# Zaprzaństwo



## jacquesvd

I am learning Polish and to that effect reading Przekrój but, of late, I ran into a header "Zaprzaństwo czy arcydzieło" commenting a theatrical play and can find nowhere a translation of the word Zaprzaństwo which seems to mean something like 'rubbish'.
 
From another, older article, I now remember an expression that I never managed to quite understand:  A głowa zawiera w sobie twarz. No idea what that could mean. Any idea?


----------



## BezierCurve

Hi,
it comes from "zaparcie się", which can be roughly translated as "to deny", "to disagree". It's hard to tell what the author meant without reading the whole article.


----------



## jacquesvd

BezierCurve said:


> Hi,
> it comes from "zaparcie się", which can be roughly translated as "to deny", "to disagree". It's hard to tell what the author meant without reading the whole article.


 
Thanks, though I still can't figure out an English noun to translate it. The article comments a play and asks whether it is to be considered a masterpiece or and here I understood the opposite, say e.g. a flop. Now with you saying that it means something like denying, disagreeing it is clear that the question is 'A masterpiece or not?' but it remains a curious substantive to be found in no dictionary.

Have you any idea what the other sentence could mean? I am not sure I quote it correctly and I don't have anymore the Przekrój in which I found it. But it was an article about Kaczynski (how can I form the diacritc sign here?) and in it it was stated that he was too proud a man showing arrogance in his face.


----------



## BezierCurve

Well, if the play was in some way showing the Polish president (or was it the other fellow?) in such an unfavourable way, then "zaprzanstwo" could either: 1) refer to denying him to be the right person for the job (and consequently criticizing the authority) or, on the other hand, 2) "zaprzanstwo" could refer to Kaczynski's practices (it's a fashionable term when talking about political leaders denying their true origin and behaving in a way which can be harmful for the country, usualy in order to achieve some personal benefit). 

But it definitely meant something more than just stating a question "is it a masterpiece or not?". 

As for the diacritics - for some reason they're not implemented here.


----------



## jacquesvd

BezierCurve said:


> Well, if the play was in some way showing the Polish president (or was it the other fellow?) in such an unfavourable way, then "zaprzanstwo" could either: 1) refer to denying him to be the right person for the job (and consequently criticizing the authority) or, on the other hand, 2) "zaprzanstwo" could refer to Kaczynski's practices (it's a fashionable term when talking about political leaders denying their true origin and behaving in a way which can be harmful for the country, usualy in order to achieve some personal benefit).
> 
> But it definitely meant something more than just stating a question "is it a masterpiece or not?".
> 
> As for the diacritics - for some reason they're not implemented here.


 
No, I took the two sentences from two different articles: zampranstwo was from an article on play by Moliere in a very modern version and I understand that some might find it a masterpiece, others would deny that.

The sentence a glowa zawiera .... was from an article several months ago. I never managed to find the exact meaning but from the rest of the text (which I can't control because I don't have the article anymore) I understood the author found Kaczynski showing 'arrogance' and that might well have been the meaning but I don't see the logic of the head contained in the face and must take it that it is idiomatic Polish?


----------



## BezierCurve

I see.

In this context "zaprzanstwo" in the first article probably meant the artists' efforts to make the play in a way that would deny the traditional approach, create something separate from traditional trends. "A masterpiece or (something) opposite (to it)" - as you suggested - would rather be translated as "arcydzielo czy *zaprzeczenie*".

As for the other article - "glowa (panstwa)" - "the head (of the state)" is indeed an idiomatic expression for "president", so it might have been intended to create a pun. However, the sentence "Glowa zawiera twarz" means simply "(the) head contains (the) face". Again, without reading the contents it's hard to guess the author's exact intentions.

EDIT: From what you wrote before I can only assume that it was about the president's "face", or, in other words, his _attitude _shown in certain situations, which would make sense if we take into consideration the idiomatic meaning of "glowa" as the "head of the country".


----------



## robin74

BezierCurve said:


> As for the diacritics - for some reason they're not implemented here.


I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that, but you form diacritics here the same way that you would in any other text - either by selecting the proper letter from the symbols list, or simply by setting your keyboard to Polish and typing Ctrl-Alt-n.
My diacritics all work just fine: ąćęłńóśźż


----------



## przemo84

jacquesvd said:


> I am learning Polish and to that effect reading Przekrój but, of late, I ran into a header "Zaprzaństwo czy arcydzieło" commenting a theatrical play and can find nowhere a translation of the word Zaprzaństwo which seems to mean something like 'rubbish'.
> 
> From another, older article, I now remember an expression that I never managed to quite understand:  A głowa zawiera w sobie twarz. No idea what that could mean. Any idea?



In my opinion *zaprzaństwo* means *kicz* (_kitsch_, _daub_ in English) - the play that is ugly and lacking of style.

*A głowa zawiera w sobie twarz.* - I'd have to read the entire article because I haven't the foggiest idea what it can mean. 

EDIT: According to the PWN dictionary - *zaprzaństwo* means _commiting treachery/betrayal_ and is an old-fashioned word. So I'd need to take a look at this article to be able to translate the headline correctly.


----------



## BezierCurve

> I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that, but you form diacritics here the same way that you would in any other text - either by selecting the proper letter from the symbols list, or simply by setting your keyboard to Polish and typing Ctrl-Alt-n.
> My diacritics all work just fine: ąćęłńóśźż


 
Won't work on my keyboard (missing num pad, can't install Polish keyboard). On some websites (esp. language forums) you can find additional js tools for writing in any language.

EDIT: @przemo: yes, in many cases "zaprzanstwo" is very close to betrayal/treachery; additionaly it carries information about denying someone's origin, belief, etc. (displaying attitude: "I'm not with them/ one of them"). A good example: when apostle Peter denied being a follower of Jesus - a pure case of "zaprzanstwo". So, the aforesaid artists also "betrayed" (or denied) the traditional art in a way, probably using new ways of expression.


----------



## jacquesvd

przemo84 said:


> In my opinion *zaprzaństwo* means *kicz* (_kitsch_, _daub_ in English) - the play that is ugly and lacking of style.
> 
> *A głowa zawiera w sobie twarz.* - I'd have to read the entire article because I haven't the foggiest idea what it can mean.
> 
> EDIT: According to the PWN dictionary - *zaprzaństwo* means _commiting treachery/betrayal_ and is an old-fashioned word. So I'd need to take a look at this article to be able to translate the headline correctly.


 
That's it: thanks a lot. The article discusses the merits of this very modern adaptation of the play but the author wonders whether it doesn't betray the original sense of the play. So the header would read in English Betrayal or Masterpiece?  

The other sentence may contain mistakes because I don't have the article anymore and will therefore drop it.

Thanks also to Bezier for his valuable contribution, but the word must be rare and archaic because I couldn't find it in the big Oxford Polish-English dictionary nor in the Polish-German one.


----------

