Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 29, 2012 at 10:39 history edited kamil-s CC BY-SA 3.0
added an afterthought
Mar 3, 2012 at 7:40 comment added kamil-s @RonMaimon Not necessarily. I will admit scattering a subordinate clause all over a sentence will often have a poetic feel to it (or will be hardly understandable) but technically it is possible. Your example could be e.g. Jan raźnym szedł do kina krokiem, na którego wschodniej, ku Mekce zwróconej, plakaty ścianie wisiały. John brisk-instr. went to cinema-gen. step-instr., on which-gen. eastern-gen., towards Mecca-dat. facing-gen., posters wall-praep. hung. Is this mixed enough for your needs?
Mar 3, 2012 at 7:25 comment added kamil-s @MarkBeadles Good point! As a sidenote, in my NS intuition I'd say pisalibyśmy is one word, but wczorajbyśmy -- I don't know. It's spelled as one (I think), but it doesn't feel like one, although it doesn't really feel like two, either. See also to żeś dał przykład :)
Mar 3, 2012 at 5:39 comment added Ron Maimon What about embedded clauses? These must stay together, so is the word permutation within each clause? I mean, something like: "John walked to the cinema that has fliers posted on the eastern side, the side that faces Mecca, briskly"
Mar 3, 2012 at 1:27 comment added Mark Beadles And of course in Polish even some 'bound' morphemes are (somewhat) free to move about - e.g. wczorajbyśmy pisali <- wczoraj pisalibyśmy ‘we would have written yesterday’ where the 1st person plural conditional morpheme is removed from the rest of the verb -- further amplifying your point about syntax v. morphology.
Feb 26, 2012 at 21:16 vote accept James Grossmann
Feb 24, 2012 at 23:46 history edited Alenanno CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 7 characters in body
Feb 24, 2012 at 10:21 history answered kamil-s CC BY-SA 3.0