# sami swoi



## jacquesvd

Hello everybody, I need help to precisely understand the following header on the front page of Przekrój:

Kto zarabia polskim na filmie sami swoi

Thanks


----------



## BezierCurve

Hi,

could you make sure what the exact word order was and also if there were any quotation marks? (Przekroj's headers often play around with words, and "Sami swoi" is one of the most known movies in Poland.)


----------



## jacquesvd

BezierCurve said:


> Hi,
> 
> could you make sure what the exact word order was and also if there were any quotation marks? (Przekroj's headers often play around with words, and "Sami swoi" is one of the most known movies in Poland.)


 
There are no quotation marks or anything else whatsoever: It's written across three lines like this

Kto zarabia
polskim 
na filmie 
sami swoi

(polskim in red half between the lines )


----------



## Thomas1

jacquesvd said:


> There are no quotation marks or anything else whatsoever: It's written across three lines like this
> 
> Kto zarabia
> polskim
> na filmie
> sami swoi
> 
> (polskim in red half between the lines )


I understand that _polskim _is (mainly) behind _na filmie_. I read it as _Kto zarabia na (polskim) filmie sami swoi_.
It means "Who's making/makes money on the (Polish) movie _Sami swoi_."

_Sami swoi_ is a title of a Polish comedy, probably the most widely known, as Bezier says. I am wondering if the article makes reference to a mobile network operator...


----------



## jacquesvd

Thomas1 said:


> I understand that _polskim _is (mainly) behind _na filmie_. I read it as _Kto zarabia na (polskim) filmie sami swoi_.
> It means "Who's making/makes money on the (Polish) movie _Sami swoi_."
> 
> _Sami swoi_ is a title of a Polish comedy, probably the most widely known, as Bezier says. I am wondering if the article makes reference to a mobile network operator...


 
Yes, 'polskim' is in a different colour half across 'na filmie' so that your interpretation is correct. It was 'sami swoi' that posed me the real problem and I thought it meant something 'like among us, people that know each other', but then I couldn't make a sensible translation. Now everything is clear. I haven't yet read the article which is very long. I'll check tomorrow if there's a reference to a network provider.


----------



## Thomas1

jacquesvd said:


> Yes, 'polskim' is in a different colour half across 'na filmie' so that your interpretation is correct. It was 'sami swoi' that posed me the real problem and I thought it meant something 'like among us, people that know each other', but then I couldn't make a sensible translation. [...]


In fact, the title isn't simple to translate into English, your interpretation passes the muster, though. It's something like _Only Our Folks_, or perhaps in the context of the movie: _Our Country Fellows_. Definitely, these are people you know, pretty well I'd daresay.


----------



## BezierCurve

> I thought it meant something 'like among us, people that know each other'


Considering the witty style of (some) of the authors I wouldn't be surprised if both meanings were used here (the title _and_ some people called 'sami swoi'). 

It is also possible (though not very probable), that the author meant the Polish language ("polski") and then we could expect some story about translations etc.. That could explain the weird word order.


----------



## Thomas1

BezierCurve said:


> Considering the witty style of (some) of the authors I wouldn't be surprised if both meanings were used here (the title _and_ some people called 'sami swoi').


Exactly, that's an excellent catchy phrase, isn't it?



> It is also possible (though not very probable), that the author meant the Polish language ("polski") and then we could expect some story about translations etc.. That could explain the weird word order.


Then I would put it differently from what I gave: Kto zarabia na filmie polskim? Sami swoi.
It would suggest to me some mischevious practices to which resort people called "sami swoi" or that only "sami swoi" can make money on the Polish movie. The story could extend well beyond translators circles, but I'll stop here and wait till Jacques tells us something about the article's content.

The title can indeed be interpreted in a few ways. And it's interesting that we can make that interpretations not reading the article, because it shows how it can draw the attention of different people.


----------



## jacquesvd

Thomas1 said:


> Exactly, that's an excellent catchy phrase, isn't it?
> 
> Then I would put it differently from what I gave: Kto zarabia na filmie polskim? Sami swoi.
> It would suggest to me some mischevious practices to which resort people called "sami swoi" or that only "sami swoi" can make money on the Polish movie. The story could extend well beyond translators circles, but I'll stop here and wait till Jacques tells us something about the article's content.
> 
> The title can indeed be interpreted in a few ways. And it's interesting that we can make that interpretations not reading the article, because it shows how it can draw the attention of different people.


 
I quickly read through the 5-page article and will have to take more time to study the text because there are parts of sentences I don’t yet understand, but there is nowhere any mention of a film or piece that would be called ‘sami swoi’
 
The article’s own header is “Jak u pana boga za piecem” and the first sentence olskim filmem rządzi Janosik—zabiera bogatym i daje biednym. Taka jest istota polskiego instytutu sztuki filmowej. Urząd, który miał przynieść renesans krajowego kina, obchodzi właśnie czwarte urodziny. Urząd ma się dobrze. Ale jak się czuje kinemotagrafia?
 
The article basically says that the state-subsidised Polish film doesn’t bring the results it should; that privately subsidised films like ‘Lejdis’, ‘Nie kłam kochanie’  and ‘świadectwo’ were the most successful films of the past year but that there, of course, exist successes of state-subsidised films as well like’ Katyń’ and goes on to mention films just released or to be released like ‘Miłość na wybiegu’.
 
In any case the words ‘sami swoi’ don’t appear again in the text itself; they are just in red under the title of the front page. So, I suppose it is not a reference to a film but an answer to the implicite question
Kto zarabia na polskim filmie ? (there is however no question mark on the front page) and that ‘sami swoi’ wich appears in red just like ‘polskim’, (the other words being in black) is the the answer : ‘we among ourselves', meaning the small incrowd that gets financially better from these subsidised films. 
 
Thanks for the help.


----------



## Thomas1

jacquesvd said:


> [...]
> In any case the words ‘sami swoi’ don’t appear again in the text itself; they are just in red under the title of the front page. So, I suppose it is not a reference to a film but an answer to the implicite question
> Kto zarabia na polskim filmie ? (there is however no question mark on the front page) and that ‘sami swoi’ wich appears in red just like ‘polskim’, (the other words being in black) is the the answer : ‘we among ourselves', meaning the small incrowd that gets financially better from these subsidised films.[...]


Hello, Jacques,

I think you are on the money here. The interpretation of "sami swoi" is more or less the same as mine. Though, as you say, the movie itself isn't mentioned in the article apart from the title, I would also associate the formulation "sami swoi" with it for the following reasons:
the title is well-established in Polish culture and widely-recognised by, I daresay, the majority of Polish folks;
the article itself treats about movies, so there is a link too;
as you can see there are a few ways to interpret the title.

I think it's another level of play on words. The first one being the most obvious is the one you are talking about, i.e. that there is only a clique of people who make money on the Polish film; the second being the movie _Sami swoi_. You will work out the first meaning after reading the article, because its content will suffice for that, I am sure. However, I am not so certain about the second meaning, which to me can be made out only if you have this part of Polish cultural background that alows you to associate "sami swoi" with the comedy. Especially that there is no reference to the movie elsewhere in the article.

The more I think about it the more I am inclined to accept it is the case here:


> The article’s own header is “Jak u pana boga za piecem” and the first sentence olskim filmem rządzi Janosik—zabiera bogatym i daje biednym. Taka jest istota polskiego instytutu sztuki filmowej. Urząd, który miał przynieść renesans krajowego kina, obchodzi właśnie czwarte urodziny. Urząd ma się dobrze. Ale jak się czuje kinemotagrafia?


The header is also quite suggestive, it is a title of a Polish series, but it can also be interpreted literally "(Komuś się żyje,) jak u Pana Boga za piecem" means a situation/condition that allows someone to live quite well with a sense of security. Is this title mentioned somewhere else in the article?
Another reference to a very well-known Polish series is Janosik. The protaginist became a stereotype of a good robber who mugs the rich rulling classes and helps the poor giving them what he deprived the former of. Surely,  broadcasting the series contributed to the process a lot. Polski Instytut Sztuki Filmowej is compared to Janosik. Though here we have a discrepancy, because Janosik played his part well, whereas the author seems to doubt that the same is the case with the Institute.


----------



## jacquesvd

Thomas1 said:


> Hello, Jacques,
> 
> I think you are on the money here. The interpretation of "sami swoi" is more or less the same as mine. Though, as you say, the movie itself isn't mentioned in the article apart from the title, I would also associate the formulation "sami swoi" with it for the following reasons:
> the title is well-established in Polish culture and widely-recognised by, I daresay, the majority of Polish folks;
> the article itself treats about movies, so there is a link too;
> as you can see there are a few ways to interpret the title.
> 
> I think it's another level of play on words. The first one being the most obvious is the one you are talking about, i.e. that there is only a clique of people who make money on the Polish film; the second being the movie _Sami swoi_. You will work out the first meaning after reading the article, because its content will suffice for that, I am sure. However, I am not so certain about the second meaning, which to me can be made out only if you have this part of Polish cultural background that alows you to associate "sami swoi" with the comedy. Especially that there is no reference to the movie elsewhere in the article.
> 
> The more I think about it the more I am inclined to accept it is the case here:
> The header is also quite suggestive, it is a title of a Polish series, but it can also be interpreted literally "(Komuś się żyje,) jak u Pana Boga za piecem" means a situation/condition that allows someone live quite well with a sense of security. Is this title mentioned somewhere else in the article?
> Another reference to a very well-known Polish series is Janosik. The protaginist became a stereotype of a good robber who mugs the rich rulling classes and helps the poor giving them what he deprived of the former. Surely, broadcasting the series contributed to the process a lot. Polski Instytut Sztuki Filmowej is compared to Janosik. Though here we have a discrepancy, because Janosik played his part well, whereas the author seems to doubt that the same is the case with the Institute.


 
The header of the article is not repeated in the body of the text. The text is, after all, not too critical because it does say that more Polish films have been produced and viewed by more people than ever have before but that the quality is 'dosyc średni' which I understand to be 'average' and that no masterpieces that have been acclaimed the world all over like Wajda's films have recently been made. (my own comment: I don't think you can subsidize to make a masterpiece, that's the work of genius but the more you encourage and create possibilities, the bigger of course the chance that you hit on somebody creating a masterpiece).
So, the discrepancy with 'Janosik' isn't really there because the quantitative aspects of Polish film-making aren't bad. I didn't know that 'sami swoi' was a wellknown Polish comedy but now I do!
 
Now, I wonder however why 'zabiera bogatym i daje biednym' has bogaty and biedny in the instrumentalis.
 
In each case, thank you very, very much for helping me acquiring a reading knowledge of Polish


----------



## Thomas1

jacquesvd said:


> The header of the article is not repeated in the body of the text. The text is, after all, not too critical because it does say that more Polish films have been produced and viewed by more people than ever have before but that the quality is 'dosyc średni' which I understand to be 'average' and that no masterpieces that have been acclaimed the world all over like Wajda's films have recently been made. (my own comment: I don't think you can subsidize to make a masterpiece, that's the work of genius but the more you encourage and create possibilities, the bigger of course the chance that you hit on somebody creating a masterpiece).
> So, the discrepancy with 'Janosik' isn't really there because the quantitative aspects of Polish film-making aren't bad. I didn't know that 'sami swoi' was a wellknown Polish comedy but now I do!


This discrepancy is visible in in the sentences you provided, though:
_Polskim filmem rządzi Janosik—zabiera bogatym i daje biednym. Taka jest istota polskiego instytutu sztuki filmowej. _
First the comparison of the two, then we have:
_Urząd, który miał przynieść renesans krajowego kina,_

The use of _miał przynieść_ is suggestive here, it was supposed to bring about the rennaissance of Polish cinematography. This is an oblique sentence, because it doesn't say whether it did or not. Without further information one is rather inclinded to understand that it didn't.
_
obchodzi właśnie czwarte urodziny. Urząd ma się dobrze._ 
The office is doing well. 
However, right in the next sentence we have an opposition, which is also oblique, because it is in a form of a question:
_Ale jak się czuje kinemotagrafia?_
But, how is cinematography doing?

Perhaps, the qualification as "dosyć średni" doesn't appeal much to the author and he wants (more) masterpieces. But since you're saying that the article isn't very critical, then maybe the whole was a rethorical procedure to draw the reader's attention. Hard to tell without reading it.



> Now, I wonder however why 'zabiera bogatym i daje biednym' has bogaty and biedny in the instrumentalis.


They are in the dative, it's zabierać coś komu? czemu? He took his car away: _Zabrał mu samochód_.


----------



## BezierCurve

Yeah, coincidentally "bogatym/biednym" (singular, instrumental) looks exactly as _plural_ dative forms of those.


----------

