Talk:Poglish

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Languages Low‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.

Merger proposal[edit]

It has been proposed that "Mixing Polish and English" be merged with the "Poglish" article. I suggest, instead, simply deleting "Mixing...," with its unwieldy title and no information of substantial importance.

The title of the "Poglish" article is in line with those of other "mixed languages," and has an opposite number here on the Polish Wikipedia. Nihil novi 19:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Autoforward needed?[edit]

The Sun newspaper (4/7/2008) thinks it's Ponglish! Digifiend (talk) 12:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also heard that it is Ponglish! --139.191.246.139 (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Examples[edit]

Would some examples, particularly the funnier ones, be appropriate to include in this? I particularly like "I will animal to you" (Zwierze Ci sie - I will trust you) and "Seeing teddy bears" (Widzimisie - I want it that way/I imagine it that way).radek (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those are not examples of mixing of languages but of gross (and stupid) mistranslation. And monoliguals won't "appreciate" them anyway. But if you have some better examples, they could be considered. Nihil novi (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they are a mixing of languages in that they are deliberate mistranslations (the humor value probably plays a role). And you're right that they're not there for the Monolinguals but they're used as slang by the people who create them - Poles abroad in English speaking countries. I also wouldn't call them "stupid" - it's slang, it's own language and it's sort of witty in fact. I guess it depends on what the scope and proper definition of Poglish is - is it just the Polonization of English words or does it include purposeful mistranslations from one language into the other (and sometimes back again)?radek (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, if these are purposeful puns (rather than malapropisms), then you are speaking not so much of language as of literature. Nihil novi (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ponglish[edit]

I am a native polish and I assure you, no one here ever heard of "poglish". There is no such a word here. "Ponglish" is the only term for it used here. 91.193.84.98 (talk) 11:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]