# Poor air quality



## eduard85

Hello,

I am trying to translate the word _Poor_ (referred to the air quality) into Polish and I am not sure if my choice is right or accurate enough.

Below is the full air quality index so you can see it in context:

Good = Dobry
Moderate = Umiarkowany
Poor = *Niewystarczający*
Bad = Zły
Very bad = Bardzo zły
Hazardous = Niebezpieczny

Thank you!


----------



## zaffy

'Niewstarczający' doesn't work in that context.  'Dostateczny' kind of fits in that grade index, yet it is higher in quality than the English 'poor'. I guess 'słaby' is the equivalant of 'poor'.


----------



## eduard85

Thank you for your quick reply.

So the index would be as follows:

Dobry
Umiarkowany
Dostateczny
Zły
Bardzo zły
Niebezpieczny

I do not care if it doesn't match the English translation 100% as long as it makes sense in Polish.


----------



## zaffy

I just found it. As I thought, it is 'dostateczny'

NaszePowietrze


----------



## eduard85

Great! Thank you!


----------



## eduard85

_Dostateczny _is the best option that I have seen so far, so I believe I will stick with it. Thank you.


----------



## jasio

What specific message you want to convey - especially with regards to the actual quality of the air? 

"Dostateczny", albeit often used in such scales indeed, has a meaning of "barely positive" (often in between of 'niedostateczny' - 'negative, insufficient' and "dobry" - "good". I'm not a native English speaker, so I'm not that sensitive to nuances, but if "poor" in this context means 'not good, but it shouldn't actually harm you' then "dostateczny" may indeed be a good choice. However if it should say "not poisonous, but you shouldn't breathe it for too long", perhaps a more alerting word should be used.


----------



## Ben Jamin

jasio said:


> What specific message you want to convey - especially with regards to the actual quality of the air?
> 
> "Dostateczny", albeit often used in such scales indeed, has a meaning of "barely positive" (often in between of 'niedostateczny' - 'negative, insufficient' and "dobry" - "good". I'm not a native English speaker, so I'm not that sensitive to nuances, but if "poor" in this context means 'not good, but it shouldn't actually harm you' then "dostateczny" may indeed be a good choice. However if it should say "not poisonous, but you shouldn't breathe it for too long", perhaps a more alerting word should be used.


*Poor* in this context means "not complying with norms, but it will not harm you", so I don't think that "dostateczny" fits here. *Dostateczny* means acceptable, sufficient. *Niewystarczający* is much better here, even if it is not widely used.


----------



## yezyk

"Kiepskawy" ; ) (This is a joke!)

The most honest and appropriate would simply be "słaby". That is also what we would most likely say to each other in a casual conversation. But in a formal message, it does not sound politically correct enough : ) That is why they use "dostateczny". That term had already been applied to poor school grades, for similar reasons. "Dostateczny" means "It won't kill you" ; ), just like "Dostateczna ocena" meant "Well, you will pass" (that was when there were grades 2, 3, 4, 5; when they added 1, "dostateczna" was automatically elevated in status because "2" took its role as the last before the worst grade and was called "mierna", which, incidentally, could be a great choice for this lousy air quality – but it is not used in the air quality contexts).


----------



## Ben Jamin

yezyk said:


> "Kiepskawy" ; ) (This is a joke!)
> 
> The most honest and appropriate would simply be "słaby". That is also what we would most likely say to each other in a casual conversation. But in a formal message, it does not sound politically correct enough : ) That is why they use "dostateczny". That term had already been applied to poor school grades, for similar reasons. "Dostateczny" means "It won't kill you" ; ), just like "Dostateczna ocena" meant "Well, you will pass" (that was when there were grades 2, 3, 4, 5; when they added 1, "dostateczna" was automatically elevated in status because "2" took its role as the last before the worst grade and was called "mierna", which, incidentally, could be a great choice for this lousy air quality – but it is not used in the air quality contexts).


This comment is not very relevant for the original question. The term "słaby" shouldn't be used in this case, not because it is "politically incorrect", but because it is inappropriate. "Słaby" is not a adjective describing *quality*, but *strength*. It is used in chemistry (słaby roztwór) and in mechanics (słabe złącze). Technical language has its own rules which are different from casual speech.


----------



## Poland91pl

I would say "niska jakość powietrza" here


----------



## Ben Jamin

Poland91pl said:


> I would say "niska jakość powietrza" here


It could maybe go, but this adjective is too diffuse to be used in a scale.


----------



## grassy

Ben Jamin said:


> It could maybe go, but this adjective is too diffuse to be used in a scale.


----------



## zaffy

Ben Jamin said:


> *Niewystarczający* is much better here, even if it is not widely used.


I can't really imagine a Polish native describing the air as "niewystarczający"


----------



## grassy

Yes, even _niewystarczająca jakość powietrza_ would sound pretty awful. 

No bo niewystarczająca do czego? Nawet fatalnym powietrzem da się oddychać, tylko to się potem odbija na zdrowiu.


----------



## rotan

Why not just go for "poniżej normy"?


----------



## Ben Jamin

There is a confusion here. I did not advocate the use of "niewystarczający" as a final translation, i only stated that the original proposal was better than the following one. You are shooting at a wrong target, sorry.


----------

