# this, taht



## drei_lengua

Cześć,

I thought that "ten", "to", and "ta" mean "this" and "tamten", "tamto", and "tamta" mean "that".

I saw the phrase "To jest mapa"  which translates to "That is a map.".  Well, then how does one say, "This is a map."?

Dziękuję,
Drei


----------



## Thomas1

drei_lengua said:


> Cześć,
> 
> I thought that "ten", "to", and "ta" mean "this" and "tamten", "tamto", and "tamta" mean "that".
> 
> I saw the phrase "To jest mapa" which translates to "That is a map.". Well, then how does one say, "This is a map."?
> 
> Dziękuję,
> Drei


Hi Drei,

The thing is that in your first paragraph you gave the examples of an adjective (your distinction is correct) and in the second one of a pronoun. 

_This is a map. = That is a map. = To jest mapa._
I think that _that_ is more often used in American English while _this_ is preferred in British English (_this  _is my observation so please correct me if I'm wrong) or perhaps people don't pay much attention chosing the preposition when they refer to the thing they have in mind.

Now if we take a closer look at this _That is a map_ would translate into Polish as _Tamto jest mapą. _but it does sound somewhat off. _This is a map_ translates as _To jest mapa._

Tom


----------



## drei_lengua

Thomas1 said:


> Hi Drei,
> 
> The thing is that in your first paragraph you gave the examples of an adjective (your distinction is correct) and in the second one of a pronoun.
> 
> _This is a map. = That is a map. = To jest mapa._
> I think that _that_ is more often used in American English while _this_ is preferred in British English (_this  _is my observation so please correct me if I'm wrong) or perhaps people don't pay much attention chosing the preposition when they refer to the thing they have in mind.
> 
> Now if we take a closer look at this _That is a map_ would translate into Polish as _Tamto jest mapą. _but it does sound somewhat off. _This is a map_ translates as _To jest mapa._
> 
> Tom


 
Thomas1,

Thanks for the reply.  Why is "To jest mapa." in the nominative case and "Tamto jest mapą." in another case?

Drei


----------



## Thomas1

drei_lengua said:


> Thomas1,
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Why is "To jest mapa." in the nominative case and "Tamto jest mapą." in another case?
> 
> Drei



Good question. 

I now realized that the meaning of _tamten/-ta/-to jest czymś _is different. When you use the instrumental here you imply that one performs a profession. So the example with _Tamto jest mapą _sounds weird, I must admit.
-Co to jest? (what is his?)
-To jest mapa. (This is a map)
-A tamto co to jest? ((and) what is that?)
-Tamto to (jest*) atlas. (that is an atlas)
*_jest_ is optional, but most likely we wouldn’t use it here, and we also would rather say _A to jest atlas, _we usually don’t pay much attention precising the closeness/distance of an object as it is usually clear from the context.

You wouldn’t say _co tamto jest?_, it sounds weird. _Tamto jest mapa. _as well.


Let’s take a few examples, say, we are watching a picture of your two brothers and one of them is a lawyer and the second is a doctor:
_Ten jest lekarzem._
This (one) is a doctor.
_Tamten jest prawnikiem._
That (one) is a lawyer.
This may sound a little unnatural but for the sake of the example itself…
Now, we are watching your two sisters walking in the park, one of them is a teacher and the second is a nurse:
_Ta jest nauczycielką._
This (one) is a teacher.
_Tamta jest pielęgniarką._
That (one) is a nurse.


To jest małapa.
This is an ape.
Tamto* to słoń.
That is an elephant.
We would be more likely to use _A to to słoń._

_To jest samochód._
This is a car.
_Tamto to autobus._
That is a bus.

Somehow _tamto_ doesn’t work well with the verb _to be_ (i.e. _jest_).


Tom


----------



## dhp

Hey there,

I'm a native polish speaker, born and raised in Poland where I stayed most of my life (so far). My Polish vocabulary may have suffered a bit in the last 6 years in Asia, but still I don't remember anybody saying what Tom has proposed. Should I be wrong at any point though, I surely hope that someone can correct me.

*Tamto jest mapą. 
This sentence is incorrect, while "Ten jest lekarzem, a tamten prawnikiem" are 100% correct, still the change in case makes it feel like they don't make a good counterpart for comparison (their functions are different).

*A tamto co to jest?
I would say that Polish is a "to"-prone language, we just say "Co to?" "A to?" without the explicit specification of distance. But should the need arise to stress out that you mean "the other thing" you'd probably use "A tamto?" but only after "to" has been used prior to it thus showing that it's a contrastive difference and has nothing to do with the distance of the object (I guess).
With a small modification Tom's sentence might be correct though: "A tamto, co to jest?" or "A tamto? Co to jest?" sound ok to me. Maybe that's what he meant?

*Tamto to (jest*) atlas. 
"A to jest atlas." is 100% correct though

*A to to słoń.
"A to [jest] słoń." sounds ok to me.
"A" suggests that the sentence comes as a continuation of another one before it ("To jest małpa, a to słoń") thus "jest" would rather be omitted as being redundant.

*Tamto to autobus.
This sentence is incorrect (just as the one above with "atlas".)

I'm guessing that you might actually be able find some of these sentences in an English language coursebook for speakers of Polish. I'd interpret them as direct translations to facilitate the understanding though, not as examples of correct Polish usage.

Just my 2 cents' worth. I hope that it clears the things a bit though... and that someone can give a more detailed linguistic explanation.

Daniel


----------



## Thomas1

Hi Daniel and welcome to the forums,


Thanks for your insight to the topic, I had hard times figuring out which one is correct/natural and which one is not while writing my answer. Since you asked for comments here are mine (further replies are also welcome ):




dhp said:


> *Tamto jest mapą.





dhp said:


> This sentence is incorrect, while "Ten jest lekarzem, a tamten prawnikiem" are 100% correct, still the change in case makes it feel like they don't make a good counterpart for comparison (their functions are different).


 
Well, from a grammatical point of view this sentence is correct, why it isn’t? However, the semantics is a little bit quirky, that’s why it sounds weird (as I mentioned in my previous post); it is not likely that one enunciate it during a casual conversation. I am sure, however, that if you were hell-bent  to use it you could devise a context in which it would fit in. 
I can’t quite grasp you when you say _the change in case makes it feel like they don't make a good counterpart for comparison._
Could you please elaborate? What change do you have in mind (from nominative to instrumental)? And, especially _a good counterpart for comparison_? A comparision with what?




dhp said:


> *A tamto co to jest?





dhp said:


> I would say that Polish is a "to"-prone language, we just say "Co to?" "A to?" without the explicit specification of distance. But should the need arise to stress out that you mean "the other thing" you'd probably use "A tamto?" but only after "to" has been used prior to it thus showing that it's a contrastive difference and has nothing to do with the distance of the object (I guess).
> With a small modification Tom's sentence might be correct though: "A tamto, co to jest?" or "A tamto? Co to jest?" sound ok to me. Maybe that's what he meant?


 
Yes, I meant A tamto, co to jest? Although, in writing the comma clears the things up, I think that urging this question in speech is possible without it, isn’t it? I agree that we most often use _to_ in Polish but I don’t agree that using _tam-_ doesn’t imply a more distant object, person,etc. cf. _Z tej strony brzegu mamy pola i lasy, a po tamtej stronie znajdują się osiedla mieszkaniowe._
Of course it depends on the context, but the distant-related difference is very much plausible. 


dhp said:


> *Tamto to (jest*) atlas.
> "A to jest atlas." is 100% correct though
> 
> *A to to słoń.
> "A to [jest] słoń." sounds ok to me.
> "A" suggests that the sentence comes as a continuation of another one before it ("To jest małpa, a to słoń") thus "jest" would rather be omitted as being redundant.
> 
> *Tamto to autobus.
> This sentence is incorrect (just as the one above with "atlas".)


 
Here I disagree; _tamto to_ is correct. Why do you qualify it as not? To me it is natural:
_-Z Magdą to była miłość od pierwszego wejrzenia, a tamto to była jedynie przelotna znajomość, nic poważniejszego. _

I ran _tamto to_ through my friends and they didn’t point it out as wrong/unnatural/etc.



Tom


----------



## AndrzejR

The sentences Thomas1 gave are 100% correct. The problem is (not only in this thread) that many sentences have good grammar, but nobody says that way. It is like the first class at school:

What is it.
This is a toy. 
And what is that?
That is a book. 
and so on...

Co to jest?
To jest zabawka.
A tamto, co to jest?
Tamto to książka.
itd ...

just abc-book.

And for me better example of "tamto" is: Tamto coś jest mapą.


----------



## mcibor

Thomas1 said:


> _-Z Magdą to była miłość od pierwszego wejrzenia, a tamto to była jedynie przelotna znajomość, nic poważniejszego. _



As I recall, you have to use a comma with a tamto:


_-Z Magdą to była miłość od pierwszego wejrzenia, *a tamto,* to była jedynie przelotna znajomość, nic poważniejszego. 

_In saying one seldomly stops at commas, the same as in English, but they are still grammatically correct.

PS. One small correction Thomas1: małpa, not małapa

So all the sentences, in my humble opinion, should look like:

A tamto, to mapa.

However Polish is horrible and nobody really knows, how to use interpunction:
http://so.pwn.pl/zasady.php?id=629737 - some rules with examples

Still the meaning is at least the same.

Back to the topic, as you said before, tamto is usually used in comparison, and means something further:

if there are two things laying on the table - one nearer, the other one further, then you can say:
Podaj mi tamto.

and if the person makes a mistake, then you correct it with
Nie (to), (tylko) tamto!

or Tamto drugie  (however to drugie is also correct)

But Tamto jest mapą sounds odd, better is:
Tamto, to jest mapa

Michal


----------



## Marga H

Hi,
I would like to add my 2 cents too:
this, that and also these and those may be adjectives or pronouns, so they are used in 2 different kinds of sentences:

*This *book is mine and *that *one is yours. = *Ta *książka jest moja, a* tamta * ( jest ) twoja.
*These *books are mine and *those* ones are yours.= *Te *książki są moje, a *tamte *( są ) twoje.
Tamten chłopiec 
,tamta dziewczyna, to dziecko, tamto dziecko, tamte czasy.te przedmioty, ci chłopcy, tamci uczniowie etc  there are  a lot of possibilities, because  adjectives correspond with nouns with gender, singular or plural and cases.
Another kind of sentence, these words are pronouns : (all words we translate *"to"* )
*This *is a book. =* To *jest książka.
*That *is a car. + *To *jest samochód.
*These *are books. = *To *są książki.
*Those *are cars. = *To *są samochody.
And also:
*It *is a book. = *To *jest książka,
*They *are books.= *To *są książki.

Sometimes you can use  "tamto" but it is very rarely.
Pozdrowienia.


----------



## Thomas1

Marga H said:


> Hi,
> I would like to add my 2 cents too:
> this, that and also these and those may be adjectives or pronouns, so they are used in 2 different kinds of sentences:
> 
> *This *book is mine and *that *one is yours. = *Ta *książka jest moja, a* tamta *( jest ) twoja.
> *These *books are mine and *those* ones are yours.= *Te *książki są moje, a *tamte *( są ) twoje.
> Tamten chłopiec
> ,tamta dziewczyna, to dziecko, tamto dziecko, tamte czasy.te przedmioty, ci chłopcy, tamci uczniowie etc there are a lot of possibilities, because adjectives correspond with nouns with gender, singular or plural and cases.
> Another kind of sentence, these words are pronouns : (all words we translate *"to"* )
> *This *is a book. =* To *jest książka.
> *That *is a car. + *To *jest samochód.
> *These *are books. = *To *są książki.
> *Those *are cars. = *To *są samochody.
> And also:
> *It *is a book. = *To *jest książka,
> *They *are books.= *To *są książki.
> 
> Sometimes you can use "tamto" but it is very rarely.
> Pozdrowienia.


 
*This *book is mine and *that *one is yours. = *Ta *książka jest moja, a* tamta *( jest ) twoja.
Curious, here _tamta_ is a pronoun and it translates as _that one _(noun phrase).

Have a look at the following:
_These are for sale, _
_And those?_
_[...]_
Te są na sprzedaż. 
A tamte? 


How does that sound to you? Or you would stll prefer _te_ here?

Tom


----------



## mcibor

Thomas1 said:


> Have a look at the following:
> _These are for sale, _
> _And those?_
> _[...]_
> Te są na sprzedaż.
> A tamte?
> 
> How does that sound to you? Or you would stll prefer _te_ here?
> 
> Tom



In my humble opinion, if you specify those other books in some other way, eg. by pointing your finger you may use _te_:

Czy te książki są na sprzedaż?
(pointing finger)
A te?

So you can say both, however the meaning is a bit different.
I those books lay in front of you I would say _te_, however if they are a bit further, then better is to use _tamte_

Michal


----------



## batka

Simply said:

ten, ta, to, te, tamten, tamta, tamto, tamci, tamte
are adjective pronouns and have to be followed by a noun for a sentence to be correct.
e.g. "Ten pies jest stary" "To dziecko jest małe" "Tamten chłopak to mój kolega"
One *does not* use them as a subject pronoun.

"To" in a sentence "To jest mapa" is the subject pronoun (and therefore is followed by a verb) like "it" and "this" in "It's a map" or "This is a map" are in English. But just because "to" (as the subject pronoun) and "to" (as the adjective pronoun) look and sound the same doesn't mean they're used the same way and that one can use other adjective pronouns as subject pronouns. 
And in case of plural in Polish one will also use "to":
"To są mapy" (the form of the verb indicates that it's plural).


----------



## marcin k

Hi everyone. I've been pondering over the issue and I think we should consider the following before trying to pinpoint the difference between "to" and "tamto" and the following cases:

"To jest zupełnie inną rzeczą."
"Tamto to (jest) zupełnie inna rzecz."

Here the cases are somewhat the other way round However,

"To (jest) zupełnie inna rzecz." is also possible. 

Another factor that could be looked at is the omssion of "jest". It isn't possible in the sentence: "To jest zupełnie inną rzeczą." Why? Maybe the possibility of the omission of "być" holds the key to the diiference in meaning.


----------



## batka

1.


> "Tamto to (jest) zupełnie inna rzecz."


I think that this one is usually used in an answer to a question "a tamto?", it rarely appears as a 'standing alone' sentence.
What I mean is, more natural usage for it is:
1: "To jest jabłko."
2: "A tamto?"
1: "Tamto to gruszka."
than 1 suddenly saying:
(while pointing at a fruit) "Tamto to jabłko."

2.
But isn't it that we usually use "to" and "tamto" only when we're talking about two objects and want to compare them?
Like: "To krzesło jest zielone, tamto (krzesło) (jest) niebieskie"
I'm still sticking to it depending on a function in a sentence as either a subject or an adjective.

3.
And also an interesting case is this one example:
"To jest kot, a tamto to (jest) pies"
"Tamto" indicating neuter only means its genre doesn't depend on the noun after "to". I think that in this case "tamto" also is functioning as the adjective and that the subject of the second part of the sentence is omitted and it could be "coś" or even "zwierzę", because if we place it there it still makes sense and doesn't disturb the style:
"To jest kot, a tamto (coś/zwierzę) to ((jest)) pies"

By the way, in the sentences "tamto (coś) to..." I more often than not omit "być" (that's why I gave it double brackets).


----------



## Thomas1

batka said:


> Simply said:
> 
> ten, ta, to, te, tamten, tamta, tamto, tamci, tamte
> are adjective pronouns and have to be followed by a noun for a sentence to be correct.
> e.g. "Ten pies jest stary" "To dziecko jest małe" "Tamten chłopak to mój kolega"
> One *does not* use them as a subject pronoun.
> 
> "To" in a sentence "To jest mapa" is the subject pronoun (and therefore is followed by a verb) like "it" and "this" in "It's a map" or "This is a map" are in English. But just because "to" (as the subject pronoun) and "to" (as the adjective pronoun) look and sound the same doesn't mean they're used the same way and that one can use other adjective pronouns as subject pronouns.
> And in case of plural in Polish one will also use "to":
> "To są mapy" (the form of the verb indicates that it's plural).


Sorry but I don't quite agree with that.
_Tamci byli nieźli, ale ci są jeszcze lepsi._

I don't see anything wrong with _tamci_ used as a subject pronoun. Moreover, I am pretty confident you can find a plethora of examples of this sort. There's nothing wrong with them in this function.



batka said:


> [...]
> 3.
> And also an interesting case is this one example:
> "To jest kot, a tamto to (jest) pies"
> "Tamto" indicating neuter only means its genre doesn't depend on the noun after "to". I think that in this case "tamto" also is functioning as the adjective and that the subject of the second part of the sentence is omitted and it could be "coś" or even "zwierzę", because if we place it there it still makes sense and doesn't disturb the style:
> "To jest kot, a tamto (coś/zwierzę) to ((jest)) pies"
> 
> By the way, in the sentences "tamto (coś) to..." I more often than not omit "być" (that's why I gave it double brackets).


You have given in your sentence an example of using them as subject pronouns, and the _to_ in your sentence functions as a verb (the use of _jest_ is somewhat weird here and I doubt whether many people would use it). IMHO, the addition of _coś/zwierzę/etc. _spoils the natural flow of the sentence it gives it a tad crude overtones. To my ears it sounds much more Polish without it. 


Tom


----------



## ryba

Hi all! Witaj na forum, dhp!

The thing is English uses a three-way distinction of distance:

here (near me) - there (near the speaker) - "over there" (nowhere near either of us).

The relation is:                                    

 here: this, these                                      
 there: that, those
 over there: that, those (over there)

While in Polish it is:

_tu/tutaj_ (near me or here in general, for example "here in Poland": "tutaj w Polsce" vs. _tam_ (far from the speaker or, in general, also far from the hearer, for example "There in China": "Tam w Chinach", "There, in front of the wall": "Tam, pod ścianą")

  tu (=tutaj): to (neutral demonstrative adjective, 4ex: "This child": "To dziecko"), ta (feminine,"This girl": "Ta dziewczynka"), ten (masculine, "This boy": "Ten chłopiec");
te (neutral and feminine plural demonstrative adj., for example "These kids/These girls"), ci (masculine pl., "These boys": "Ci chłopcy")

 tam: tamto (n, singular, "Tamto dziecko"), tamta (f., singular, "Tamta dziewczynka);
tamte (neutral and feminine plural demonstrative adj., for example "Those kids/Those girls": "Tamte dzieci/Tamte dziewczynki), tamci (m. pl., "Tamci chłopcy")

Now, what is very important, "to" may be either a demonstrative adjective of neutral gender or *demonstrative pronoun*. Thus, we say "To jest dziecko/dziewczynka/chłopiec", "To są dzieci/dziewczynki/chłopcy".

Another thing to remember is that we rarely use things like "That ball (that lies) over there"="Tamta piłka (która leży) tam". The most natural is "Ta piłka, która leży tam." "Tamto tam", "Tamten tam", etc. sound a bit cacophonic and funny to polish ears, although you can surely come across examples of this kind of usage. "To, co leży pod ścianą" would be used no matter if it is situated tu, tam, here, there or anywhere.

"Tamto" would be used only in oppositions, like "_Wyrzu__ć na śmietnik *to*, co leży pod ścianą w przedpokoju, ale zostaw *tamto*, co jest pod sto__łem, bo to dzisiejsze zakupy._": "Throw to the dustbin what is lying in front of the wall in the hall, but don't you throw what is placed on the table, because those are things I bought today". All in all, we use "te" instead of "tamte", "to" instead of "tamto", etc. whenever we can and whenever using them doesn't produce confusion.

Excuse my horrible English, I hope I am understandable.

Cheers/Pozdrawiam


----------

