Archive

Archive for November, 2004

Shake and Freeze

November 30th, 2004 1 comment

The oddest thing for an inhabitant of Poland to be writing: we had an earthquake yesterday at around 6:20 in the evening.

Completely unrelated, but I got hits from Google yesterday with someone looking for “bridal tracksuit” and “wedding tracksuit.” Looks like someone’s got class.

It was a slight little hiccup by most standards: 3.6 on the Richter scale. Kinga was at home and said she felt the building shaking for about five seconds. I, on the other hand, was walking home and felt nothing. Reportedly in the nearest town, some houses were shaken enough that books fell from the shelves, and on the other side of the Tatra Mountains, Slovakians reported having felt it.

No reports of damage, but of course everyone’s talking about it.

Earthquake and Poland — they go together about as well as . . .

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,

#$*@!

November 29th, 2004 2 comments

Ah #&@*, I did it again — trying to stop cursing and let another one loose unconsciously.

Without the redundant profanity (a sorry attempt at a joke), that’s what I thought last night when something irritating happened and, muttering to myself about it, I used “colorful” language.

Stopping cursing is about like stopping smoking, I’d imagine. Perhaps more difficult from a certain point of view — you don’t have to buy profanities. They’re there, piled up in our heads, for free! And you never run out of them, so you can’t really think to yourself, “As long as I don’t stop by a convenience store and see a wall of cigarettes, I’m fine.”

My parents tell the story of when my father was trying to stop cursing, he and my mother set up a system that each profanity cost some part of their weekly spending money. They were a young couple, and the purse strings were tight, so they allotted themselves only a few dollars a week as personal spending money. My father “spent” all his money and then some one afternoon waiting for, if I remember correctly, a “woman driver” to turn left.

What is it about profanity that has such a draw? It’s so difficult to stop, and yet so easy to begin. You can sit with an infant, patiently trying to teach her how to say something — anything — and she, with stubborn resoluteness, sits and says nothing. Then you hear the soup boil over, exclaim something you shouldn’t, and when you come back a second later, the infant is chanting your profanity.

It’s not that children have an ear for the vulgarities of their own language. An acquaintance told my wife and me that her daughter has recently begun using “the ‘f’ word” because — guess. It’s a word that has no meaning in Polish, though it does sound like “Kwak,” a somewhat common surname.

Nonetheless, there she was, running around the apartment saying, well, the obvious.

When I moved to Boston after having spent three years in Poland, I began muttering Polish profanity — and it is a language rich in profanity — at work when something was trying my patience. Then a Pole started working there.

In Polska, cursing is strangely culturally accepted. That’s not to say that it’s universally practiced, for if everyone cursed, then it would cease to be profanity. Still, in the States someone out “in public” doesn’t usually let the four-letter words fly at will. A bus driver, for example, wouldn’t be sprinkling is conversation with a passenger with profanity, but here, it’s a common occurrence. I’ve heard fathers let loose while their four-year-old daughters stand beside them, grandfathers going crazy while their five-year-old grandsons run around at their feet — and then it’s no wonder that you hear a five year old say the Polish equivalent of, “Hey, *#@$-for-brains, where they *#@! are you going?”

Why did I write *#@$ rather than “shit?” It’s always amused me to read quotes in something like Sports Illustrated where instead of quote the pitcher verbatim, puts words like s*$# in his mouth. As if we don’t know what it means, and, more importantly, as if we don’t sound the word in our heads as we read it. Is “shit” any worse than *#@$ for conveying the same idea? It’s even gotten to the point that without any context, we have a pretty good idea what *#@$ means, so what’s the point?

I’m not sure if it’s the rural environment, or Polish culture in general, but one does hear much more “in public” than one hears in the States. In stores, in bus stops, on the streets — it’s everywhere. In Polish, it’s not “the ‘f’ word” but rather “the ‘k’
word” and it’s shocking — almost impressive — to hear how many times a riled up Polish man of, say, twenty-five, can use “the ‘k’ word” in a sentence.

Perhaps it’s a question of American culture’s Puritan roots. After all, there are advertisements for soap in Europe that show women’s breasts — unthinkable in the States.

I’m curious about other cultures — how is cursing viewed wherever you sit reading this?

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,

The See-Saw

November 28th, 2004 2 comments

I try to be tolerant. I try not to make blanket statements about an entire group of people. I try not to make crude comments about people’s religious beliefs, social customs, etc. I try to be a bleeding heart, I guess.

Sometimes, I feel the little xenophobe in me (and there is one, buried deep inside) wiggling his way out and making me think things like, “Stupid barbarians.”

A fourteen year old being whipped to death because he broke the Ramadan fast is one of those incidents that is just fodder for my smoldering xenophobia.

“Barbarians,” some are calling them. “A ‘religion’ of hate,” others are saying. “A country ruled by terrorists,” still others are accusing. And the little conservative in me that I fight to keep down when I hear things like that mutters, “The judge, the executioner, and all who stood around cheering deserve the same.”

“The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful,” is the common refrain among us bleeding hearts.

“Explain the lack of outcry among other Muslims about this event,” says the Little Xenophobe I keep on a very short leash.

“Yes, but the townspeople were outraged by this,” says Bleeding Heart. “The article says so!”

“They were only outraged that he died, I’m sure. If he’d received a more ‘moderate’ punishment, like, say, five or ten lashes, they’d approve,” says LX.

“That’s just conjecture. You’re generalizing from one event,” replies BH.

“One event? Look at the Muslim ‘faith.’ It’s blatantly misogynistic; it rules by the sword; it converts by the sword; it’s brutal . . .” begins LX.

“Yes, but most Muslims . . .” interrupts BH.

It’s a never-ending cycle.

What sorts of LX/BH dialogues do you have rattling around your head?

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,

In synagogue Saturday

November 28th, 2004 No comments

My wife and I spent the weekend in Krakow. Saturday we went for a stroll in Kazimierz, the old Jewish quarter.

As I’ve mentioned before, Jews in Poland occupy a strange position. There are very few left in Poland today, and that’s why we were able to find ourselves in an old synagogue on a Saturday.

“We shouldn’t be here,” I thought.

“This should still be in use. We should feel as if we’re intruding, coming into the Jewish quarter on a Saturday as bumbling tourists.”

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,

Politely Declining (Or “Why Polish is really a nightmare”)

November 26th, 2004 4 comments

I recently wrote about Polish plurals and the strange fact that there are two forms.

That was only the tip of the iceberg. The easy part of the language. Today — how to make a Polish sentence meaningful. Or “how to make sure you say ‘The dog bit John’ rather than ‘John bit the dog.’”

In English, word order is an essential grammatical element. We know in the sentence “The dog bit John” that the dog did the biting, and not John, from the position of “The dog” in the sentence.

Polish, however, is an inflected language and that means that word order has no effect on the meaning of the sentence. In Polish, you could just as easily order the words, “John bit the dog” without any change in meaning. For that matter, “Bit John the dog” and “The dog John bit” are possible as well.

So how are they differentiated? By their ending. In Polish (in all highly inflected languages) you indicate a word as a direct object, an indirect object, a subject, or whatever by adding a suffix according to a given pattern.

An example may help. Imagine in English that subjects ended in “-doj” and direct objects ended in “-aldi.” Our sentence would then look like this: “The dogdoj bit Johnaldi.” In that case, “Bit Johnaldi the dogdoj” would have the same meaning, as would the following:

  • “Johnaldi bit the dogdoj.”
  • “Johnaldi the dogdoj bit.”
  • “The dogdoj Johnaldi bit.”

English does indeed have a bit of declension. Some examples:

  • “-ed” to a verb to make it past tense
  • “-s” to make a noun plural
  • “-ing” to make a verb a gerund (i.e., “Swimming is a healthy activity.”)
  • “-er” and “-est” in the comparative and superlative forms
  • “-’s” to denote possession (i.e., “Samantha’s mother left for Switzerland.”)

By and large, though, English is not an inflected language. “The dog bit John” and “John bit the dog” are very different sentences as a result.

Thanks to Oliver for the correction. Originally I’d mistakenly claimed that German has five cases.

An inflected language uses cases to differentiate functions and forms. Greek and German have four cases.

Polish has seven:

  • Nominative case — The subject of a sentence
  • Accusative case — The direct object of a positive sentence
  • Genitive case — To denote possession (i.e., “That’s George’s bag.”)
    • The direct object of a positive sentence for some verbs
    • The direct object of a negative sentence
    • For quantities of five and above.
  • Locative case — To specify location after certain prepositions
  • Instrumental case — To denote the method or tool used to do something
  • Dative case — The indirect object of a sentence
  • Vocative case — Used in addressing people (i.e., Did you take it, George?)

These changes even occur to _names_, providing a clear example of the complexities of Polish grammar. We’ll use “Bill Clinton” as a direct object, indirect object, object of a preposition, etc, and see just how insane Polish is:

Case Example
Nominative case To jest Bill Clinton. (This is Bill Clinton.)
Accusative case Lubię Billa Clintona. (I like Bill Clinton.)
Genitive case Szukam Billa Clintona. (I’m looking for Bill Clinton.)
Locative case Myślę o Billu Clintonie. (I’m thinking about Bill Clinton.)
Instrumental case Rozmawiam z Billem Clintonem. (I’m talking with Bill Clinton.)
Dative case Dałem Billowi Clintonowi. (I gave Bill Clinton… _s’thing_.)
Vocative case Wziąłeś, Billu? (Did you take it, Bill?)

Because of declension, the word order doesn’t make any difference. For example, if you want to stress that you gave it to Bill as opposed to George, you could say, with the proper vocal inflection to stress it, “Billowi dałem.”

But learning Polish grammar is not simply a matter of remembering some endings, for all nouns in Polish have a gender (as in German, French, Spanish, etc.), so you have to learn a hell of a lot of endings.

  • Three genders
  • Seven cases
  • Singular and plural

So when you utter a Polish noun, there are forty-two possible endings, depending on whether it’s singular or plural, masculine, feminine or neuter, and whichever case is necessary.

And the exceptions, for some forms are exactly the same except in given cases.

  • The accusative plural and the nominative plural of neuter nouns are identical, but feminine and masculine nouns are different.
  • The female genitive and locative cases are the same for singular nouns but not for plural nouns.

Aside from that nonsense, there are various considerations for exceptions. Is it a masculine alive noun? Does it end in “a”?

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,