Talk:Polish morphology

Tables

The information in this article is rather badly organised, with just endless lists of forms. Tables would be much more accessible and easier to understand. I have converted the noun section, can someone else volunteer to do the rest? CodeCat (talk) 21:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Agree! This should be done for the adjectives as well! Marsupium (talk) 18:47, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Declension table

The plural gentive of "miesiąc" should be "miesięcy" instead of "miesiący". As the point of this table is to show how endings change, it would be confusing to just change it. I suggest picking another noun for that table. 77.253.124.105 (talk) 19:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Virility

This article mentions masculine animate nouns, but not masculine virile. Shouldn't this be added? We say 'widzialem kroliki' but 'widzialem facetow' - because of virility. Kroliki robily, faceci robili. Malick78 (talk) 22:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Non-English words

@Keyacom and Marsupium: Greetings, and thanks for your work on the project! I ran an automated report on the 2020-05-20 Wikipedia database dump, and the following show up as possible typos or non-English words. They may need to be tagged with {{lang}} or {{not a typo}}.

i)e, i)o, z(e), e)m, bierze(sz), zacznie(sz), piewa(sz), mąky, mopie, hangarze, giem, dzy, młodzieńcze, dzy, anów, ogist, policjanty, policjanci, ministrowie, burżuje, burżuje, chrzt, tchu/tchowi, książeta, sędziego/hrabiego, sędziemu/hrabiemu, sędziego/hrabiego, sędzią/hrabią, sędzi/hrabi, sędzio/hrabio, sędziowie/hrabiowie, sędziów/hrabi, sędziom/hrabiom, sędziów/hrabiów, sędziami/hrabiami, sędziach/hrabiach, sędziowie/hrabiowie, narzędzi, wszystka, dwóm, dwoma, dwiema, trzej/trzech, trzem, trzema, czterej/czterech, czterech, czterech, czterem, czterema, pięcioma, siedmiu, ośmiu, jedenastu, dwudziestu, trzydziestu, pięćdziesięciu, dwustu, trzystu, pięciuset, dwojga, dwojgu, dwojgiem, trojga, trojgu, trojgiem, czworga, czworgu, czworgiem, wieloma, pełno, obydwa, kupimy, kupicie, kupią, ły, eć, ąć, móg, ść, źć, nąć, znikł, będzicie, stawaj, łszy, zabiwszy, eć, yć/-ić, ąć, ęty, nąć, nięty, jedzony, rozumiany, rozumienie, powinna/-o/-i/-y, powinienem/powinnam, rozeznać

-- Beland (talk) 04:22, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Masculine case forms generalizations

The article as of right now states that "The accusative of masculine nouns is identical to the nominative or genitive," failing to take into account that there are masculine a-stems (e.g. nominative mężczyzna 'man' having the accusative mężczyznę but the genitive mężczyzny, thus not being identical to either. Should this be fixed to say something like "The accusative of masculine u-stems/a-stems is identical to the nominative or genitive", or perhaps something with less specific terminology ("The accusative singular of masculine words ending in a consonant is identical to the nominative or genitive singular, depending on animacy")? Purple purpur (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)