# For + pronoun + verb



## 涼宮

Good evening! 

What is the structure you use in Polish for such expression? From the point of view of romance languages English is very weird in that structure. Romance languages would literally say ''for that + subjunctive'', and German would use ''damit können + infinitive'' (lit: with that can).

For instance:

1) I wrote it for you to understand. Lo escribí _para que entiendas_/Ich habe es geschrieben, _damit_ _kannst_ du _verstehen_. 

2) I have arranged everything for you to have an apartment. 

I guess that Polish uses ''aby'' in that structure, but not really sure. 

Thank you in advance!


----------



## LilianaB

_*Żebys*_ is used in informal speech. _Zrobilem to dla Ciebie żebys zrozumiał_. In formal writing, you could use _w celu_: _Zamknęlismy starą hutę w celu poprawy jakosci powietrza_. _We closed the old factory so that the quality of the air improves, for the quality of the air to improve. 





_


----------



## kknd

będę tłumaczył z angielskiego (z pewnością da się znaleźć dużo naturalniejsze sformułowania; męski nadawca i adresat dla ustalenia uwagi):
1) „Napisałem/Napisałam to, byś zrozumiał.” albo „Napisałem to, byś mógł zrozumieć.”
2) „Przygotowałem wszystko, byś miał mieszkanie.” być może lepsze będzie „Przygotowałem wszystkie formalności związane z twoim mieszkaniem.”

zamiast „byś” można użyć „abyś”, „żebyś” itp. jak widzisz twoja intuicja była całkowicie poprawna!

z pozdrowieniami!


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, _Abyś,_ sounds Ok here as well. _Byś_ -- I am not sure. It does not sound as natural in the second example. _Abyś_ and _żebys are_ more universal I think. _Byś_ you really have to feel how to use it, in my opinion.


----------



## 涼宮

Thank you both of you! The structure uses the past tense, so it  is: byś/żebyś/abyś + perfective; except that ''to have'' used the imperfective, I guess because I'll be living in the apartment, not something that happens only once.


----------



## LilianaB

Suzumya, the perfective aspect in Polish has totally different functions than in English, or in Spanish, so please don't get confused.


----------



## Ben Jamin

涼宮 said:


> Thank you both of you! The structure uses the past tense, so it  is: byś/żebyś/abyś + perfective; except that ''to have'' used the imperfective, I guess because I'll be living in the apartment, not something that happens only once.



No, the perfective aspect is not obligatory in the "subjunctive" constructions in Polish. Both perfective and imperfective can be used, depending on the meaning to be conveyed. Actually the sentence "Przygotowałem wszystko, byś miał mieszkanie.” uses an imperfective verb. 
Another example using an imperfective verb:
"Przypilnuj aby on codziennie jadł obiad" (Take care that he eat dinner every day"). The choice between perfective and imperfective depends on the action to be done shall be perfective or imperfective.


----------



## Ben Jamin

LilianaB said:


> Suzumya, the perfective aspect in Polish has totally different functions than in English, or in Spanish, so please don't get confused.



Actually the perfective/imperfective aspect in Spanish and Polish have more in common with each other than with the way it is expressed (or not expressed) in English. 
In English, the perfective aspect in Simple Past is not marked in any way, but can be guessed from context or from the meaning of the verb. In the sentence “He killed Mr. Hyde” the lexical aspect is certainly perfective, in the sentence “He slept many hours every day” it is clearly imperfective. 
In Polish we mark the perfective aspect by using own perfective verbs and imperfective aspects by using own imperfective verbs. Very few verbs have ambiguous aspect (aresztować).
In Polish we can say: “On _zabił_ pana Hyda” and also “On _zabijał_ codziennie wielu ludzi”. The aspect is marked lexically. In Spanish we can choose between _pretérito imperfect_o and _pretérito indefinido_: “El _mató_ a señor Hyde” and “El _mataba_ a mucha gente cada día”, the aspect is marked morphologically.

The difference is in the sentences expressing a wish or purpose: in Spanish the subjunctive has no aspect difference, in Polish the subjunctive construction can distinguish between imperfective and perfective.


----------



## LilianaB

_Mieć_ is another verb the aspect of which is not marked. There are some verbs in Polish which are not marked with regards to aspect. They could express both aspects. The perfective aspect in Polish is often created in an agglutinative way -- by adding a prefx (_prze_, usually, maybe some other perfixes as well). _Prze_ is the prefix most commonly associated with the perfective aspect. _Za_ is yet another one.


----------



## Ben Jamin

LilianaB said:


> _Mieć_ is another verb the aspect of which is not marked. There are some verbs in Polish which are not marked with regards to aspect. They could express both aspects. The perfective aspect in Polish is often created in an agglutinative way -- by adding a prefx (_prze_, usually, maybe some other perfixes as well). _Prze_ is the prefix most commonly associated with the perfective aspect. _Za_ is yet another one.



_Mieć is an *imperfective* verb, without any doubt. It has no perfective counterpart of the same stem. If you need to express the perfective of Mieć you use verbs like dostać, posiąść, nabyć:


Imperfective                                                   perfective
Mieć gorączkę (to have fever)                           Dostać goraczki (To get fever)
Mieć pieniądze (To have money)                       Posiąść/dostać pieniądze (To come into possession/get money)
Mieć samochód (To have a car)                        Nabyć samochód (To buy a car)
Mieć jakąś właściwość (To have a property of)   Nabyć jakąś właściwość (To acquire a property of)


_


----------



## kknd

probably _ambiguous_ aspect is not the best translation(?) the term 'bi-aspectual' is used by grzegorz jagodziński (after polish well-established _dwuaspektowy_); to clarify situation and to find more examples of those verbs one can check those two articles: first, second (available also in english) and this language advice from pwn.


----------



## Ben Jamin

kknd said:


> probably _ambiguous_ aspect is not the best translation(?) the term 'bi-aspectual' is used by grzegorz jagodziński (after polish well-established _dwuaspektowy_); to clarify situation and to find more examples of those verbs one can check those two articles: first, second (available also in english) and this language advice from pwn.


If you hear the sentence "Policja aresztowała demonstrantów w niedzielę”, you don’t know if the meaning is perfective or imperfective. So, the word ambiguous gives a good idea about the properties of the verb, even if it is not an official grammatical term.


----------



## LilianaB

To me the sentence would only mean: _Some protesters were taken into custody by the police on Sunday _(completed action). To express action that has not been completed, I would say: _Policja próbowała aresztować demonstrantow_, or _policja była zajęta_ or _zajmowała się aresztowaniem demonstrantow kiedy zaczęło się tornado_.


----------



## Ben Jamin

LilianaB said:


> To me the sentence would only mean: _Some protesters were taken into custody by the police on Sunday _(completed action). To express action that has not been completed, I would say: _Policja próbowała aresztować demonstrantow_, or _policja była zajęta_ or _zajmowała się aresztowaniem demonstrantow kiedy zaczęło się tornado_.


Nope. It can also mean "the police was busy arresting protesters on Sunday"


----------

