# czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie



## stelingo

I am having difficulty understanding a text I am working on from the textbook Hurra po Polsku. The first paragraph is about a woman remisniscing about her school days. She was rebellious and wondered what she would do if she were expelled from the school. Could somebody explain the highlighted parts of the text? Have I understood correctly that she believes she would end up working at the post office? Thanks



Wiedziałam, że jak *przegnę* i mnie wyrzucą, to *wyląduję na poczcie *- wspomina. -Byłoby żal, bo przecież właśnie otwierał się świat. Pamiętam to poczucie, że wszystko jest możliwe, że *czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie*.


----------



## Morfi

Hello stelingo,

że jak przegnę - if I go too far.
przegiąć is slang word and means to go way too far in doing something in negative meaning of course. For instance kids often go way too far with their behaviour towards parents. (przeginają)

wyląduję na poczcie - end up on the post office as you said 
wylądować has two meanings, one is to land (like aircraft or baloon can land on the ground) and second one (slang again) is to end up somewhere (it usually has negative meaning, like you didn't want to end up in some place or situation)

"Pamiętam to poczucie" - you didn't bold this but no one use word "poczucie", at least I have heard it maybe twice in my life. We say "uczucie" which has the same meaning.

czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie - this makes absolutely no sense to me and I'm 99% sure such 'phrase' doesn't exist in Polish language.
It literally says "no matter what you touch(in meaning: do), this will hapen". We used to say "czego się człowiek nie dotknie to zepsuje" which means no matter what you touch(do), you will brake this(collapse) and this doesn't refer to objects only, it can also refer to situation (for example when you try to begin chat with uknown women and you make fool of yourself).


Let me know if you have further questions.


----------



## MateuszMoś

As far as I am concerned, it is not easy to provide the exact  translations of these words/expression unless I am not familiar with  these ones. There is no escaping the fact that the highlighted words  were used in a metaphorical meaning.

*Przegnę* - It is  sort of tricky one, in this context, it means that the speaker was  allowed to do something but in a specified manner, for instance: She was  expected to perform kind of activity according to somebody's  caprice/requirement. In other words, if somebody is expected to come  back home at 8p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc. and on Monday it  happens to somebody kind of being late-it is ok; on Tuesday she/he is  late-the situation is getting worse; On Wednesday another late coming  and there is kind of "*przegnę*" - when you are not able  to observe to the parents', grandparent', teachers',  colleagues'...requests/commandments and you ignore them many times.

*Wyląduję na poczcie*  - to be honest, according to me, it can mean that the speaker's  aspiration is to achieve something which will be profitable e.g. job.  The speaker is fully aware that if she is expelled from the school,  she will have to resort to the worst - to do something she finds uninspiring and it will shatter her hopes about  "better tomorrow".
*Czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie*  - It is a kind of magical mechanism , whatever you wouldn't like to  happen, it will happen, irrespective whether you want it to happen or not and she  remembers this rule, and she is afraid that this time the worst could  happen...she has to be careful

I can be wrong, I am utterly puzzled with "wyląduję na poczcie" and I am not sure If I get it.


----------



## acerebral

The explanation made by Morfi is great but I have a feeling that "*czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie*" part is still unclear.

It's definitively not a fixed expression. I'd translate it as "no matter what you try to do, you will succeed", so simply the girl is saying that she felt like she could accomplish anything.

Edit: I see that Mateusz understood that part in a different way - and I can agree with that definition as well, suppose you'd need a bigger context to decide which one is better here.

Pozdrawiam,

acerebral


----------



## LilianaB

The fragment is not very well written, but I agree with everything Morfi said, including that poczucie is the wrong word here. It should have been uczucie.


----------



## Oletta

Morfi said:


> "Pamiętam to poczucie" - you didn't bold this but no one use word "poczucie", at least I have heard it maybe twice in my life. We say "uczucie" which has the same meaning.



Well, we do use the word 'poczucie' but in a different context, there are several collocations with the word 'poczucie' such as 'poczucie winy', 'poczucie humoru', 'poczucie obowiązku/bezpieczeństwa' or ' poczucie własnej wartości'.


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, poczucie bezpieczenstwa and winy are definitelly the right collocations.


----------



## dreamlike

The passage is readily understandable to me, I find it completely unambiguous. It's a good piece of writing, Liliana - it sounds perfectly natural, and there's nothing wrong with it . "Poczucie" fits in just fine, I don't think it should be replaced with "uczucie". 

*Pamiętam to poczucie, że wszystko jest możliwe, że czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie.* the following expression is usually used in a negative sense. "Czego się nie dotkniesz, to spartaczysz", "Czego się nie dotkniesz, to zepsujesz". *Byłoby żal, bo przecież właśnie otwierał się świat.* the world was about to undergo considerable changes, people were to be offered more freedom (perhaps the book is recounting the fall of Communism?), hence the feeling that everything is possible, that things will become readily available soon. The underlined sentence is a metaphor of that.


----------



## LilianaB

It is unambiguous: it is just badly written. This is not the meaning of poczucie. Thank God some people said the same because I would have been accused of having strange ideas about Polish. Do you remember the tale about the Chinese Emperor?


----------



## dreamlike

It is not badly written, perhaps its imaginative style creates the false impression, but it's fine. How can you have the audacity to asses other people's writing skills, when your writing in Polish leaves a lot to be desired? 

I have no problems with "poczucie" here. On reflection, "uczucie" would be equally fine, though.


----------



## LilianaB

It is badly written. Please do not confuse people who are just trying to learn Polish. You do not have a Master's Degree in Polish, as far as I know, so let more competent people speak. I think some of the people who had the same opinion as I did are Slavists.


----------



## dreamlike

Your opinions about Polish language proved wrong a number of times, so I don't think you're in a position to dismiss something as "badly written". To me, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.


----------



## Oletta

dreamlike said:


> To me, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.


 To me as well. I like the piece and I thought about the word 'poczucie' in it, it would have said 'uczucie' but 'poczucie doesn't sound too bad especially to the older generation (eg. my parents).


----------



## 1-2-3

1. "[...] przegnę [...]" - see Mateusz` answer to this one. It`s  perfect; I wouldn`t put it better myself. I might stress, however, that  it usually reffers to negative situations where you stretch the  limit of or, in fact, abuse ascribed liberties, rights, freedoms or  power (example of parents setting a curfew to their children, that has  been constantly violated - kids "przegięły/przeginają"). But this might  not be entirely true. I can easily imagine a conversation between two  thieves that have robbed a bank, going something like this:

-Nie dość, że obrabowaliśmy bank, to jeszcze zabiłeś strażnika. Teraz to dopiero przegiąłeś.

It`s hard to think of stretching/abusing liberty, right, freedom of any  sort/kind here (because, as a default, you aren`t allowed to kill  people, right?), but the sentence is still "correct", though.

2. "[...] wyląduję na poczcie [...]" - to end up somwhere; in a given  context, as a result of rebellious behaviour you were keen to describe.  This expression has neutral to slightly negative meaning, of course (as  always) depending almost solely on the context.

3. "[...] czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie." - this is not a  coined expression of Polish language. The context imposes a positive  meaning. First, the woman decribes her times: "[...] wszystko jest  możliwe [...]" - everything`s possible, sky`s the limit, world`s your  oyster, second - she puts an emphasis on the degree of easiness with  which one is likely to make things happen: "[...] czego się człowiek nie  dotknie, to się stanie." (If you start any activity, the outcome is  usually unknown or uncertain, but here all it takes to achieve whatever  you want is just to start doing it.)

About word "przeczucie" - those who think it doesn`t exist/is not widely  used are wrong; those who think it can be treated as a synomymous word  for "uczucie" are only partially "right". To say, in this particular  context, that the words are synonymous is far-fetched. We do not have  any information about the intellectual and emotional state of that woman  to conclude that, hence we cannot tell which of the two words is more  appropriate. In fact, I`d tend to say that "poczucie" is the only  correct word that can be used. There is "poczucie czasu" (sense of time)  not "uczucie", because you cannot "poczuć" (feel) the time - and the  same goes for "poczucie, że wszystko było możliwe"; there is "uczucie  głodu" (sense of hunger; in English it looks misleading), because you  cannot intellectually percieve/sense hunger. And intellectual/emotinal  perception is what makes those two words distinct, albeit it`s not  logical division (complete and exclusive). Contemporary dictionaries  tend to stress that.


----------



## stelingo

Well thank you all for your contributions. I'm a little clearer now on the meaning of 'czego się człowiek nie dotknie, to się stanie.' Certainly a complicated phrase for a book for students of Polish.


----------



## 1-2-3

Stelingo,

Not really, it`s very simple in fact. Think about King  Midas. Whatever he touched, turned into gold; no strenuous effort on his  part. The same here. And the meaning of the phrase (positive, negative  or neutral) depends largely on context. I think some of the guys in the  thread took it for negative, because you can easily imagine a context  where such instances of use would be 100% right (look below). If you  still have some reservations about our advices, I`d suggest you to  re-type that text again, this time giving us a wider context.

A  very bright person flunks his or her exams, and you say: "Don`t worry.  You will make it next year. Everything`s possible". (positive)
A  child asking his father: "Daddy, I want to become a lawyer. Is that  possible?". Father, shrugging his shoulders: "And why not. Everything`s  possible". (neutral)
A high ranking military officer in General Staff  (discussing all the aspects of preventive strike in a minute detail):  "We know that we`re dealing with highly-skilled enemy; everything`s  possible. We cannot afford the luxury of being wrong and failure`s not  an option. I suggest sending a reckon first". (negative)

To be more precise: "wszystko jest możliwe" = "czego się nie dotoknie, to się stanie" (as indicated by the punctuation).


----------

