Polish Translation Services
With a large network of in-country, professional Polish translators, Verbatim Solutions can respond quickly and effectively to your Polish language translation needs.
Verbatim Solutions provides professional, high quality Polish to English translations and English to Polish translations. Our Polish translation services will help you maximize your global strategy.
Native Speaking Polish Translators
Verbatim Solutions Polish translation teams are professional linguists performing translation from English to Polish and Polish to English for a variety of documents in various industries including:
- Desk-top Publishing
- Rich Media
We can put Polish transcription of words here.
As it is on Polish poets, we must insert unicode representations of Polish national characters.
Contrary to what you state, Polish has *five* genders, masculine, feminine, and neuter in the singular number and male-personal and other in the plural number. This is seen in the five forms of the third-person pronoun: _on_, _ona_, _ono_, _oni_, and _one_.
The verbal aspects are perfective (not perfect) and imperfective (not imperfect).
Frank Y. Gladney Universion of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
—- There are some other mistaken terms: – verbs are conjugated rather than declined
– “diacritics” is a more proper term than “accents” As for Polish genders, according to the traditional Polish approach there are three genders in the singular number and two genders in the plural number (as Mr Gladney put it). Other reasonable approaches would be to claim that there are three genders (m, f, n) or there are five genders – feminine, neuter, masculine-personal, masculine-animate-impersonal and masculine-inanimate. The division into four genders (feminine, neuter, masculine-animate and masculine-inanimate) is valid in singular, but not in plural, so I don’t find it correct. I’ll change the article in a while.
Boraczek 14:33, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC) I’ll present the approach formulated by the president of the Polish Language Council, hold also by Encyclopedia J?zyka Polskiego (Encyclopedia of the Polish Language). According to these sources, there are five genders: masculine-personal, masculine-animate, masculine-inanimate, feminine, neuter.
New phonetic table:
The English equivalents of Polish sounds given in this article are not always accurate. They’re close, but not quite the same. Could anyone add X-SAMPA transcription too? Ausir 12:05, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC) Let’s insert a table.
Letter/digraph The closest English sound X-SAMPA
Boraczek 15:54, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC) Good idea. Ausir 15:56, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC) Could someone add also X-SAMPA column to the table? Not everyone can see the IPA symbols… Ausir 01:00, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Done. Now it doesn’t look so good anymore but, well, let’s just hope someday all browsers will be able to read IPA characters. Kpalion 01:49, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Excellent job, Kpalion! 😀 I’m really impressed! 😀 I’ll make a couple of minor changes, if you don’t mind. Of course, the changes are subject to discuss.
1. I’ll change examples of Polish words with nasal vowels, because there are actually no nasal vowels in k?t and l?k (it’s incorrect to pronounce nasal vowels in these words).
2. length, long => length, long (because it doesn’t make too much sense to separate “n” and “g” in a digraph “ng”, it’s like writing mysz”.
3. Polish ? and j are usually pronounced as non-syllabic u and i respectively rather than approximants.
4. In the tongue-twister chrz?szcz is pronunced as
I need help with IPA symbols! I can’t type them. I’ll put “?” instead. Could you please replace my ?’s with the symbols, Kpalion?
Boraczek 10:03, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Thanks! You’re right about points 1,2,4, and I’ve already made the changes. As for ? and j, aren’t semivowels a class of approximants?
I don’t think so. There’s a great site with animations showing how people pronounce different sounds. It’s a pity they only describe English and Spanish. But the site shows the difference between glides and non-syllabic vowels. See SAMPA chart and other related articles. Kpalion 11:15, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Done with the table of Polish letters. We had an editing conflict, but I think everything’s all right now (I was careful so as not to overwrite your changes). I didn’t manage to insert IPA symbols for , click on “Launch Spanish Library” and you’ll be able to watch animations for glides (“semi-consonants” in Spanish) and correspondent non-syllabic vowels (“semi-vocals” in Spanish) 🙂 BTW I’m editing the Orthography section right now. Please don’t touch it! 😉 Boraczek 11:45, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Feel free to add sounds in the table, if you think any are missing. As for IPA characters, I can’t type them either; I copy-pasted them from SAMPA chart and other related articles. Kpalion 11:15, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) Done with the table of Polish letters. We had an editing conflict, but I think everything’s all right now (I was careful so as not to overwrite your changes). I didn’t manage to insert IPA symbols for [i_^] and [u_^]. Now I’m making an analogous table for Polish digraphs. Boraczek 12:03, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) I couldn’t find fonts with an inverted breve below i and u so I put those letters with an inverted breve above instead. I hope it won’t cause too much confusion. Kpalion 17:31, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)
the word akurat (‘exactly’) – stress on the last syllable – that part seems to be incorrect. Perhaps it is so in some regional dialects, but I’ve never heard it stressed that way. Could anyone provide some more info?Halibutt 23:35, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC) This pronunciation (“akuRAT”) is old-fashioned but still correct (together with a more modern alternative – “aKUrat”). For example, it is still used by poets when they need a word stressed on the last syllable for a masculine rhyme. I mentioned it because it is probably the only Polish word (excluding one-syllable and compound words) which may be correctly stressed on the last syllable. Kpalion 00:34, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC) I can confirm what Kpalion said. “akuRAT” is correct even though it sounds strange. “aKUrat” is correct too. (source: “Nowy s?ownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN” ed. by A. Markowski). BTW I’d have translated “akurat” as “just” rather than “exactly”. But I agree that in some sentences “akurat” can be translated as “exactly”, so the current translation isn’t incorrect.