# Potrafić vs moć vs umieć



## 涼宮

Good afternoon! 

Moć= permission, possibility, to have the right to, be able to do something (ability), the will to do something.

Umieć= to know how to (wissen/saber/savoir)

Potrafić= ability/capacity to do something, to manage to do something, to know how to.

Those are the meanings I found in the dictionary and other parts. According to the translation, both, potrafić and moć, can mean ''to be able to do something''. Is there any difference between both verbs when having that meaning? 

For example:

Potrafię (na)pisać vs mogę (na)pisać



Thank you in advance!


----------



## majlo

There is and there isn't. It all depends on the context.  Give us some sample sentences and we'll be able to help you more.


----------



## dreamlike

Your understanding of those verbs is mostly correct, and definitions you came up with are accurate. "Umieć" and "potrafić" are used interchangeably, with no change in meaning. They mean that you have the ability to do something. 

(1) Umiem to zrobić.
(2) Potrafię to zrobić. 

If I were to make any distinction, I'd say that (2) implies more confidence in taking some action. 

As far as "mogę" goes, it's more of one having time or opportunity to do something he/she couldn't have done earlier. It's not a rule of thumb, though.

(1) Mogę to zrobić wieczorem, bo teraz nie mam czasu.
(2) Mogę to zrobić, nic nie stoi na przeszkodzie = I see no reason why wouldn't I do it (help you, for instance)
(3) No dobraaa - mogę to zrobić. = implies reluctance to do something

Anyway, some sample sentences wouldn't go amiss - as Majlo said. We can try to come up with more contexts but there always be plenty of them


----------



## LilianaB

Potrafic is more to be able to: to be physically or mentally able to do something. Moc is more like may, but not always. It all depends on the context.

Umiec used as potrafic is also more colloquial.


----------



## dreamlike

I made exactly the same point, Liliana.


----------



## LilianaB

Not exactly Dreamlike, there are some nuances added, if you read it carefully, so please kindly don't post comments of this type before you read posts carefully,  to every detail. Unless you meant that you agree, because right now, I am not really sure what you meant.


----------



## majlo

Liliana, I'm sure dreamlike meant that you're making pointless comments about Polish.


----------



## LilianaB

You cannot be sure what anybody else meant. There is nothing pointless about my comment.


----------



## majlo

Of course there is. You practically copied the contents of dreamlike's comment, and besides we can't say much here without some particular context.


----------



## LilianaB

Amazing. Amazing what people can imagine.


----------



## dreamlike

I always make the effort to read other's posts carefully, Liliana, and so I did this time. I'm unable to find anything in your post I didn't include in mine. There's simply no need for iteration, nothing personal


----------



## LilianaB

1. _Potrafić_ means to _be able to _in most cases.
2._ Móc_ means _to be allowed to_( as in_ you may_) in many cases.

3. _Potrafię _replaced with_ mogę_ sounds more colloquial in many cases.

These are the points you missed.


----------



## 涼宮

Thank you all of you!

Okay, Allow me to try some sentences to see if I fathomed properly dream's explanations . Please, correct my mistakes.

1) The things I can do are few(Let's say I'm handicapped)= Rzeczy o których potrafię zrobić są niewiele. ( no physical capacity to do something)

2) I can do that as long as you allow me to= mogę to zrobić tak długo jak ty dozwalasz mnie to.

3) I read the manual, I can do it = przeczytałam instrukcję, umiem to zrobić.

4) After having studied for hours, I'm sure I can pass the exam = nauczywszy się na godziny, jestem pewny, że potrafię zdać egzamin.

Would you use those verbs in those contexts as I did? 

Thanks again!


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, these verbs can be used in your contexts, but other verbs could be used there as well. There are some grammatical mistakes in your sentences, but I'm not going to correct them. It is móc not moć.


----------



## myfakename

1) Niewiele jest/jest niewiele rzeczy, które potrafię zrobić.
 2) Moge to robić, dopóki będziesz mi na to pozwalał/pozwalała/pozwalać (male/female/infinitive, which can be used with any gender). Dozwalać doesn't really fit, reminds me of the prohibition of smoking or something. It just feels weird.
3) Przeczytałem instrukcję, więc umiem to zrobić. (-łam is female) I'd rather specify something - więc umiem to złożyć for example, if it comes to, say, furniture in pieces, to be assembled on one's own.
4) Uczyłem (-łam) się godzinami dlatego jestem pewien (pewna), że zdam./że zdam egzamin. OR że jestem w stanie zdać ten egzamin - after jestem w stanie I'd always add ten, because "being able" specifies something by itself. Jestem w stanie zdać egzamin lacks something, but of course is correct and would be understood.


----------



## LilianaB

I agree with everything MF said.


----------



## 涼宮

Thank you myfakename! Just a little doubt, whenever I use ''dopóki'' I must use the future of być + past tense as you did? I'm confused about why one has to say it that way.


----------



## myfakename

Past tense forms or the infinitive. They're perfectly interchangeable. I'm using the infinitive, because the past tense form placed there sounds just plain stupid for me. But that's my personal opinion, I'm not forcing you to think the same  And I don't think it will be any easier for you to use the infinitive here, you need to know all those forms anyway, so choosing between them is symbolic.


----------



## dreamlike

As regards the fourth point, if you were, for some reason, bent on using the past particple the way you did in English, you could say 

*After having studied for hours, I'm sure I can pass the exam *- Ucząc się przez wiele godzin, jestem pewien, że zdam egzamin.
On the face of it, it looks like present participle but it's not. Anyway, it's best avoided in modern Polish and you're better off following myfakename's advices  




			
				LilianaB said:
			
		

> 1. Potrafić means to be able to in most cases.
> 2. Móc means to be allowed to( as in you may) in many cases.
> 3. Potrafię replaced with mogę sounds more colloquial in many cases.
> These are the points you missed.



1. I didn't miss that point - you didn't read my post carefully, if you had read it all before posting yours. The third sentence of my post reads _They mean that you have the ability to do something. (they referring to "umieć" and" potrafić")
_2. Agreed.
3. I would never replace "potrafię" with "mogę" (as opposed to "umiem"). The sentence would take on a completely different meaning then. I guess you slipped, and meant "umię".


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, Umiem is a better equivalent for potrafię, but mogę can sometimes be spotted too, in colloquial speech. I think you just made the same mistake I was almost screamed at and accused of being totally illiterate: umię. Right now I don't even know anymore which form is correct. It is pronounced umiem, but I got totally confused about the spelling.


----------



## dreamlike

I've never heard "mogę" used the way you suggest in my part of Poland, or any part of Poland, for that matter. Now that you mentioned such usage, I'll maybe hear it, but I wouldn't hold my breath for it, to be honest. Yes, I made the same, egregrious error you have some time ago, but I corrected it right away  How come you noticed it? Probably, if it weren't for you making this mistake, I wouldn't make it either - the wrong concepts sometimes occurs in our minds if we're exposed to them, and there's nothing we can do about it.


----------



## LilianaB

I am not sure, Dreamlike, if this is a mistake. You better consult a good dictionary. It was somebody in this forum that was trying to convince this was a mistake in writing. It is always pronounced: umiem, but I am not really sure anymore how it should be spelled.


----------



## myfakename

LilianaB said:


> I am not sure, Dreamlike, if this is a mistake. You better consult a good dictionary. It was somebody in this forum that was trying to convince this was a mistake in writing. It is always pronounced: umiem, but I am not really sure anymore how it should be spelled.


Umiem, umiesz, umie, umiemy, umiecie, umieją. _*Umię_ doesn't exist. _Rozumieć_ is declined the same way, thus _*rozumię_ is also an error.


----------



## LilianaB

I found this; I am not claiming the reasoning is correct or anything like that. I just want your opinion.

http://gregry.w.interia.pl/umie.html


----------



## NotNow

LilianaB said:


> Unless you meant that you agree, because right now, I am not really sure what you meant.



Your posts are not only pointless, they are also badly written.  Proper grammar should be used in a language forum.


----------



## LilianaB

My ungrammatical language, as you claim, is nothing compared to your rudeness. There would be nothing ungrammatical about this sentence if it was said. I know what you mean: the first part is related to the previous sentence, however. It was added later. It is not a part of my dissertation either. It was a shortcut. Do not worry, I know what a complete sentence that would express the same content should look like. It was just a thought: a stream of consciousness, kind of.


----------



## myfakename

LilianaB said:


> I found this; I am not claiming the reasoning is correct or anything like that. I just want your opinion.
> 
> http://gregry.w.interia.pl/umie.html



Look at the table at the bottom of this site. _*Kłamacie_? _*Rozumieło_? This is some... alternative grammar, to say it softly.


----------



## marco_2

I knew an old man born in Gniezno (he was my neighbour, actually) who used to say *ja _umię  *ty umisz  *on umi, _but it is definitely incorrect.


----------



## LilianaB

Does anyone have any links to a reliable Polish dictionary or a grammar book?


----------



## dreamlike

LilianaB said:


> I found this; I am not claiming the reasoning is correct or anything like that. I just want your opinion.
> 
> http://gregry.w.interia.pl/umie.html



If you ask me, Lilliana, a person who found this site came up with this feeble theory to justify the usage of "umię". It's against well-established Polish grammar, and every single teacher or linguist would dismiss it as wrong.


----------



## majlo

Sometimes these incorrect, village-like expressions are quite quaint and I myself do use them at times for a humorous effect, but "umię" certainly does not belong to that group and it stands out like a sore thumb in it.


----------



## dreamlike

Agreed. "Umię" or "rozumię" don't even lend themselves to being used for a humorous effect. Well, maybe they do, but in a different sense - you run the risk of being laughed at if you use them, by less polite people.


----------



## hoc

dreamlike said:


> Agreed. "Umię" or "rozumię" don't even lend themselves to being used for a humorous effect. Well, maybe they do, but in a different sense - you run the risk of being laughed at if you use them, by less polite people.



Rozumię is pretty common in Warsaw among elderly people, whose families have lived in Warsaw for generations. This is certainly a regional thing. My grandma uses this form and I'm pretty sure I've heard her say "umię", too. 

A well-known politician in Poland (Ryszard Kalisz) says "rozumię"/"nie rozumię" all the time.


----------



## dreamlike

Your point being? 

Does being a regional thing is some kind of redeeming quality of "umię" or "rozumię"? If you ask me, it could be used nationwide and I would still think of it as wrong and deserving to be laughed at. Do the tend to say _Rozumisz?_, too?  

As regards Ryszald Kalisz, he's the same authority to me in the field of Polish language as he is in any other field, that is none. I couldn't care less what this man has to say about anything, Polish language included.


----------



## LilianaB

I personally think rozumiem was once spelled rozumię but pronounced roumiem, but I cannot guarantee it, and I would not bet on it. This is my feeling, however. Once, I mean some 30-20 years ago.


----------



## dreamlike

Interesting theory, but somehow I doubt it. What would be the rationale behind pronouncing the "ę" sound this way, that is "-em"? Besides, there are plenty of verbs that have this ending (-em) in the first singular, in both aspects. For that reason, I refuse to believe that it was spelled this way.


----------



## LilianaB

I don't know Deamlike. I think ę in this position should be pronounced as em. You could check some reliable books, literature printed before 1980, let's say, and see what they use in dialogues.


----------



## dreamlike

I've never encountered "rozumię" used instead of "rozumiem", even in books that were published long before 1980. And it's no wonder, it would be plain wrong. Take my word for it, Liliana.


----------



## LilianaB

Check them, just in case. It will not hurt.


----------



## dreamlike

Ok, Liliana, for your peace of mind - I checked it with three books, all of them published before 1980, and I didn't find "rozumię" in any of them. I don't I think I ever seen it in writing. 

You may find this interesting


----------



## LilianaB

What about umię? Check real books, Dreamlike, if you can, not internet versions. Unfortunately I own only three Polish books. I will check them later.


----------



## marco_2

O.K., let me quote a real book - "Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiego" by Z.Klemensiewicz, T.Lehr-Spławiński and S.Urbańczyk: 

"Podobnej zmianie uległy formy czasu teraźniejszego czasowników _umieć, rozumieć, śmieć. _I one niegdyś odmieniały się: _umieję, umiejesz, umieje; umiejemy, umiejecie, umieją /_but by "niegdyś" the author means the 14th century/ (jak dotąd wielka gromada czasowników typu _sinieję, czernieję, bieleję _itd.) Grupa _-eje _ulega kontrakcji w _e _długie, później w polskie _e _pochylone. W I osobie l.poj. stare _-eje _zostało zastąpione przez -em /in the Middle Ages/ na wzór odmiany _wiem__, wiesz _itd. Tylko w 3 os. l.mn. zachowało się _-eją." _And some lines before the author describes this phenomenon as "bardzo stary, bo do epoki przedpiśmiennej należący i oparty na tendencji żywej już w końcowej fazie wspólnoty prasłowiańskiej." So the forms _umiem, rozumiem _appeared in Polish many centuries ago and the forms *umię *rozumię are regional, much later and considered incorrect.


----------



## hoc

dreamlike said:


> Your point being?
> 
> Does being a regional thing is some kind of redeeming quality of "umię" or "rozumię"? If you ask me, it could be used nationwide and I would still think of it as wrong and deserving to be laughed at. Do the tend to say _Rozumisz?_, too?
> 
> As regards Ryszald Kalisz, he's the same authority to me in the field of Polish language as he is in any other field, that is none. I couldn't care less what this man has to say about anything, Polish language included.



My point was just to say that these forms do exist, not necessarily in humorous contexts or among uneducated people. I think I made a mistake quoting your post in mine. It didn't directly refer to your post. Sorry, I'm new here 

As for Ryszard Kalisz, thanks for sharing your opinion about him I mentioned him just to show that using rozumię is a deeply ingrained habit of some people and they can't get rid of it even when speaking in the media. Maybe they don't feel it's a mistake or an unacceptable form.


----------



## LilianaB

Does anyone one know the reason why it is umiem i rozumiem and mowię i piję? The explanation of the author of this dictionary seems a little fishy. Wasn't Latin the language of the Middle Ages, especially in writing?  How does he know how people talked, especially that he does not mention any particular regions? As far as I know, Kochanowski was the father of literary Polish, even if symbolically, so what does the author really want to prove? The form umiem is not present in many Slavic languages. It is not present in Silesian, which is an older Slavic dialect than Polish? I am not convinced. He does not mention any language reconstruction, either. So I think this is mostly speculative.


----------



## dreamlike

Liliana, what gave you the idea that I checked internet versions? My parents have quite a book collection and there are a lot of books that were published long before 1980. Get over it, "rozumię" or "umię" are unacceptable in writing. The same goes for speech, although there I'm inclined to be more lenient. Still, it's quite amusing to hear it. We provided you with dictionary entries stating clearly that it's an egregrious error, you can even learn where does it stem from. 

Hoc - that's OK  If that's the case, I think we should make people aware of the fact it's a mistake, and try stamp out this bad habit. Television should set an example when it comes to language correctness. I'm afraid it hever has and it never will. 

*edit:* Liliana:


> Wymawianie _rozumię (także bez nosowości na końcu jako rozumie) jest wynikiem zinterpretowania czasownika rozumieć przez użytkowników języka jako odmieniającego się według wzoru chcieć (tj. z końcówkami -ę, -esz) lub szumieć (-ę, -isz). Tym również można by tłumaczyć formę 3. osoby liczby mnogiej rozumią zamiast rozumieją.
> PWN_



There's simply a different pattern that governs the declination of "umieć" and "rozumieć".


----------



## LilianaB

Dreamlike, I know it is pronounced umiem and I would never pronounce it  any other way. I just think the written form was once umnię, and the final ę pronounced as em. As to dictionaries, i do not trust all of them. If you lived in a multi- dialect country you might really be in trouble, because you would think that half of the population spoke the wrong version and should be laughed at. More open-mindedness would be really good.


----------



## dreamlike

"Wymawianie" can easily be replaced with "Pisanie" in the passage I quoted. I would be more than glad to see some evidence, so please don't hesitate to share one if you find it. For the time being, though, I'll stick to my guns.


----------



## marco_2

LilianaB said:


> Does anyone one know the reason why it is umiem i rozumiem and mowię i piję? The explanation of the author of this dictionary seems a little fishy. Wasn't Latin the language of the Middle Ages, especially in writing? How does he know how people talked, especially that he does not mention any particular regions? As far as I know, Kochanowski was the father of literary Polish, even if symbolically, so what does the author really want to prove? The form umiem is not present in many Slavic languages. It is not present in Silesian, which is an older Slavic dialect than Polish? I am not convinced. He does not mention any language reconstruction, either. So I think this is mostly speculative.



It is true that Latin was the language of the Middle Ages and Kochanowski was "the father of literary (modern) Polish" but we have quite a lot of Polish works edited in the 13th and 14th century (eg. _Kazania świętokrzyskie, Psałterz floriański, Kazania gnieźnieńskie _and many others) which allow us to describe the state of the language. And prof. Stieber in his "Zarys gramatyki porównawczej języków słowiańskich" wrote that the ending -m was very expansive at that time and it replaced the ending -ę in many verbs, which today have their primary ending -ę ("W języku polskim zastępowanie zakończenia 1. sg _-ają _przez _-am _and _-eją _przez -em odbywało się jeszcze w XIV w. Jeszcze w tym czasie nierzadkie były formy jak 1. sg. _podnaszaję ręcę moję, wylewaję, trzymaję /.../ _Jednak już w Psałterzu floriańskim z XIV w. przeważają stanowczo formy jak _oczekawam, pocałowam, słycham, kłamam, czerpam, umiem." _And later: "Formy potoczne _umię, rozumię _mogły powstać wtórnie skutkiem procesu analogicznego (_umię : umiesz _jak _kłamię : kłamiesz_)" and it is probably the most rational explanation.


----------



## LilianaB

Hi, Marco, w Psalterzu Florianskim bylo klamam, jednak teraz jest kłamię.


----------



## marco_2

Owszem, a z kolei kiedyś było _umieję, _a teraz jest _umiem. _


----------



## LilianaB

See, this is just a proof that the explanation in the dictionary lacks certain scientific evidence.


----------



## dreamlike

Liliana, it was hundrends of years ago, Polish had undergone some changes since that time, it doesn't justify the misuse of "rozumię" or "umię". That being said, I agree that the author should've made a mention of it.


----------



## marco_2

marco_2 said:


> "Formy potoczne _umię, rozumię _mogły powstać wtórnie skutkiem procesu analogicznego (_umię : umiesz _jak _kłamię : kłamiesz_)" and it is probably the most rational explanation.



Both professor Stieber and other PT scholars admit, that the forms *umię, *rozumię or *śmię exist in colloquial speech in some regions of Poland but there isn't any document confirming that such forms existed at any stage of the development of our language. They may have appeared no sooner than in the 19th century like other mistakes of people who couldn't go to school then and they appeared by analogy (_kłamię, _so why not _*umię _or _*rozumię?) - _it is like _*poszłem, _cause _poszłam. _"Słownik poprawnej wymowy polskiej" reads beyond any doubt: 
*umieć: *1 os. l.poj. umiem, NIE: umię, umie; 3.os l.mn. umieją, NIE: umią.


----------



## LilianaB

I am not sure about this, Marco. i have been trying to find out what it is in other Slavic languages. In Russian it is: umieju, ponimaju. Rozumiju in Ukrainian. In Silesian it is umia and rozumia. I don't know about other Slavic languages, but I have a feeling that it is something closer to umię. Please do not take me wrong. I do not want to change how these forms are used in Polish. I am just interested how these changes came about.


----------



## kknd

przyznam, że nie miałem problemów ze znalezieniem odpowiednich wyjaśnień w internecie… proszę, oto one:
∙ http://www.polskieradio.pl/9/305/Artykul/396792,Umiec-–-ja-umiem-rozumiec-–-ja-rozumiem
∙ http://obcyjezykpolski.interia.pl/?md=archive&id=417


----------

