# Dzisiaj opowiemy Wam o tym, w co ubierają się Polacy



## gvergara

Hi,

I have just come across this sentence, and cannot quite put my finger on the role/meaning of the preposition _w_. I tend to interpret the sentence to be constructed as Germans would.

_Today we'll talk to you *about what* Poles put on. 
Heute werden wir mit Euch über das sprechen, was die Polen zu verschiedenen Anlässen aufziehen.
Dzisiaj opowiemy Wam o tym, w co ubierają się Polacy na różne okazje._

According to my way of reasoning, _über das= o tym_, that is to say, a type of antecedent of the following sentence (=what the Poles put on/ wear). Why is _w _included? If I understand the sentence correctly, people ubierają się something/clothes, not _w _something, or am I wrong? Look forward to your answers, thanks.

G.


----------



## elroy

gvergara said:


> According to my way of reasoning, _über das= o tym_, that is to say, a type of antecedent of the following sentence (=what the Poles put on/ wear).


Your line of reasoning is correct, but the German equivalent here is “darüber,” not “über das” (see below).



gvergara said:


> Why is _w _included? If I understand the sentence correctly, people ubierają się something/clothes, not _w _something, or am I wrong?


I don’t know if “ubierać się *coś*” is possible, but “ubierać się *w czymś*” is definitely correct.  See the examples here.

_She dresses in sports clothes all the time.(Ona ubiera się *w sportowe ciuchy* cały czas.)

He dresses in T-shirts and jeans.(On się ubiera *w koszulki i jeansy*.)_

Compare English “to dress *in* something” and Spanish “vestirse *de* algo” in Spanish.  English uses the same preposition but no reflexive, while Spanish uses a different preposition but does use a reflexive.  Polish is a mix of the two! 



gvergara said:


> _Today we'll talk to you *about what* Poles put on.
> Heute werden wir mit Euch über das sprechen, was die Polen an verschiedenen Anlässen aufziehen._


I would say:

_Today we’re going to talk to you about what Polish people wear / how Polish people dress for different occasions.

Heute werden wir mit euch darüber sprechen, was Polen zu verschiedenen Anlässen tragen / wie sich Polen zu verschiedenen Anlässen bekleiden. 

Hoy les vamos a hablar sobre qué llevan los polacos / como se visten los polacos en diferentes ocasiones. _

Definitely not “put on” in English.  “put on” only refers to the physical act of putting yourself into a particular article of clothing (“sich ein Kleidungsstück anziehen,” “ponerse una prenda”).


----------



## gvergara

Thanks.


elroy said:


> but the German equivalent here is “darüber,” not “über das” (see below).


Not sure here, and not the objective of this forum. But plenty of hits here for the exact search"über das sprechen, was", including many formal .de sites. 



elroy said:


> I don’t know if “ubieraç się *coś*” is possible, but “ubierać się *w czymś*” is definitely correct.


I guess you are right. The dictionary that I use (Pons.de) lists the verb ubierać as transitive, but I failed to notice that the reflexive form is a whole different story. Well, one question wasted unfortunately, but thanks.


----------



## elroy

gvergara said:


> But plenty of hits here for the exact search"über das sprechen, was", including many formal .de sites.


"über das sprechen, was..." is very correct, but it's not the equivalent construction _in this context_.*  

In short:

"über das sprechen, was...": "hablar sobre *lo que*..."
"darüber sprechen, was...": "hablar sobre *qué*..."

The meaning here is the second one.  Polish uses the same construction for both meanings.

*You may want to take a look at this thread.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask them in the German forum.



gvergara said:


> Well, one question wasted unfortunately, but thanks.


Not necessarily!  I'm curious about this:


elroy said:


> I don’t know if “ubierać się *coś*” is possible


So hopefully a native speaker will tell us!


----------



## zaffy

This is how I see it.
ubierać coś  - sounds better when describing a single action
ubierać się w coś - sounds better when describing a habitual activity

A son takes a look at his father who's getting dressed and asks:
A: Dlaczego ubierasz garniutur? (at the moment of speaking)
B: Idę na pogrzeb kolegi.
A: Lubisz ubierać się w garnitur? (generally)
B: Nienawidzę. Ubieram (się w) garnitur tylko na poważne uroczystości.  (generally, but here I would drop "się w")


elroy said:


> I don’t know if “ubierać się *coś*” is possible, but “ubierać się *w czymś*” is definitely correct. See the examples



"Ubierać się w czymś" is incorrect. But "być w czymś" is fine.

_Zauważyłeś, że on codziennie jest w garniturze?
Zauważyłeś, że on codziennie ubiera się w garnitur?_


----------



## elroy

Oops, I got the case wrong!

I thought “w” _*always*_ took the locative!


----------



## Henares

Using “w” is just idiomatic in some scenarios. “W” means “in”/“inside”, so it could potentially mean that some people are inside their cloths, or those cloths make a layer around them. But I’m not sure, to me it’s just a fixed phrase that is idiomatic in some situations.


----------



## Henares

elroy said:


> Oops, I got the case wrong!
> 
> I thought “w” _*always*_ took the locative!


It does, but when you’re describing where you’re getting dressed. “Ubieram się w moim pokoju”.


----------



## Drakonica

elroy said:


> "ubierać się *w czymś*” is definitely correct


Ubierać się *w czymś*. (the place) - miejscownik
Ubierać się *w garderobie*.
- To dress up in a *wardrobe*.

Ubierać się *w coś*. (clothes) - biernik
Ubierać się *w spodnie*.
- To punt on *trousers*.

Ubierać *coś*. Ubierać *kogoś*. - biernik
Ubierać *choinkę*. Ubierać *dziecko*.
- To decorate the *Christmas tree*. To dress up a *baby*.


A common mistake is form:
"Ubieram spodnie" in meaning: I put on on trousers .


----------



## anthox

elroy said:


> Oops, I got the case wrong!
> 
> I thought “w” _*always*_ took the locative!


It also takes the accusative when there is a sense of movement "into" something, e.g. _Chodźmy w las _('Let's walk into the forest', *but *_Stoimy w lesie_ [loc.], 'We're standing in the forest')_, _or just idiomatically in certain contexts, as in this one (_ubiera się *w garnitur* = _literally, "dress oneself *into a suit*").


----------



## zaffy

Drakonica said:


> A common mistake is form:
> "Ubieram spodnie" in meaning: I put on on trousers .


Everyone I know, including myslef, uses this form here in the south.


----------



## elroy

German “in” works the same way.

Ich gehe in den Park. (accusative) = I’m going to (literally, into) the park.

Ich laufe im Park. (dative) = I’m running in the park. 

I just thought Polish “w” was only used in the latter sense, and that Polish used other prepositions for the other sense. 

I wonder if this is a German calque.


----------



## Drakonica

zaffy said:


> Everyone I know, including myslef, uses this form here in the south.


That is why, I cold it a common mistake


----------



## Ben Jamin

gvergara said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have just come across this sentence, and cannot quite put my finger on the role/meaning of the preposition _w_. I tend to interpret the sentence to be constructed as Germans would.
> 
> _Today we'll talk to you *about what* Poles put on.
> Heute werden wir mit Euch über das sprechen, was die Polen zu verschiedenen Anlässen aufziehen.
> Dzisiaj opowiemy Wam o tym, w co ubierają się Polacy na różne okazje._
> 
> According to my way of reasoning, _über das= o tym_, that is to say, a type of antecedent of the following sentence (=what the Poles put on/ wear). Why is _w _included? If I understand the sentence correctly, people ubierają się something/clothes, not _w _something, or am I wrong? Look forward to your answers, thanks.
> 
> G.


You have a good paralell usage in German: "auf" corresponds to Polish "w".


----------



## elroy

Ben Jamin said:


> You have a good paralell usage in German: "auf" corresponds to Polish "w".


Can you elaborate?  I don't think "auf" corresponds to "w" in this particular case.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Drakonica said:


> Ubierać się *w coś*. (clothes) - biernik
> Ubierać się *w spodnie*.
> - To wear trousers.
> - To decorate the *Christmas tree*. To dress up a *baby[
> 
> 
> A common mistake is form:
> "Ubieram spodnie" in meaning: I put on on trousers .
> *


*


elroy said:



			Can you elaborate?  I don't think "auf" corresponds to "w" in this particular case.
		
Click to expand...

Both "auf" and "w" are prepositions with many uses, each in its language. Auf functions here as a prefix to change the meaning of the core word "ziehen", but I think that it was originally a separate preposition with the meaning like "on" in "put on". In Polish one is "in" the clothes (w ubraniu), hence " chodzić w ubraniu" (literally to "walk in clothes" = wear clothes). Mayby the similarity is not so obvious at first glance, but I think it exists.*


----------



## elroy

Sorry, I still don’t know what you’re referring to.  Can you give an example of what you mean?


----------



## Ben Jamin

elroy said:


> Sorry, I still don’t know what you’re referring to.  Can you give an example of what you mean?


I gave you an example. What more do you need?


----------



## elroy

Never mind.


----------



## Ben Jamin

elroy said:


> Never mind.


Maybe your not knowing Polish makes it difficult for you?


----------



## elroy

I have no interest in dialoguing further with you.  See my last post.  Thank you.


----------



## Ben Jamin

[/QUOTE]





elroy said:


> I have no interest in dialoguing further with you.  See my last post.  Thank you.


The same to you.


----------



## Donoav

zaffy said:


> Everyone I know, including myself, uses this form here in the south.


PWN właśnie stwierdza, że to regionalizm małopolski.


----------

