# Imperfective rules



## 涼宮

Hello everybody! 

I was wondering if Polish imperfective might have the same usage as Russian imperfective. These general rules/definitions, all of them can work with Polish? 

Imperfective aspect:

_Incomplete, ongoing, interrupted or repeated actions_

1. In the present tense the action is still ongoing by definition so the imperfective aspect is always used in the present tense.

2. Unfinished and ongoing actions always use the imperfective aspect.

I was working 
I was going 

3. Actions that are repeated an unspecified number of times, or are habitually repeated are imperfective.

4. Expressions when you specify a length of time use the imperfective aspect. (All day, for 2 hours, etc.) 

I worked for 2 hours.

5. Verbs that express the state of something, rather than an action, use the imperfective aspect.

I was home

6. If an action is reversed the imperfective is used. For example if a window is opened, then using the imperfect form of ‘open’ may imply that it has since been closed.

7. If you are saying that something didn’t happen you use the imperfective aspect.

8. If there is no result of the action, or it wasn’t successfully completed then use the imperfective aspect.

*Aspects in the negative*

Using the negative with perfective verbs indicates the person failed to do that action. Using the imperfective will normally simply mean that it didn’t happen.


I would like to know if those Russian general rules can work with Polish, that would make easier my learning, thanks in Advance


----------



## Thomas1

Hello, 涼宮, 



涼宮 said:


> Hello everybody!
> 
> I was wondering if Polish imperfective might have the same usage as Russian imperfective. These general rules/definitions, all of them can work with Polish?
> 
> Imperfective aspect:
> 
> _Incomplete, ongoing, interrupted or repeated actions_
> 
> 1. In the present tense the action is still ongoing by definition so the imperfective aspect is always used in the present tense.
> 
> 2. Unfinished and ongoing actions always use the imperfective aspect.
> 
> I was working
> I was going
> 
> 3. Actions that are repeated an unspecified number of times, or are habitually repeated are imperfective.
> 
> 4. Expressions when you specify a length of time use the imperfective aspect. (All day, for 2 hours, etc.)
> 
> I worked for 2 hours.
> It may be, but here we can use the perfective aspect too:
> Pracowałem dwie godziny. (imperfective)
> Przepracowałem dwie godziny. (perfective; I think this sentence emphasises more the total time you worked and that you finished working.)
> 5. Verbs that express the state of something, rather than an action, use the imperfective aspect.
> 
> I was home
> I think you're right here. It should be borne in mind, however, that 'Byłem w domu' can also have a two meanings:
> I was home. (the literal interpretation)
> I went home and came back. (a more idiomatic interpretation)
> 6. If an action is reversed the imperfective is used. For example if a window is opened, then using the imperfect form of ‘open’ may imply that it has since been closed.
> Could you please give us a sample sentence (in Polish if that's possible)?
> 7. If you are saying that something didn’t happen you use the imperfective aspect.
> Ibidem.
> 
> 8. If there is no result of the action, or it wasn’t successfully completed then use the imperfective aspect.
> I think this may well be true, but I'd need an example.
> 
> *Aspects in the negative*
> 
> Using the negative with perfective verbs indicates the person failed to do that action. Using the imperfective will normally simply mean that it didn’t happen.
> Co robiłeś wczoraj?
> Oglądałem xyz. (My watching xyz did take place.)
> 
> I would like to know if those Russian general rules can work with Polish, that would make easier my learning, thanks in Advance


----------



## 涼宮

Hello thomas! 

Thank you very much for replying, well there are a few problems, I am afraid I cannot give you examples in Polish, because I find much more material about Russian on internet than Polish, and I am still novice at that, so I cannot give you an example.

So the 6th rule, I do not know how to apply it in Polish, but I can try an example in English, and by translating it into Polish we may see if it fits or not the rule.

It says a ''reversed action'' so it would be like you ''regret'' having done it or changed your mind, or someone did the opposite of what you did

Instance:

I left the door close. ( and someone or something opened it, so we use the imperfective, right?)

7) instance:

I went to the hospital. ( if we use the imperfective, so it didn't happen, something might have come up, like if I said '' I tried but I couldn't'') 


8) That one is when the result is unknown or failed.

Instance:

I took the exam yesterday. (but I failed or it didn't worth it, so I wasted my time, there was no point in taking the exam))

The aspect in negative, you did not use the negative in the Polish sentence and you said the action did take place, but the explanation says you use negative, I got confused 

Thanks again and sorry for not having examples in Polish


----------



## robin74

涼宮 said:


> I left the door close. ( and someone or something opened it, so we use the imperfective, right?)


Not really. It's a one-time thing you did in the past, you would use perfective (Zostawiłem zamknięte drzwi). Imperfective would imply a repeated activity (Zostawiałem zamknięte drzwi - I was leaving the door closed (implying that someone kept opening them - again, a repeated activity)).
BTW, it would be the same in Russian. From my knowledge of Russian I would say that rules on using perfective/imperfecrive aspect are the same as in Polish.



> I went to the hospital. ( if we use the imperfective, so it didn't happen, something might have come up, like if I said '' I tried but I couldn't'')


Right.


----------



## BezierCurve

As for the door, sometimes indeed we use imperfective aspect to give a hint of our doubt (about the effect of an action). It's not a strict rule or anything, but I can imagine someone seeing the previously closed door open and saying:

"Przecież zamykałem te drzwi..."

while 

"Przecież zamknąłem te drzwi." sounds like s/he's 100% sure about the result of their action. Would you agree?


----------



## Thomas1

涼宮 said:


> [...]
> 8) That one is when the result is unknown or failed.
> 
> Instance:
> 
> I took the exam yesterday. (but I failed or it didn't worth it, so I wasted my time, there was no point in taking the exam))
> 
> The aspect in negative, you did not use the negative in the Polish sentence and you said the action did take place, but the explanation says you use negative, I got confused  [...]


I re-read the rule and see what you mean now.
Yes, it's true.

Let me give you an example:
1. Nie obejrzałem wczoraj meczu. 
This sentence indeed does smack of my failing to watch the match. Perhaps, I had to stay longer at work.]

2. Nie oglądałem wczoraj meczu.
This sentence simply informs us that I didn't watch the match.

Could the difference between the following Spanish sentences be the same:
1. No he visto el partido de fútbol ayer.
2. No vi el partido de fútbol ayer.
?


----------



## 涼宮

Thank you again! 

So in short, the imperfective in Polish has the same usages as Russian imperfective in all of them. As for the negative, still a little confused.

In your instances; the first example explains that you tried to watch the match but something came up, right? that would be the imperfective, the second one you simply did not do it, so you used the perfective.

As for the Spanish sentences, the first one does not make sense, even in English I think it doesn't either ''I have not watched the soccer match yesterday''

At least in Spanish you cannot use the _pretérito perfecto compuesto_ to talk about something that did not happen indefinitely in the past.

The second one makes sense and it says you simply didn't watch the match, so it would be equivalent to the imperfective in Polish; but if I wanted to express the perfective aspect in Spanish, you could say:

I could not watch the soccer match yesterday.

No pude ver el partido de fútbol ayer.

That ''can'' says indirectly that something came up that hindered me to watch the match.

Does it make sense in Polish if I use that sentence in lieu of the perfective? Or is it enough just to use the perfective to indicate that I failed to do the action?


----------



## Thomas1

涼宮 said:


> Thank you again!
> 
> So in short, the imperfective in Polish has the same usages as Russian imperfective in all of them. As for the negative, still a little confused.
> 
> In your instances; the first example explains that you tried to watch the match but something came up, right? that would be the imperfective, the second one you simply did not do it, so you used the imperfective.





> As for the Spanish sentences, the first one does not make sense, even in English I think it doesn't either ''I have not watched the soccer match yesterday''
> 
> At least in Spanish you cannot use the _pretérito perfecto compuesto_ to talk about something that did not happen indefinitely in the past.


Oh, so this Spanish tense is actually more similar to the English perfect. Thanks for the information. 



> The second one makes sense and it says you simply didn't watch the match, so it would be equivalent to the imperfective in Polish; but if I wanted to express the perfective aspect in Spanish, you could say:
> 
> I could not watch the soccer match yesterday.
> 
> No pude ver el partido de fútbol ayer.
> 
> That ''can'' says indirectly that something came up that hindered me to watch the match.


I guess that would be the same. Just to satisfy my curiosity, if there weren't 'wczoraj/ayer' in the sentences, would then:
1. Nie obejrzałem meczu. 
2. Nie oglądałem meczu.
correspond to
1. No he visto el partido de fútbol.
2. No vi el partido de fútbol.
in Spanish?



> Does it make sense in Polish if I use that sentence in lieu of the perfective? Or is it enough just to use the perfective to indicate that I failed to do the action?


Do you mean a sentence with the Polish equivalent of 'could/pude'? If so, you can use both. The one with could would stress more the fact that you couldn't watch the match.


----------



## 涼宮

Thank you again! Yes that is what I meant, now I am clear, I am happy that Polish and Russian are so similar sometimes, it would be a hell for me if the aspects were so different .

As for your sentences, now the first one is a lot different without the adverb of time.

No he visto el partido. Can mean 2 things, that you have not watched it *yet* (this is normally used when someone asks you*),* or that in a past event you were expected to or supposed to watch it and you didn't watch it. That is called _uso temporal, _the latter use is necessary a context which tells me the uso temporal, but that only sentence you gave is not enough to teach you the real meaning. 

And finally you have to be aware of that not in all countries the pretérito perfecto compuesto is used in the same way, for instance in Spain, it is normally used for something that already happened rather than an action that has not happened yet or uso temporal; in Spain it is common to say: He comido pastel ayer, when normally you would say comí pastel ayer, we could say it is more to emphasize.

Note: The _pretérito perfecto compuesto_ has more uses but that would be off-topic in here 

I think it corresponds to that, the first sentence in Polish is used in perfective right? If so, it matches with the Spanish one, but it still depends upon the context, because it could be also imperfective( from Spanish POV*) if it is used with the uso temporal as I explained.

I hope it was not too long and you could understand 

* Just in case it was not fathomed, POV= point of view

Thanks again and take care!


----------



## Thomas1

Thanks for your input.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Thomas1 said:


> 1. Nie obejrzałem wczoraj meczu.
> This sentence indeed does smack of my failing to watch the match. Perhaps, I had to stay longer at work.]


??? How did you come to such interpretation?
The sentence simply means "I did not see the WHOLE match". The sentence is ambiguous: it may mean "I might have seen parts of it", or "I did not see it at all". No reasons are implied.
This way of putting it is rather less likely to be used. The implied meaning is "And I regret it".



Thomas1 said:


> 2. Nie oglądałem wczoraj meczu.
> This sentence simply informs us that I didn't watch the match.


This form would be the "normal" one, most used, neutral, no implied meanings.


----------

