Polish prepositions and conjunctions table. Functional parts of speech (Wyrazy niesamodzielne). The Polish “przez” is also very polysemantic and in addition to “through” it can also have other meanings “due to”, “due to”, “during”, etc.

Prepositions are one of the most difficult topics in any language. In languages ​​that do without cases, it is prepositions that perform their function, and in English, for example, a preposition can sometimes radically change the meaning of the verb. In languages ​​with many cases, like Polish, the same preposition can be used with different cases and have different meaning. In general, with these pretexts the devil will break his leg.

If you want my opinion, then I am sure that coping with pretexts is an extremely difficult task. I am sure that it is much easier to feel them than to build a somewhat digestible system. Thus, to work with prepositions in the best possible way will, however, sometimes it won’t hurt to reinforce what has been started with a focused elaboration of individual prepositions.

Let's start with the preposition " through».

The first thing that comes to mind, as a Polish counterpart to this Russian preposition, is “ przez" But it should be noted that:

1. We translate “through” as “przez” only if talking about space:

For reference: Pojechaliśmy do Polski przez Ukraine.

We went to Poland through Ukraine.

W tym mieście kawiarni są przez każde pięć metrów!

In this city there is a cafe every five meters!

2. Polish “przez” is also very polysemantic and in addition to “through” it can also have other meanings “due to”, “due to”, “during”, etc.

For reference: Spóźniliśmy przez nasz samochód.

We were late because of our car.

Przez cały rok skrzętnie uczyłem się języka polskiego.

Throughout the year I diligently studied Polish.

If you and I talking about time, then the translation of “through” will depend on when the action occurs.

1. If the action takes place in the future, then we translate “through” as “ za ».

Na przykład: On wyjechał do Polski i wróci (w przyszłości) za dwa lata.

He went to Poland and will return (in the future) in two years.

2. If the action remains in the past, then we translate “through” as “ po ».

Na przykład: On wyjechał do Polski i wrócił (w przeszłości) po dwu latach.

He went to Poland and returned (in the past) two years later.

In order to better remember, we systematize the above in the form of a tablet.

Now you can superimpose the table of school Polish onto school Russian. First, only headings, prepositions, endings:
case/// Questions/// Prepositions/// Units: 1skl//2skl//3skl/// Plural
przypadek///Pytania///Przyimki/// liczba pojedyncza:m“0”//m/f-a,i//f“0”//wed///lic zba mnoga nie m-o( not ml)//męskoosobowy
I(Nominative///Who? What?///“0”///“0”,-o,-e// -a,-i// “0”,-my///-s,-i,-a,-i, -e//not highlighted
Mianownik///Who? Co?///“0”/// m/r“0”//m:-a(-ta);f:-a,i//f“0”//cf-o,e,-u m; ę, mię
///not m-l m+f:-y,-i,-e/ cf:-a
((m/r (not m-l all) + f/r to -a,-i:
y: to firm acc;/ i: only -gi,-ki;/ e: to -ż,rz,-sz,cz,-c,-dz +to soft(-l,-j,-ni,-ń, ś,ć,ź);
/f in sogl (all): e,-y,-i independent from the base
/cf(-o,-e,-um):- a;/ cf(ę,mię): - ęta,-miona))
//m-l:-y,-i,-e
((y: without alternation according to ec/cy, ca/cy; 3rd turn: -r/rzy, k/cy, g(a)/dzy
i: 8 soften: -p/pi, b/bi, n/ni, m/mi, w/wi, s/si,z/zi, f/fi; 4black:t/ci; sta/ści; d/dzi; ch/si
e: rz/rze; sz/sze; cz/cze; ść/ście; l/le; ranks, relationships:- wie))
P(Genitive)/// Whom? What? (no)/// near, near, without, for, from to y, with, from, because of -a, -i(u/yu)//-s, -i//-i// /“0”, -ov, -ev, -(i)y, -ey// -
Dopełniacz/// Kogo? Czego?(nie ma)/// koło (obok), bez, dla, od, do, u, z/ze; z powodu = because of, naprzeciwko = on the contrary, wśród = among, oprócz = except, podczas (w czasie) = during; według = according to: …mnie/niego= in my/his (opinion); …wskazówek – instructions/// -a/-u // -y/i // -i/y//-a
M/r “0” live:-a
M/r“0”not alive: -a/-u
a: months of February; tools; body parts; Polish cities; all in ak, nik; decrease: ek, ik/yk u: uncountable, collected, abstract, foreign, days of the week; NOT reduce: ek; izm/yzm
//m/r on “a”+ w on “a,i”: i:after k,g; soft (-cja,sja,zja=-ji; -ja=-i); y: after the others
//zh“0”- ży,rzy; szy,czy; after other letters: -i/y //Ср/р all: -a
///“0”;-ów -i/y
m/r all: solid -ów; ż,rz,sz,cz;dz,c: -y; soft -i(+options:-ów/-y)
w/r on “a”+sr/r: “0”: after hard ones + sometimes after soft/sizzling ones; -y: after ż,rz,sz,cz; i: after soft// w/r“0”only -i/y //m-l is not highlighted
D(Dative)///To whom, to what?/// to, by///-y,-yu//-e, -and//-and///-am,-yam// -
Celownik /// Komu? Czemu? /// ku, dzięki, przeciwko, wbrew (to, thanks to, against, in spite of) /// -owi,u//-(i)e,y,i// y,i//-u
//m/according: owi,u (no rule)//m/r on “a” +all w/r:(i)e,y,i=P// s/r all: -u/// -om// -
B(Accusative)/// Whom? what?
///non-soul=I/soul=P// -
Biernik /// Kogo? Co?(mieć)/// za, przez, (na, nad, w), o/// m“0” nieżywotny=I/ m“0” żywotny(=P)=-a//
m/r on “-a” + f/r on “-a,i”=-ę// f/r“0”+ sr/r all =I/// =I: all not m-l m/ r living and not living + all f/r and cf//m-l=P
T(Creative/// By whom? What?/// behind, above, under, with, before (between) /// -oh, eat //-oh, her (oh, her) //yu, (eat) ///-ami,-yami // -
Narzędnik/// Kim? Czym?/// za, nad, pod, z, przed, między/// (i)em//-ą//-ą//(i)em/// ami(mi- soft)// -
P(Prepositional)/// About whom/ what?/// about, (in, on), with/// -e, -i(u/yu)//-e, -i//-i/// -ah ,-I// -
Miejscownik /// O kim? O czym? (Gdzie -where?) /// O; w, na, przy, po(walks where? po dashu =on the roof), po(when? po pracy =after work)/// ie, e, u//ie, e, y, i
//-ie m+sr+f hard: 8 soft and 3 black as in (I) m-l: t(a)=cie; st(а)=ście; (z)d=(ź)dzie;
-e m+sr+f: turn (s)ł=(ś)le; r=rze
-u (m/r "0" + sr without black) on ch,k,g,c,soft,thorn
//-e (f/r and m/r with “-a”) + 3cher: cha=sze, ka=ce; ga=dze
y/i(=P) w+m on “-a”:-y (on -c,-dz,-cz,-sz, rz,ż)/ i: (on l, j, i,ś,ń,ć,ź)
//"0": y/i(=P)
///-ach// -
Z(vocal)/// -/// -/// “0”/// Pl.=I// -
Wołacz/// -/// -/// -(i)e,-u//-o,-u,-i//-i,-y//=And
m "0" = P (excl. -(n)iec/-(ń)cze), decrease: -u// (f+m) by "-a" - hard, -ja: -o; decrease: -u; on i=i// Ж“0”:-i,y(=Р)// ср=И
///Pl = And: Panie! (Ladies!)// Pln=I: Panowie! (G-yes!) Państwo! (Ladies and Gentlemen!)
What good can be gained from this porridge? Firstly, the prepositions are very similar to Russian ones. For example, in the nominative in case they are not found either in the Russian line or in the Polish, which was obvious without any table.
Genitive also begins optimistically: about, near, without, for, from, to y, with, from, because of (who/what) roughly correspond to the Polish koło(obok), bez, dla, od, do, u, z/ze ; z powodu (kogo/czego), especially considering that in Polish it reads dla=[for]. Remembering the Little Russian accent in the textbook “I’m walking around the Christmas tree” (“Conduit and shwambraniya”), it’s easy to guess that koło(obok) = near, and having stumbled upon z/ze or z powodu a couple of times, you’ll realize that our prepositions are not in Polish “from, with(co), because of”, and there is “z/ze”. Z powodu awarii, ze szkoły, podczas burzy, oprócz cebuli (due to an accident, from school, during a storm/thunderstorm, except onions) and also naprzeciwko = opposite, wśród = among, podczas=w czasie=“during” good are guessed if you think about a village on the Russian-Ukrainian border.
The discrepancy between Polish and Russian prepositions is mainly stylistic and begins where schoolchildren get confused in cases. In Russian you should say “I’m going to school/to the cinema (V)” or “from school, from the cinema (R)”. And a deuce threatens a child who writes “from school, from the cinema” or, even more so, “to school” - if he is going to not only reach it, but also go inside and spend the whole day there. In this case, what is a two for a Russian is a five for a Pole. Polish schoolboy idzie do szkoły(Р)/ wraca ze szkoły(Р), chodzi do kina(Р), (idzie na film(В), idzie do domu/do parku(Р), which translates - goes to school(В) / returns from school (P), goes to the cinema (goes to the film (B), goes home / to the park (B). And the fact that Polish “cinema” receives the usual case endings, like other foreign words, is the least of the problems The list of places to which a Polish schoolchild goes/walks/drives is very long, but sometimes a Pole, for a change, goes “on/to” and even “above” something: na stadion(В) = to the stadium, nad morze(В )=on the sea (also on=nad any shore of a body of water) w Tatry(В)=in the Tatras (like in=w any other mountains), and this is the accusative case. And when going back from the mountains or from an event – ​​genitive. Here the pair (B)/(P) completely coincides with the Russians: w Tatry// z Tatr, na stadion/ film/ concert/ obiad(B)// ze stadionu, z filmu/concertu/obiadu (P) (in the Tatras/ from the Tatras, to the stadium/ film/ concert/ lunch// from the stadium, from the film/ concert/ lunch), as well as the unusual to the Russian ear “nad morze(В)// znad morza(Р) = to the sea//from the sea” . Another funny example from Polish stylistics is our “according to what?” - according to instructions." We taught and taught that this is the dative case (according to the protocol, decision, etc.), but it turned out that in Polish all these expressions are genitive, although in Russian it is translated as dative: według= according to: ...mnie/niego(Р) = my/his (opinion(D); ...wskazówek(R) = instructions(D)
Dative, except for “according to what/what” does not bring any special surprises. Dzięki/wbrew (thanks to/in spite of) so it will be dzięki (niemu)twojemu przyjacielowi/ wbrew wszystkim= thanks to (him) your friend/ in spite of (or in spite of) everyone. Przeciwko(przeciw) komuś/czemuś(D) does not coincide with the Russian “against whom/what(R)”. Here, in contrast to “according to which,” everything is the other way around: in Russian it is genitive, in Polish it is dative. By the way, if anyone hasn’t guessed yet, in Polish dictionaries they write not komu/czemu (to whom/what) but komuś/czemuś (to someone/something), and not “kto/co”, but “ktoś/coś” etc. in all cases, since the particle “ś” corresponds to our “-or/-that”, although it is written without a hyphen. “Ku” is rare, and is usually translated: ku morzu/ zadowoleniu = to the sea/ pleasure (for example, mutual). From the Polish point of view, the Russian “walk on the roof, in the park” is not a dative case, but a prepositional case. This difference is easier to notice in the words m/r with a consonant: a Russian is walking “in the park, on the roof (D)” // is “in the park, on the roof (P)” and the Pole is only na/po dachu//w parku (P ) - on/on the roof//in the park, and cannot trample on the park as on the surface, especially in dative case, although we can probably say that he turned “towards the park” = ku parkowi (D).
In the accusative case“on, in, above” in the combinations na stadion, nad morze, w Tatry and na film/koncert - this has already been passed. Poles also go “to the spatzer” (na spacer(B). Spatzer = walking. The unusual thing about the spatzer is that it somehow managed not to get into the Russian language. There is “Motsion”, there is a “promenade”, but there is no spatzer. Well, okay, if you didn’t hit it, it means you’re not needed. In a completely Russian way, the Pole walks through the park or across the street (for example, along an underpass) - idzie przez park/ ulicę(B). True, he doesn’t walk very much in Russian with the preposition “in front” from the house to the platform (B) in front front door: idzie przed dom(B). We, of course, do not say: “I will go out (to) the front of the house” - but the cases here coincide. There is also a preposition “for” in the usual version for us: “przepraszać za spóźnienie = to apologize for being late (B).” Also sounds good in Polish za in the meaning “za darmo / za opłatą (T)” = “for free / for a fee (for money (B)". It’s even a shame that in Polish this is not the accusative, but the instrumental case, and in essence it should be “(with what?) for free / with payment.” By the way, “how? - free, for nothing , zadarma" is an adverb in both languages, and it does not have any case endings. In addition, “za darmo” = “free” implies free tickets, bonuses, etc., and not the archaic slang “zadarma” and is always written separately. This the booklet is za darmo, and that card over there is za opłatą(T), for a fee. But more often the choice (B)/(T) does not cause problems: położyć coś pod/na stół/ jest pod stołem= put something under /on the table (B)/ is under the table (T).
There is no “about” in Polish at all (about this, about that, etc.). Therefore, the options “about the road (P) / about the road (V)” are absent in Polish - there is only “o”, and with the accusative case, and not with the prepositional case, as we would like. It turns out that asking (someone) about something / about the road / about time” (P) is translated only in the accusative case = pytać (się) (kogoś) o coś/ o drogę o godzinę (В) – something in between between our “ask (about what) about the road/about time (B)” or “ask (what?) the road/time (B)”. It’s even more difficult to come to terms with the fact that “asking for an address” (B) = prosić o adres (B). By the way, the Polish preposition “o” in its rightful place in the prepositional case is translated without problems: to talk and think about someone (P) = mówić i marzyć o kimś (P). But the strangest combination for Russian ears is worse than “driving over the sea / over the river (B), or returning “from above” the river (R), and even asking for “the address” / going “in front of the house” ( B)” is the Polish “czekać na (kogoś/co)” = wait for (someone/what) (B). Only close genetic ties with Ukraine will tell you that czekać na ojca/autobus(B) = wait for father/bus(B). But not everyone knows Ukrainian verbs.
Instrumental case, like the prepositional one, adds almost no unusual combinations or new prepositions. “For free/for a fee” za darmo/ za opłatą(T)” has already happened. There is no need to translate “pod stołem /nad stołem=under/above the table (T)”. The Polish “nad”, passing into the instrumental case, becomes almost recognizable even in expressions like to be (where?) “at the sea (on the lake (P) = (where - “above what”?) nad morzem (nad jeziorem) (T) "- in contrast to “to go (to) nad morze (jezioro)(В)/ to return (from where) znad morza (jeziora)(Р)". Also turns idzie przed dom(В) into the usual stoi przed domem (przed kinem) (T) = stands in front of the house (or in front of the “kin”, excuse me, cinema). “Together (with whom) with my brother” also sounds “in Russian”, that is, z moim bratem. The use of prepositions between and for is absolutely clear when trying to translate “między stołem a szafą wisi lampa (śpi kot)/ za domem jest ogród.” Although there are plenty of surprises not related to prepositions and cases in this example: firstly, Poles use either “a” or “i "(and in this case no comma separates the “a”!), where in Russian there is always only “and”; secondly, “szafa” is our closet, which turned out to be in the Polish language female; thirdly, “ogród” is a garden, not a vegetable garden. So the correct translation is: “there is a lamp hanging between the table and the closet (the cat is sleeping) / there is a garden behind the house.” It can be considered that the Polish “for” fails the Russians (if you don’t take into account za opłatą(T) = for a fee (B) in just one case: “tęsknić za kimś/czymś(T) = miss someone/something (P)" , although here the classic rustic “I miss my family, girlfriends (T), and our home (T)” comes to the rescue - that is, I miss home.
Prepositional, when it comes to questions o kim? o(w;na;po) czym? gdzie? extremely similar to Russian, as can already be seen: marzyć o kimś - think/dream about someone (P); na/po dachu//w parku= (be) on/ (walk) on the roof//in the park (P). The complexity of the Polish “where” is most likely due to the unusual declension geographical names. The coolest exception is three European countries: Hungary, Germany, Italy. In Polish these are Węgry, Niemcy, Włochy, and their population is Węgrzy, Niemcy, Włosi ( m-l genus), and the inhabitants are spoken of as Węgrach, Niemcach, Włochach. Since the “correct” endings are already occupied by nationalities, the Pole writes about countries “Węgry/na Węgrzech - Hungary/in Hungary” (and not “na Węgrach”, this would turn out to be chauvinism!). Germans and Italians behave similarly: w Niemczech=in Germany, we Włoszech=in Italy. These are exceptions that are in any Polish textbook, but the use of “na” and “v” does not hurt the Russian ear. Similarly with the city of Zakopane/in Zakopane - Zakopane/w Zakopanem (and not “w Zakopanym” and not “w Zakopanych”!). Inconsistencies about where to write “in” and where “on” generally occur less frequently than one might expect. This, for example, is our “at the university” = na uniwersytecie in Polish. Village/(na)in the village = wieś/na wsi is distinguished by the use of “na wsi” to mean “summer in the village,” meaning the countryside, rather than as a preposition. But there are two prepositions that are often used “not at all in Russian”, these are przy, po. After all, a Russian dines at the table (T), but a Pole eats “at the table” = przy stole (P), even if they are sitting next to each other. And of course “after”, if it is not “walking on the roof, on the site”, namely “after finishing something there”: (when?) po pracy (P) = after work (P). There will also be an after dinner/concert, etc.
But Prepositions are not used in the vocative case, since the “o” in the exclamation “Oh Mouse!” This is not a preposition at all, but an interjection like “Ah! Oy!”, and the correct address to this beast would rather be “o Myszy!”
Of course, it is impossible to list ALL the cases where Polish prepositions coincide/do not coincide with ours. But two and a half pages of instructive examples from Polish textbooks provide an excellent opportunity to completely get confused in Polish endings, which at first seemed simple and familiar. Which allows us to finally fill in the table of Polish cases with words. By the way, when checking it in a textbook, especially one translated from English, pay attention to the sequence of cases - it does not always coincide with “our Russian”.
Perhaps the most noticeable and difficult difference between Polish and Russian declensions is soft and hard endings. Since the letters “я”, “у” and “ь” are absent in Polish, then ń,ś,ć,ź /ni,si,ci,zi are the same “soft” letters that are written differently in depending on the position at the end of the word/before the vowel; “softening of consonants” - p/pi, b/bi, n/ni, m/mi, w/wi, s/si, z/zi, f/fi functions as a “soft sign” in endings –i=[and] or –ie=[e]; in addition, rz, dz and z may behave differently in standard alternations; and of course we must take into account the favorite Polish “zhy, shi with “y”. All this is easy to remember, roughly like a telephone directory or like case endings in Russian. Therefore, you have to memorize individual words, and it is better if with prepositions/verbs, or in short phrases. In order not to immediately add adjectives to nouns, we will use the magic pronoun “this / this / this / these”, which well warns that the Polish stove is masculine, the wardrobe is feminine, etc. This = ten, and “that” = tamten (ta=tamta, etc.). They behave the same in all variants, including “ci” and “tamci”, so for gender/number it is enough that this/this/this=ten/ta/to; these(men)/(not men)=ci/te

The article analyzes the definitions used in Polish linguistic literature as
synsemantic category of words. I will give special respect to the secondary receivers. Naked in role
These are units in the current Polish syntactic system, which lies in the transition from synthetic to analytical
forms
Key words: receiver, secondary receiver, meaning, prescriptive, Polish language.

1. More about the definition of preposition
The definition of preposition existing in Polish linguistic literature defines this category
as a service (synsemantic) word, which in the understanding of traditional grammar controls
a noun or a form of another part of speech with the function of a noun. At the same time, “synsemantic”
is understood as one for which the syntactic function consisting of linking, highlighting, correlating
etc., is the main one. In turn, function (synsemantic) words (grammatical words,
empty words, formal words, etc.) are words that are unable to act independently as members
sentences and serving to express various kinds of semantic-syntactic relations between
significant words. In other words: these are functionally and semantically independent words,
which form syntactic units in combination with a noun phrase; in another way: function words,
which provide entry into the formal syntactic structures of words that, mutually exclusive,
these structures could not be formed (por. “wyrazy pomocnicze, ktуre umożliwiają wstępowanie w związki
formalnoskładniowe wyrazom, kture inaczej byłyby wzajemnie inkompatibilne”).
The above definitions suffer various disadvantages. For example, the definition according to
for which the preposition is a word that is not independent in semantic terms is not enough
expressively, because it is not known whether semantic lack of independence and their semantic
incompleteness or absence of meaning (as indicated by the definition “synsemantic”). Maybe it's their
syntactic rather than semantic independence.
This means that the question of the semantics of the preposition - as well as its linguistic status - also remains insufficient
studied and debated. In this regard, it is only emphasized that in the Polish language prepositions are all
are not semantically empty words: they indicate (sygnalizują) to various types relationship
(spatial, temporal, causal, etc.).
In any case, each preposition is characterized only by its inherent set of meanings.
The meanings of a preposition constitute its semantic structure (i.e., the totality of its semantic
implementations, or variants). In other works, the dominant reference is to the functional aspect of this
categories of words. See, for example, the work of Maciej Grochowski „Wyrażenia funkcyjne. Studium leksykograficzne”
(Functional expressions. Lexicographic study).
The next question raised in the literature about the status of the preposition is the question of the relationship between the preposition and
case inflection in the prepositional group. This problem can be reduced to the formula “preposition is a word or
morpheme?". For example, Iwona Kosek speaks about this in detail in her work “Przyczasownikowe frazy przyimkowo-
nominalne w zdaniach wspуłczesnego języka polskiego” (Verb prepositional noun phrases in
statements of modern Polish). Here is an overview of Polish concepts
linguists, starting with E. Kurilovich and Z. Klemensevich, ending with their students and admirers (Tadeusz
Milewski, Andrzej Boguslawski, Stanislaw Karolyak, Maciej Grochowski, etc.). There is no point in this topic
© Lyakhur Ch., 2008 LINGUISTIC STUDIO. Vipusk 17

76
spread, especially since the concept of Jerzy Kurilovich is well known in the Russian-speaking
linguistic literature.
The next question is about the structure of prepositions. In modern Polish there are prepositions
primary, primordial from a genetic (etymological) point of view for a given language (and perhaps for
most Slavic languages), and secondary ones, derived from other parts of speech. Both are
simple or complex. The composition of Polish prepositions, of course, is constantly replenished with other parts
speech.
Very significant information about the etymology of Slavic prepositions is provided by the work of Frantisek
Kopechny “Etimologicke slovnнk slovanskеch jazykoů” (Etymological Dictionary of Slavic Languages).
For the Polish language there are no monographs yet devoted to a systematic description of all
primitive prepositions, with detailed illustrative material. Existing works
are associated, first of all, with the study of the semantics of prepositional constructions, and describe individual
meanings of prepositions. We especially note the research of Adam Weinsberg and Barbara
Klebanovskaya. Dedicated to double prepositions of the Polish language
monograph by Cheslav Lyakhur.
The authors of most of the existing works devoted to the functioning of prepositions in the Polish language are
indicate the interdependence and interdependence of the preposition and the noun. It's connected with
establishing the compatibility of individual prepositions with certain classes of nouns (in other words: which
nouns appear under certain prepositions). Let us make the following remark. M. Grokhovsky,
co-author of the academic “Gramatyki wspуłczesnego języka polskiego” (Grammar of modern Polish
language), states: “Przyimki obok własności gramatycznych sprowadzających się do determinowania określonej
formy przypadkowej mają także własności leksykalne (relacyjne), polegające na wyznaczaniu klas rzeczownikуw, kture
mogą z nimi wspуłwystępować. Kwestia, jakie leksemy rzeczownikowe mogą być użyte po jakim przyimku, wymaga
szczegуłowej analizy” (“Prepositions, except grammatical properties, which can be reduced to determining
a certain case form, also have lexical (relational) properties, consisting in
indicating the classes of nouns that can interact with them. The question is, what lexemes
nouns can be used after which preposition requires detailed analysis").
And finally, the question of the distinction between prepositions and adverbs. As you know, not a single grammar class
is not isolated, existing out of context. Units that can be clearly included in
a certain grammatical class are few in number. To such units that cannot be clearly defined
linguistic qualifications include prepositions and adverbs. Problems of the relationship between adverbs and
Many articles are devoted to prepositions in the Polish language; we cite, for example, the collection „ Przysłуwki i przyimki.
Studia ze składni i semantyki języka polskiego” [Adverbs and prepositions. Research on syntax and semantics
Polish language].
2. Secondary prepositions in Polish
The rapid development of secondary prepositions is certainly associated with significant processes that
occur in the Polish syntactic system over the past decades (it seems that the same
occurs in other Slavic languages). These processes consist in the “analysis” of language, i.e.
transition from synthetic forms to analytical forms. There is an extensive literature on this issue.
in Polish. See, for example, the works of Danuta Buttler, Janusz Anusiewicz
, Ignaci Vontora et al.
A special manifestation of these changes is a noticeable increase in prepositional elements,
whose main function in a language is to indicate various semantic and grammatical
relations between the elements of a statement connected in this way. These units are defined as
“secondary (secondary) prepositions.” They are units of language, highly specialized in
semantically and syntactically, are characterized by a complex morphological structure: they consist
of at least two (or more) syllables. Etymologically, these are most often forms of indirect
noun cases or prepositional combinations, i.e. combining prepositions with nouns,
adverbs, numerals, pronouns. These are also gerunds used in special contexts (to
what else will we come back to).
The status of these units is determined by the presence in their meaning of a relative feature (indication of
subject-object, local, temporal and other relations). Such units are not included in the proposal
occupy an independent syntactic position and are not independent members: they constitute
with the dependent word a single syntactic group. Specificity of the expressions established in this way
influences the fact that they have not yet been included in the classification by parts of speech as prepositions.
The indicated properties of these units are considered the basis, on the one hand, for their identification, and, on the other
parties, determining their status and definition.
The nature of the secondary preposition, its essence in the Polish language, issues of functioning and
further development (it should be emphasized that the class of these units is open) has a rich Section II. Current problems of morphology

77
literature. In addition to the above-mentioned works, special mention should be made of the monograph and dictionary by Beata Milewska “Przyimki
wturne we wspуłczesnej polszczyźnie” (Secondary prepositions in modern Polish) and
Słownik polskich przyimkуw wturnych (Dictionary of Polish secondary prepositions). B. Milevskoy
a theory of secondary prepositions in the Polish language has also been developed. She sets out in detail the essence of secondary
preposition, pointing at the same time to the complexity of its definition in the light of existing lexicographical
materials. Thomas Menzel’s article Der Ausdruck finaler Relationen durch “secundäre” also deserves attention.
Präpositionen im Polnischen in the Oldenburg collection „Präpositionen im Polnischen” (Prepositions in Polish
language).
In connection with the research of B. Milevskaya, we note the following point. There is no doubt that
Context plays a decisive role in assigning a linguistic unit to the class of adverbs or prepositions.
The analyzed fragment of this context is considered an adverb if it is used without
noun - as an independent member of a sentence, or a preposition if it is not
an independent member of a sentence, appears with the noun with which it comes into contact
management. Therefore, for example, the words blisko, dookoła, pośrodku, obok in the contexts: On mieszka blisko, Drzewa
otaczały dom dookoła, Stуł ustawiono pośrodku, Sklep znajduje się obok are considered adverbs, but in statements:
On mieszka blisko dworca, Dookoła domu rosły drzewa, Stуł ustawiono pośrodku salonu, Sklep znajduje się obok
dworca – the same words are prepositions.
Difficulties arise when we try to determine the linguistic status of expressions like
daleko od, wkrutce po, wraz z, zgodnie z, in which the adverb and
primitive preposition, and which can be considered occasional and free combinations, such as
for example, in expressions with a structure like tłumnie na – przybyć tłumnie na spotkanie (here we have
a free combination of the adverb tłumnie and the primary preposition na). The examples given are characterized by
however, with a certain and non-random regularity in use.
In this regard, the question arises whether this mutual coexistence indicates lexicalization
of these structures in the function of a preposition. The question is undoubtedly debatable, which is confirmed by the discrepancy even
among linguists-polonists dealing with this issue. So, for example, the mentioned
M. Grokhovsky considers prepositions to be expressions like odnośnie do ‘as regards (what)’ and zgodnie z ‘according to
(to what)’. But H. Zgulkova in her work „Funkcje syntaktyczne przyimkуw i wyrażeń przyimkowych we wspуłczesnej
polszczyźnie muwionej” (Syntactic functions of prepositions and prepositional expressions in modern
Polish colloquial speech) does not include constructions of this type in the list of prepositions.
In turn, “Słownik wspуłczesnego języka polskiego”, ed. Boguslav Danube (Dictionary
modern Polish language) marks with the mark “preposition” the expression daleko od, (as well as z
dala od and z daleka od), odnośnie do, wraz z, wraz ze, zgodnie z. This class of units also includes the expression
wespуł ‘together with’ (wespуł z rodziną), on the other hand, the word pospołu ‘together with’ is marked as an adverb, although it
appears in a very formally similar context: pospołu z innymi organizacjami ‘together with
other organizations'.
In this situation, it is important to determine the conditions that should characterize the structures
consisting of an adverb and a primitive preposition, with the aim of classifying them into the class of secondary prepositions. AND
B. Milevska is making such a successful attempt, as it seems.
3. About secondary prepositions of adverbial origin
This fragment of observation concerns a question that has not yet been the subject of a separate and
systematic description, although the existence of these units and their prepositional function in Polish
were noted. This refers to a class of words and expressions whose morphological structure does not cause
doubts.
Here are some examples: Karawana Jakuba była ogromna: składała się z […] jedenastu synуw Jakuba, nie licząc
mnуstwa czeladzi wraz z rodzinami (Z. Kosidowski). Bohaterami wojen są wysłannicy stacji telewizyjnych,
przedstawiający problemy płytko, nie uwzględniając niuansуw (“Wprost”). Atlas został uzupełniony o spis wszystkich
nazw utworуw powierzchniowych w Układzie Słonecznym (wyłączając Ziemię) (“Rzeczpospolita”). Pomijając koszt
zakupu, instalacji i amortyzacji okaże się, że koszt netto 1 kWh z takiej „elektrowni” jest na poziomie 16 groszy
(“Rzeczpospolita”). Te i inne przeinaczenia służą jednemu celowi: udowodnieniu, że pominąwszy mesjanizm, Absolut i
Marksa ograniczyłem romantyzm do nacjonalizmu (“Polityka”). Pochwalił on bowiem tylko działalność gospodarczą i
socjalną kanclerza III Rzeszy jako socjalisty, abstrahując od jego zbrodniczej działalności jako nacjonalisty
(“Rzeczpospolita”).
The expressions highlighted in these statements (nie licząc, nie uwzględniając, wyłączając, рomijając,
pominąwszy, abstrahując od) have the meaning ‘wskazanie na wyłączenie czegoś, jako wyjątku, z zakresu treści
zdania’ [‘an indication of the exclusion of something, by way of exception, from the scope of the content of the sentence’] and
are included in the relational synonymic series, the dominant of which is the preposition oprуcz ‘except, without’. Such
the synonymous series is formed by prepositions and expressions: оруcz, prуcz, poza, obok, z wyjątkiem, za wyjątkiem,
pomijając, pominąwszy, z pominięciem, nie licząc, nie uwzględniając, nie uwzględniwszy, wyłączając, wyłączywszy,
abstrahując od, z wyłączeniem. This also includes the expressions nie włączając, nie muwiąc o, nie biorąc pod LINGUISTIC STUDIES. Vipusk 17

78
uwagę (potentially za wyłączeniem). (Cf. expressions existing in Russian like: excluding, not
counting, not taking into account, not taking into account (not taking into account), not including, etc.).
Words like wyłączając, pominąwszy consist of a verb stem of the present/past tense and
suffixes -ąc, -wszy, that is, they are similar to gerunds (imiesłowy przysłуwkowe (nieodmienne)). But also in
syntactically, and semantically their behavior is largely inconsistent with
behavior of “regularly” used participles. So, the question arises, which part of speech should they belong to?
attribute. Moreover, in such situations, refer to existing dictionaries of the Polish language
impossible. It should be noted that in existing explanatory dictionaries in special articles only
primary prepositions and the indicated expressions in them are either not explained, or are found in articles
dedicated to verbs. An exception for the Polish language is the previously mentioned 2-volume
„Słownik wspуłczesnego języka polskiego” ed. Boguslav Danube and, in part, the 4-volume “Universalny słownik”
języka polskiego”, ed. Stanisław Dubisza (Universal Dictionary of the Polish Language).
See in the mentioned dictionaries, on the one hand, examples like w celu, w charakterze, w ciągu, w drodze, c tytułu, na
mocy and, on the other hand, examples like tytułem, drogą, mocą, celem.
Returning to the words wyłączając, pominąwszy, it should be noted that there are whole nests in the Polish language
more or less synonymous expressions of this type, sometimes including phraseological units (with
negation), see examples above. Most of these expressions are highly lexicalized. In addition, they
often do not have corresponding synonyms among primitive prepositions. For example, the value
constructions with the primary preposition bez do not always coincide semantically with constructions with
expression nie licząc. Danel Weiss speaks about this more broadly in the article „Nowe przyimki o pochodzeniu
imiesłowowym?” (New prepositions of adverbial origin?).
4. Conclusion
The problem of secondary prepositions in Polish (and other Slavic languages) requires further
research. The number of units of this category, its constant development, the status of secondary prepositions and their
functional equivalents in the text create new possibilities and areas of observation. Detailed
The semantics of constructions with these units also awaits description. Moreover, a comprehensive analysis of how
individual prepositions and synonymous series will help to identify, on the one hand, the possibility of their
interchangeability and, on the other hand, restrictions on use in certain contexts.

Literature
Anusiewicz 1978: Anusiewicz J. Konstrukcje analityczne we wspуłczesnym języku polskim, Wrocław.
Buttler 1967: Buttler D. Ekspansja konstrukcji analitycznych // Poradnik Językowy, nr 1.
Buttler 1976: Buttler D. Innowacje składniowe wspуłczesnej polszczyzny, Warszawa.
EJO 1999: Encyklopedia językoznawstwa ogulnego, Pod red. Kazimierza Polanskiego, wyd. drugie, poprawione
i uzupełnione, Wrocław–Warszawa–Krakław.
Gramatyka 1984: Gramatyka wspуłczesnego języka polskiego. Składnia, Pod red. Zuzanny Topolińskiej,
Warsaw.
Grochowski 1997: Grochowski M. Wyrażenia funkcyjne. Studium leksykograficzne, Kraków.
Klebanowska 1971: Klebanowska B. Znaczenia lokatywne polskich przyimkуw właściwych, Wrocław–
Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk.
Klebanowska 1982: Klebanowska B. Wyrażenia przyczynowe z rzeczownikami abstrakcyjnymi we
wspуłczesnej polszczyźnie, Warszawa.
Kopeсny 1973: Kopečne Fr. Etimologicke slovnнk slovanskеch jazykoů. Slova gramatickб a zбjmena.
1. Předložky. Koncovе partykule, Prague.
Kosek 1999: Kosek I. Przyczasownikowe frazy przyimkowo-nominalne w zdaniach wspуłczesnego języka
polskiego, Olsztyn.
Lachur 1999: Lachur Cz. Semantyka przestrzenna polskich przyimkуw prefigowanych na tle rosyjskim, Opole.
Menzel 2003: Menzel Th. Der Ausdruck finaler Relationen durch „sekundäre” Präpositionen im Polnischen //
G. Hentschel, Th. Menzel [ed.]. Präpositionen im Polnischen, Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia, Oldenburg.
Milewska 2003: Milewska B. Przyimki wtуrne we wspуłczesnej polszczyźnie, Gdańsk.
Milewska 2003a: Milewska B. Słownik polskich przyimkуw wturnych, Gdańsk.
Przysłуwki 2005: Przysłуwki i przyimki. Studia ze składni i semantyki języka polskiego, Pod red. Macieja
Grochowskiego, Toruń.
Słownik 2001: Słownik wspуłczesnego języka polskiego, Red. nauk. Bogusław Dunaj, „Przegląd Reader’s
Digest”, Warszawa.
Uniwersalny 2003: Uniwersalny słownik języka polskiego, Pod red. Stanisława Dubisza, Wyd. Naukowe PWN,
Warsaw.
Wątor 1974: Wątor I. Rozwуj funkcji wyrażeń i wyrazуw polskich od przysłуwkowej do przyimkowej,
Rzeszuw.
Weinsberg 1973: Weinsberg A. Przyimki przestrzenne w języku polskim, niemieckim i rumuńskim, Wrocław–
Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk. Section II. Current problems of morphology

79
Weiss 2005: Weiss D. Nowe przyimki o pochodzeniu imiesłowowym? // Przysłуwki i przyimki. Studio ze
składni i semantyki języka polskiego, Pod red. Macieja Grochowskiego, Toruń.
Zgуłkowa 1980: Zgуłkowa H. Funkcje syntaktyczne przyimkуw i wyrażeń przyimkowych we wspуłczesnej
polszczyźnie muwionej, Poznań.

The present paper outlines the definitions of the preposition as a synsemantic lexical category that can be found
in Polish linguistic literature. Attention has been drawn in particular to secondary prepositions. The role of these items
in the syntactic system of the Polish language, which consists in the moving away from the synthetic forms into the
analytical ones have been emphasized.
Keywords: preposition, secondary preposition, meaning, adverb, the Polish language.
Received before the editor on June 7, 2008.

Functional parts of speech include prepositions ( przyimki ), unions ( sp ó jniki ), particles ( partyku ł y ).

Prepositions(Przyimki )

Depending on the origin and morphological composition, prepositions of the Polish language can be divided into three types: a) simple, primary prepositions like bez , w , na , nad , pod , po , dla , do , przed , za and so on. b) complex prepositions like zza 'because of', spod 'from under', etc., c) secondary prepositions like dooko ł a 'around', dzi ę ki 'thanks to', obok 'Near', wzgl ę dem 'from point of view', zamiast 'instead of', etc. Prepositional-case combinations like w ci ą gu 'during', na czele 'headed by', razem 'together with', etc.

Primary prepositions, which are common Slavic in origin, most often coincide with Russian ones in meaning and functioning ( z przyjemno ś ci ą 'with pleasure', przed obiadem 'before lunch', ksi ąż ka dla doros ł ych 'book for adults', etc.). Prepositions differ in Polish and Russian in their compatibility with case forms. Some can be combined with only one case, others - with two, three cases ( bez + D . 'without', od + D . 'from', etc., za + D . , za + B . , za + N 'behind'). There may be cases of discrepancy in the use of one or another preposition in the Polish and Russian languages. Thus, there is a discrepancy in the use of the preposition do observed in a significant group of verbs and adjectives ( d ąż y ć do czego , do kogo 'to strive for something, for someone. ’, podobny do kogo , czego 'resembling someone, something', zwr ó ci ć si ę do kogo 'to contact someone', zabiera ć si ę do czego 'get down to something. ’, iść do brata 'go to brother' zajrzeć do pokoju 'look into the room', jechać do Warszawy 'go to Warsaw', etc. Among adverbial combinations, the combinations are widely used do + D in the meaning of the purpose of the action (przygotowywa ć si ę do egzamin ó w 'prepare for exams', szczoteczka do z ę b ó w 'Toothbrush', ochota do pracy 'willingness to work') . Design dla + D . may also have the meaning of a goal, an achieved result ( dla przyjemno ś ci 'for, for pleasure', dla och ł ody 'to refresh yourself'), designation of feelings and sensations ( wdzi ę czno ść dla pisarza 'gratitude to the writer').Combinations za + D . pass different object values ​​( korzysta ć z czego 'to use smb. ’),spatial values( wsta ć z łóż ku 'get out of bed', wyj ść z domu 'leave the house'). The Polish prepositional-case combination differs significantly in its lexical content za + D . and Russian s + R.p. with the meaning of the reason (ze strachu 'out of fear, out of fear', etc. ). Characteristic designs are also evaluative predicative constructions Name + copula + z + R.p. (K ł amca z ciebie . "You are a liar.").

Construction with time value za + D. has no analogue in modern Russian. The meaning of this combination is to determine the time of action by a person or phenomenon associated with a given time ( za Kazimierza Wielkiego 'during the time of Casimir the Great', za ż ycia 'in life', za moich czas ó w 'in my time', etc. Preposition combination o with the form V.p. can have an object value ( prosi ć o kogo , o co 'to ask about whom, about what'), can denote quantitative differences with different types of comparisons (with the comparative degree of adjectives and adverbs) ( o dwa lata m ł odszy 'two years younger', o dwa kroki siedzie ć 'sit two steps away', etc.). The design has a specific meaning za + V.p. with nouns denoting units of time, future tense ( za rock 'in a year', za miesi ą c 'in a month', etc.). The functioning of prepositions can be represented as follows:

Compared to the Russian language, the Polish language has a wider range of complex prepositions that are used with the genitive case and have meanings of space and time. These prepositions in Polish constitute a more complete system that serves to indicate the location of an object in space and the direction of its movement ( ponad rzek ą 'above a river', ponad g ó rami 'high above the mountains, above the mountains', pose rzek ą 'over the river', pose dome 'outside the house', popod lodem 'under the ice', wyszed ł zza rogu 'came around the corner', spod 'from under', i ść znad rzeki 'come from the river', odej ść przed drzwi 'move away from the door', wyj ść spomi ę dzy g ę stych drzew 'come out of the thick trees', spoza 'because of', etc.). Adjective and verb combination of preposition sprzed and R.p. a noun with a temporary meaning denotes a statute of limitations ( moda sprzed dwudziestu lat 'fashion from twenty years ago').

Secondary prepositions are the result of rethinking the forms of other parts of speech, primarily prepositional-case combinations and adverbs ( wzd ł u ż 'along', podczas 'during', blisko 'close to', skutkem 'as a result', wobec 'in relation to what, in relation to what', etc.).

Unions(Spójniki ),

From a functional-semantic point of view, conjunctions are divided into coordinating and subordinating.

Coordinating conjunctions ( sp ó jniki łą czne ) connect both words and sentences that are in a relationship of equality. Depending on the purpose, they can be divided into several groups: connecting(i And', a 'and, a', oraz 'and also, and', etc.), adversative(a 'A', ale 'But', jednak 'however', natomiast 'the same, but', przeciwnie 'on the contrary, on the contrary', etc.), dividing(albo 'or', b ą d ź 'or, either', etc.), explanatory(czyli 'or, that is', etc.), productive(wi ę c 'therefore, therefore', then 'thus, thereby', przeto 'therefore, therefore, so', tote ż ’and therefore ’, etc.) etc.

Subordinating conjunctions ( spójniki podrzędne )express a subordinating relationship in a complex sentence and attach subordinate clauses with various subordinate meanings. These are unions time(gdy 'When', soon 'as soon as, only, if', dop ó ki 'bye, until', etc.), causes(bo 'because, since', poniewa ż 'since, because', etc.), goals (aby 'so that, if only', by 'to', i ż by 'to', etc.), conditions (gdyby 'if', je ś li 'If', je ś liby 'if only', etc.), additions(ż e 'What', i ż 'what', etc. ), concessions (cho ć 'Although', cho ć by 'at least (and)', Chocia ż 'Although ', Chocia ż by ’at least (and)’, etc.) etc.

Some conjunctions can attach subordinate clauses with different subordinating meanings. Yes, union ż e “what” can appear in an explanatory clause ( Dobrze ,ż e ś przyszed ł. “It’s good that you came.”), subordinate clause of degree ( So mnie boli , ż e spa ć nie mog ę. “It hurts me so much that I can’t sleep.”), in the attributive clause ( Uderzy ł wiatr z so ą si łą,ż e a ż chojary przygi ęł y si ę do ziemi . “The wind hit with such force that even the old spruce trees bent to the ground.”), in the subordinate reason ( Na ł owy zje ż d ż a ł tu , ż e bory blisko . “He came here to hunt, since there is a forest nearby.”), in the subordinate clause ( Przywaliło go drzewo w liesie, że ledwo na pół żywy powrócił do domu. “A tree crushed him in the forest, so he returned home barely alive.”), etc. . The most specialized are unions bo 'because', je ż eli 'If', cho ć 'although', etc. Subordinating conjunctions can be used in a simple sentence, joining words and phrases ( Stary cho ć jeszcze krzepki gospodarz ... “An old, although still strong master...”).

Particles(Partyku ł y )

Particles include function words with different functions, meanings, and varying degrees of semantic and phonetic independence. The following are traditionally classified as particles in the Polish language:

1) morpheme particles that have grammatical meaning and serve to form word forms, this is a) particle by , which is an indicator of the subjunctive mood, as well as an inseparable component of conjunctions ż eby , aby etc., particle niech - index imperative mood, particle ni - component of negative pronouns ( nobody , nigdzie etc.), components of pronouns - ś , - kol wiek ,lada ,b ą d ź (who ś 'someone, somebody', ktokolwiek 'anyone', lada who 'anyone who just got', who b ą d ź 'someone', etc. ) ;

2) enhancing particles type no , ż e /ż, ci , to , przecie ż (We ź cie no si ę do roboty . “Finally start working.” Zrobże ! “Do it!”);

3) negative particle nie(Nic nie rozumiem. "I do not understand anything.");

4) interrogative particles like czy 'li', albo 'isn', czy ż by ’isn’, etc. ( Czy on so powiedzia ł? “Is that what he said?” Albo mi to m ó wiono ? « Did they tell me about this?”), etc.

The Polish linguistic tradition classifies introductory words with particles as modal meaning type mo ż e 'May be', chyba 'perhaps', oczwi ś cie ’of course’, etc.

Interjections(Wykrzykniki )

Interjections express a person’s emotional and volitional reactions to external urges or impulses, or imitate various characteristic sounds made by people, animals or objects.

Semantically, interjections differ from all significant parts of speech in that they do not have the function of naming; the meaning of interjections can only be understood from the context. At the same time, interjections are not parts of the sentence; they occupy an isolated position in it.

Most verbalized interjections come from onomatopoeias( Palma si ę zachybota ł a . I brzd ę k na ziemi ę! “The palm tree swayed. And hit the ground!” A wtem urwis-bęc ją w łeb kamieniem. “And at this time the mischievous person gets hit in the forehead with a stone”). Some of the interjections were formed from verbal roots ( hop , 'jump', chlup 'squelch', ciach 'bang, bang, thump' (colloquial), trzask 'clap, fuck', etc.). In the Polish linguistic tradition, interjections acting as a predicate are usually called, following Z. Klemensiewicz, “ interjection verbs» ( czasowniki wykrzyknikowe), and S. Jodlowski defines them as “ uninflected personal verbs»( czasowniki niefleksyjne osobowe). The so-called can be distinguished into a separate category. vocatives or vocative interjections, used to attract attention.

The morphological system is characterized by the presence of a category of male person (personality), the use of alternations in the formation of grammatical forms, and the absence of specific short predicative forms of adjectives and participles. The forms of degrees of comparison of adjectives and adverbs are non-homonymous. Personal and possessive pronouns They have full and short (enclitic) forms. Numerals have a special type of declension. In the verb, the forms of past, long-past, and pre-future tenses are based on the participle form in - l with personal indicators. There is a verbal noun and a special indefinite-personal form and a generalized-personal form.