# Syllable breaks



## raptor

Hello, I have a couple Polish words that I have the IPA for but don't know where the syllables start/end. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

_bezwzględny_ [bɛzvzglɛndnɨ]
_przestępstwo_ [pʂɛstɛmpstfɔ]
_Strwiąż_ [strfʲɔ̃ʂ]
wstrząs [fst.ʂɔ̃s]

and the tongue twister

W Szczebrzeszynie chrząszcz brzmi w trzcinie [fʂt​͡ʂɛbʐɛʂɨɲe xʂɔ̃ʂt​͡ʂ bʐmi ftʂt​͡ɕiɲe]


----------



## BezierCurve

Hi, this is one of possible ways (due to consonant clusters, which might be split in a few different ways; we usually look for the most convenient one):

bez-względ-ny [bɛz-vzglɛnd-nɨ]  
prze-stęp-stwo [pʂɛ-stɛmp-stfɔ]
Strwiąż [strfʲɔ̃ʂ] 1 syl. word
wstrząs [fst.ʂɔ̃s] 1 syl. word
W Szcze-brze-szy-nie-chrząszcz-brzmi-w trzci-nie [fʂt​͡ʂɛ-bʐɛ-ʂɨ-ɲe-xʂɔ̃ʂt​͡ʂ-bʐmi-ftʂt​͡ɕi-ɲe] 
Some people would probably find bez-wzglę-dny, przes-tęps-two etc. a better option.


----------



## kknd

Here you can find principles ruling word breaking (in Polish). If you'll have problems with understanding just write back here about it.


----------



## raptor

Thank you!

kknd, I'm afraid I don't speak Polish, but I'll have a look


----------



## e7ka

przes-tęps-two
In such situation there is always a break between two consonants, not between a consonant and a vowel.


----------



## robin74

e7ka said:


> przes-tęps-two
> In such situation there is always a break between two consonants, not between a consonant and a vowel.


Actually, "prze-" being a prefix and "stwo" a suffix, it can _only_ be correctly broken as *prze-stęp-stwo*.


----------



## e7ka

I learnt on Polish lessons that version such as 
'prze-stęp-stwo' 
is always a mistake


----------



## .Jordi.

e7ka said:


> I learnt on Polish lessons that version such as
> 'prze-stęp-stwo'
> is always a mistake



Oh really? So then Polish Orthographic Dictionary lies:

http://so.pwn.pl/lista.php?co=przest%EApstwo


----------



## mcibor

I agree with Robin and Jordi.

Because it's a word with prefix, normal rules do not apply.


----------



## BezierCurve

> Because it's a word with prefix, normal rules do not apply.


 
Is it so - I mean, even if there is no "stępstwo'" as a word on its own?


----------



## mcibor

I don't know what stęp meant in older Polish, but it surely does, as you have so many words as:
następstwo
następny
występny
przestępny
wstępny
postęp
ustęp
itd itp.

So I think there was a word stęp (not the bone nor the horse walk) that meant something...

Therefore there are historical reasons for such syllabization.


----------



## Szymon Krulikowski

mcibor said:


> I don't know what stęp meant in older Polish, (...)


 IMO it derives from _stąpać_...


----------

