
To Krysia: In some cases using the -u as a nominative may reflect a laid-back style and be used for light-hearted or humorous effect. But both in Poland and even in States I have encountered Polish families where Jasiu, Stachu, Zdzichu, Zbychu, etc. were the nornmal colloquial forms of the nominative (Zdzichu przyjechał) with no comic effect intneded.

My question to you or any other lingo-savvy PF-er is whether that phenomenon is characteristic of a certain region of Poland.
Ksysia 25 | 430  
4 Dec 2009 /  #22
My question to you or any other lingo-savvy PF-er is whether that phenomenon is characteristic of a certain region of Poland.

I don't recognize it as regional, it's colloquial.
One can't for example use that in formal speech, like in younger towards elder. Can't say 'Tatuchu przyjechał' (Daddy came home).
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
4 Dec 2009 /  #23
Zdzichu is the name of one of the taxi drivers that used to take me to companies. That's what everyone calls him as the nominative form. Jasiu, I know that one well ;) ;)
Ksysia 25 | 430  
4 Dec 2009 /  #24
Then I guess they just like the bugger ;)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
4 Dec 2009 /  #25
Yeah, it's a term of endearment. Grzesiu is another one.

Archives - 2005-2009 / Language / Dostał buta - genitive / accusativeArchived