Synthetism and Analytism of Linguistic Units in Croatian-Polish Comparative Approach on the Example of Croatian Sudjelovati and Polish Take Part , Participate

of linguistic unit, because, regardless of whether for example in Polish language, there was collocation or synthetic verb in a sentence, transferred content was convergent, in reference to inter-linguistic equivalence, with Croatian language. Discrepancies in translation, seen on the basis of parallel corps, resulted from syntax changes which were introduced in analysed texts by translators of EU law in Croatia and Poland. This analysis may be useful from the point of view of glottodidactics and translation.


Introduction
The issue of synthetism and analytism in relation to Slavic languages has been extensively researched, but the analysis of this phenomenon is not thoroughly examined within the two languages.The paper proposes to explore the problem of analyticism and synthetism through the prism of single and multi-word language units, such as verbs and collocations, which are interlingual equivalents.The paper discusses an equivalence pair in which a synthetic verb appears on the Croatian side, as defined in the analysis.In the Polish equivalent, both a synthetic verb and a collocation can be found: Croatian sudjelovati -Polish take part, participate (brać/wziąć udział, uczestniczyć).This example illustrates that structural equivalence is not always possible; a synthetic verb does not always correspond to a synthetic verb (although it is the most common situation in Croatian-Polish equivalence), and a collocation does not always correspond to a collocation.This complexity poses a challenge for language learners, as finding equivalents for a one-word language unit among multi-word units and vice versa is not intuitive and does not happen automatically.The use of collocations elevates the construction of utterances to a higher level, but requires knowledge of connectivity patterns (Przybylska, 2020, p. 49).For translators, finding linguistic equivalents can also be challenging, especially if they are structurally different or belong to different functional language varieties.
The discussion of the indicated verb pair may serve as a model for the analysis of other examples of semantic equivalence not involving structural equivalence.The pair of equivalents presented here is not an isolated case, as other such examples can be found between Croatian and Polish, e.g.: nadati sehope, tuširati se -take a shower etc.I have chosen sudjelovati -take/take part, participate due to their frequent occurrence in legal texts, as they are units of language that appear in the administrative register and concern the general sphere of human life.The other two examples cited above also occur in general language, but are rare in the administrative style of which the legal texts forming the basis of this analysis are a part.
In addition to semantic equivalence, the pair of equivalences in question also contains structural equivalence: sudjelovati -participate (uczestniczyć).However, semantically in Polish, an analytical equivalent in the form of the collocation take part (brać/wziąć udział) provides more contextual opportunities.Still, it can also present stylistic problems when constructing speech for the foreign language learner or translator.
One may encounter assertions that attribute collocations more to an administrative style, while synthetic verbs do not exhibit such clear stylistic associations (Szymczak-Rozlach, 2010, p. 112).Renata Przybylska, however, highlights the pitfall of exclusively studying collocations for a specific style, as it may lead to accusations of focusing only on a particular segment of the language.Nevertheless, by examining the collocability of specialized texts, such as legal documents, one can acquire insights into the characteristic word combinations of a given style (Przybylska, 2020, p. 46).However, determining the stylistic affiliation of a language unit is challenging, especially if it is widely used in general language, as it appears in texts of various styles.

Objectives, material base and methodology
The aim of this article is to comparatively trace the issues of semantics, equivalence, syntax, and style related to the phenomenon of synthetism and analytic language units in Croatian and Polish, using the example of a selected unit.In Croatian, a synthetic verb is examined, specifically sudjelovati, while the Polish counterpart is explored in the form of collocations like take/take part (brać/wziąć udział) and the synthetic verb participate (uczestniczyć).The analysis extends to both general language usage in Croatian and Polish and is specifically focused on the phenomenon in legal texts, characterized by administrative style, where collocations are believed to be most prevalent, particularly in Croatian (Blagus Bartolec, 2017, pp. 286, 305).
Goranka Blagus Bartolec provides three supporting reasons: 1) pragmatism, as collocations often convey a narrower meaning than synthetic verbs, with administrative style texts featuring nominalization; 2) linguistic contacts, as Croatian collocations are frequently borrowed from other languages (German, Hungarian, Russian, English) over centuries; 3) word-formation challenges, as it is not always feasible to form a synthetic verb (Blagus Bartolec, 2017, pp. 290-291).Similar challenges are observed in Polish.In selecting collocations in administrative texts, their use as more precise language units is crucial.Despite dictionary indications suggesting otherwise, e.g., Wielki słownik języka polskiego PAN [The Great Dictionary of the Polish Language, Polish Academy of Sciences] (WSJP PAN, n.d.) categorizing the collocation take part (brać udział) as a hyperonym compared to the verb participate (uczestniczyć), collocations are often borrowed from other languages, mainly English or German.The appearance of collocations in Polish may also stem from the absence of a verb expressing a specific content, necessitating an omniscient conveyance through multi-word constructions.
Croatian language dictionaries provided the material basis: Hrvatski jezični portal [Croatian language portal] (HJP, n.d.), Veliki rječnik hrvatskoga standardnoga jezika [The Great Dictionary of Croatian Standard Language] (VRHSJ, 2015), Rječnik sinonima hrvatskoga jezika [Dictionary of Croatian Synonyms] by Ljiljana Šarić and Wiebke Wittschen (RSHJ, 2008), Kolokacijska baza hrvatskogo jezika [Collocation base of Croatian language] (KBHJ, n.d.) and the Polish: Słownik języka polskiego PWN [Polish language dictionary PWN] -electronic (SJP PWN, n.d.) and printed versions (SJP PWN, 2012), Wielki słownik języka polskiego PAN [The Great Dictionary of the Polish Language, Polish Academy of Sciences] (WSJP PAN, n.d.).Examples of usage of the analysed language units have been excerpted from the Croatian language corpus HrWaC (hrWaC, 2016) and the Polish language corpus The National Corpus of Polish of the IPI PAN (NKJP, n.d.).For the excerpting of collocations, appropriate tools were used, which operate alongside the corpora -for Croatian it is an additional possibility to search the corpus, for Polish it is a special tool Kolokator NKJP.The texts of legal acts have been collected in the Eur-Lex database (Eur-Lex, n.d.) and are treated here as a parallel Polish-Croatian corpus.The article also uses the only scientific Polish-Croatian dictionary by Neda Pintarić and Milan Moguš Poljsko-hrvatski rječnik [Polish-Croatian Dictionary] (PHR, 2002) to verify the correctness of the selected interlingual equivalents.
The dictionaries served as the basis for the semantic elaboration of the analyzed language units.The excerpt of definitions from the general monolingual dictionaries helped to establish the proper meanings, style affiliations, grammatical structure and syntactic requirements, or to determine possible suggested correct uses indicated for the verb sudjelovati -participate (uczestniczyć) and collocations take part (brać/wziąć udział).As it has already been mentioned, the national corpora and the parallel corpus of legal texts of the Eur-Lex database allowed us to obtain examples of contexts used in Croatian and Polish language practice.The texts selected for analysis are legal acts of the European Union issued in the first half of 2020, when Croatia presided over the work of the Council of the European Union.Thus, these are texts concerning various areas of economic, social, and legal life relating to the functioning of the societies of the EU Member States, so one encounters usage contexts presenting a variety of vocabulary.
The excerpting of contextual material in the parallel corpus was carried out semi-automatically using AntConc software (Anthony, 2022), which made it possible to create and analyze its own corpus, not included in other language corpora, and to find examples of the use of the analyzed language units in the texts of legal acts.The semi-automatic nature of the method was due to the fact that it is impossible in the aforementioned application to automatically extract all the inflectional forms building a word combination in inflected languages such as Croatian and Polish.It is possible to obtain a concordance containing, for example, different forms of the verb forming a given collocation, but all these forms have to be verified manually due to the impossibility of retrieving all inflectional forms of a given word occurring in a given word combination in one search.
The selection of the indicated verb equivalents sudjelovati -take part, participate (brać/wziąć udział, uczestniczyć) was carried out.Although the HJP (n.d.) also notes occurrence of the synonymous collocation uzeti učešće and the synthetic verb učestvovati1 in Croatian which, however, is considered to be a regionalism and Serbianism, so it falls outside the scope of the analysis of Croatian standard language.After confronting the frequency of the above collocation in the Croatian Reference Corpus (hrWaC, 2016) and in the corpus of legal texts being the basis of the analysis, it turned out that its share in the corpus sentences is negligible, as it amounted to 0.15 occurrences per million linguistic units (e.g.words or sentences) in the Croatian corpus, in contrast to the verb sudjelovati, whose incidence per million is 203.24 units.2This study focuses solely on the imperfective verb sudjelovati in Croatian due to the absence of its accomplished counterpart (Cvikić & Jelaska, 2007, p. 198).The verb participate (uczestniczyć) in Polish exhibits a similar aspectual situation, appearing only as an imperfective verb without an aspectual pair.In the synonymic collocation, on the other hand, the indefinite aspect is distinguished take part (brać udział) and the imperfective mode (wziąć udział).In Polish, the verb "take part" can be translated into two distinct forms: "brać udział" and "wziąć udział" This linguistic phenomenon is characterized by the coexistence of multiple expressions for a single concept.The distinction lies in the aspectual differences between the verbs.1. "Brać udział": a) Represents the imperfective aspect.b) Conveys the ongoing or repeated nature of taking part.2. "Wziąć udział": a) Represents the perfective aspect.b) conveys a completed or one-time occurrence of taking part.In contrast, English does not make a clear aspectual distinction in the translation of "take part".English employs a single expression for both ongoing and completed actions.This linguistic nuance in Polish reflects the language's rich system of aspectual distinctions, allowing speakers to convey subtle differences in the temporal nature of actions.Such intricacies contribute to the depth and expressiveness of the Polish language.The Kolokator reports chi 2 values for the Polish data with indicators of 107351.18take part (brać udział) and 62759.19 for take part (wziąć udział), "representing the statistical significance of a given collocation" (Pęzik, 2012, p. 268), i.e. "the probability that the frequency of co-occurrence of a collocation centre with a given word in the corpus is not random" (Przybylska, 2020, p. 47).In NKJP (n.d.), participate (uczestniczyć) appears 5734 times.A direct comparison of occurrence data between Croatian and Polish is challenging due to differences in corpus construction and linguistic unit counts in them, but they are needed to illustrate the frequency of their occurrence on the ground of the language from which they originate.
In the corpus of analyzed texts of EU legislation, the linguistic units in question are numerically as follows: in the Croatian corpus of 5545588 linguistic units sudjelovati (in various grammatical forms) occurs 725 times, uzeti učešće does not occur at all, in the Polish part of the corpus out of 5662861 units, take part (brać udział) appeared 162 times, take part (wziąć udział) 30 times, and participate (uczestniczyć) 1210 times.

Terminological problem and state of research
Here, the verb is called synthetic to emphasize its single-word structure, while for the analytical form the term collocation is used due to the large semantic capacity of the term.The term synthetic verb can be found in a study by Mariola Szymczak-Rozlach, where the author defines it as a synthetic verbal equivalent, which is the equivalent of a collocation within a single language (Szymczak-Rozlach, 2010, p. 29).She does not mention interlingual equivalence having the structure discussed in this study.
A collocation, on the other hand, is a discontinuous unit of language, its meaning does not derive directly from the meanings of its individual components, hence the terminological problem of assigning these multi-word constructions to connective phraseological compounds (Kurkowska & Skorupka, 1959).The degree of connectivity and the possibility of exchanging components in a collocation and a connective phraseological compound are similar, because both in a collocation and in a connective phraseological compound, the misuse of components is perceived by language users as a linguistic error, with the difference that a multi-word unit of language, in order to be recognised as a collocation and not as a phraseologism, should have its synthetic close verb equivalent (Szymczak-Rozlach, 2010, p. 112).
In both Croatia and Poland, research on collocations as multi-word lexical units has been conducted for decades.In Poland, they started earlier than in Croatia, as already in the 1960s the first works on word combinations not necessarily assigned to phraseologisms appear, e.g.Danuta Buttler's 1968 article defining these units as analytical constructions (Buttler, 1968;Anusiewicz, 1978) or multi-verbalism (Buttler, 1978).In the following decades, further studies appear in which researchers propose other terms, such as: predicative periphrase (Topolińska, 1977), periphrastic expression, periphrastic decision (Bogusławski, 1978), verbo-nominal analytic, verbo-nominal phrase (Jędrzejko, 1992;Mindak, 1983), to the emergence of the term collocation in the first decade of the 21st century.It is believed to have emerged under the influence of English, where the occurrence of collocations is common, and research on these constructions has been conducted since the 1950s through John R. Firth (1957).Collocation as a term for multi-word constructions appears, among others, in studies by Grażyna Vetulani (2012), Ewa Białek (2015), or Renata Przybylska (2020).
The linguistic phenomenon discussed in the article, i.e. the analysis of collocation and synthetic verb as interlingual equivalents, has already been partially explored by Ewa Białek, who has studied Polish and Russian in this regard.The researcher draws attention to the phenomenon of equivalence of synthetic unit versus analytic on the level of a single language, but also shows interlingual semantic pairs fulfilling the indicated criterion (Białek, 2013, p. 96).
The problem of collocation in legal texts has not yet received many studies in both Polish and Croatian literature.In Polish linguistics, two research streams can be distinguished: concerning the problems of syntax of legal texts, which is dealt with by Małgorzata Gębka-Wolak and Andrzej Moroz (Gębka-Wolak & Moroz, 2016), or due to the legal terms created by collocations (Gębka-Wolak, 2016), and from the point of view of translation of collocations in legal texts -here we can mention the research of, among others, Wanda Stec concerning Russian (Stec, 2018) or Katarzyna Siewiert-Kowalkowska for German (Siewiert-Kowalkowska, 2016).In Croatian linguistics, the problem of collocation in legal texts began to be elaborated with the emergence of the need to translate EU legal acts, hence Larisa Grčić Simeunović and Tomislav Frleta's article on the translation of complex language units -terms and collocations in legal texts (Grčić Simeunović & Frleta, 2012).Other studies of collocation concern either administrative texts in general (Blagus Bartolec, 2017) or scientific style texts (Šnjarić, 2018).

Dictionary analysis sudjelovati -take part, participate (brać/wziąć udział, uczestniczyć)
By analyzing the dictionary definitions, the range of meanings of the linguistic units under study in Croatian and Polish was determined, and it was possible to determine interlingual equivalents.However, it was problematic to identify the meaning for collocations that do not appear in all dictionaries.Often, collocations can be extracted from the dictionary entry for a verb because it is a periphrasis of the verb, however, only in WSJP PAN (n.d.) can we find the collocation take part (brać/wziąć udział) as an independent dictionary entry, but it does not have as extensive a dictionary description as the synthetic verbs collected in the aforementioned dictionary.In HJP (n.d.), collocations are hidden in dictionary entries related rather to nouns, so the aforementioned collocation for the verb sudjelovati as uzeti učešće can only be found in the noun phrase učešće, not with the verb uzeti/uzimati or sudjelovati.The listing of verb collocations in Croatian dictionaries is not a frequent phenomenon (Blagus Bartolec, 2017, p. 288).The presence of collocations in various dictionary entries makes them difficult to find, for example, by language learners.
As synonymous with the verb sudjelovati, the RSHJ indicates different verbs and collocations: "imati udjela, uzeti udjela (u čemu), biti (su)dionikom (u čemu), participirati, surađivati usp., (~ u troškovima) zajedno snositi, (~u čemu) kumovati, šurovati, (~u financiranju) sufinancirati, (~u organizaciji) suroganizirati; nef.primirisati, uvaliti se." (RSHJ, 2008, p. 452).Moreover, two meanings for the verb sudjelovati appear in the dictionary Veliki rječnik hrvatskoga standardnoga jezika edited by the team of Liliana Jojić: "djelovati zajdedno s kime, imati udjela u kakvu događaju ili zbivanju, biti sudionikom [sudjelovati u pothvatu/u natjecanju/u raspravi/u prekršaju] = participirati."(VRHSJ, 2015(VRHSJ, , p. 1486)).The dictionary also contains important information due to the collocation of uzeti/uzimati učešće, which is noted by the HJP and which also appears in the Croatian national corpus.Definition of the lexeme učešće itself (the dictionary does not mention this collocation) points to its three meanings: "1.razg.→ udio.(2) [učešće grada i županije u sufinanciranju, učešće u vlasti = participacija]; 2. bank.novčani polog primatelja kredita u određenom postotku vrijednosti namjene [treba namuknuti novac za učešće za stan; kredit od pet godina bez učešća; kredit bez učečća i jamaca = bez udjela]; 3. razg.bivanje sudionikom čega [odbijanje učešća na konkgresu]."(VRHSJ, 2015(VRHSJ, , p. 1595)).The indicated lexeme in two of its meanings is assigned to the colloquial style, in the third it is a specialized, banking term.It can therefore be presumed that the third meaning noted in the dictionary, which is the semantic equivalent of the verb sudjelovati belonging to the colloquial style, results in being a component of the collocation, giving it a colloquial meaning, hence the negligible number of occurrences in the national corpus (it rather appears in journalistic texts) and the complete absence of this collocation in the analyzed corpus of legal texts.3 In the WSJP PAN dictionary the verb participate (uczestniczyć) has the following definition: to participate -( 1) to be at the place where a certain activity is performed and to perform it together with other people, or to perform another function that results from the essence of that activity; (2) to perform a function consisting in the performance of certain actions in a venture or other organisational whole, which involves joint responsibility for the course of that matter, benefiting or suffering losses in connection with it.(WSJP PAN; "uczestniczyć", n.d.-b) In the SJP PWN (electronic and printed versions), the meaning in the definition is similar, the electronic version of the dictionary includes: "(1) to take an active part in something to co-operate in some action; (2) to have a share in the expenses and profits of some undertaking" (SJP PWN; "uczestniczyć", n.d.-a), while the earlier printed version draws attention to having one's contribution in something, to community and membership in something: "(1) to take an active part in something: U. in a meeting; (2) to have one's contribution, share, be a partner, member in something.U. in income."(SJP PWN, 2012, p. 1077).
The collocation take part (brać/wziąć udział) in both its meanings is considered in the WSJP PAN (n.d.) to be a hyperonym relative to the verb participate (uczestniczyć).This is not often extracted in dictionaries, with the result that many times collocations are treated as synonymous with the synthetic verb, while they may have broader meanings and are not semantically identical with the verb.The information quoted above may come as a surprise, since it is repeatedly pointed out that the analyticity of forms makes the meaning more precise and therefore narrower, hence the frequent use of collocations in specialized texts or administrative style texts, i.e. wherever precision of expression is required.On the other hand, the verb participate (partycypować) is synonymous with the collocation take part (brać/wziąć udział) (for meaning (2): "someone takes part in something -(1) someone has a share in something; (2) someone participates in an indicated action" (WSJP PAN, n.d.).

The contextual analysis sudjelovati -take part, participate (brać/wziąć udział, uczestniczyć)
Contextual analysis is needed because of the precise determination of meaning, especially in polysemous words, as only then is it possible to find the full, standard use of a given word, i.e. in a specific meaning (Przybylska, 2020, p. 48).The two-phase corpus analysis, first in the general Croatian and Polish corpora, and then in the parallel Croatian-Polish corpus of legal texts collected in the Eur-Lex database, provides the basis for the contextual elaboration of the studied language units, i.e. allows to distinguish specific meanings and illustrate them with examples of use in linguistic practice.The first phase, i.e. the excerpting of contexts of use from the general corpora, allowed the identification of meanings for the general language.The second phase, the analysis of legal texts and the excerpting of contexts of use for this type of text, made it possible to study cross-linguistic equivalence, and check it semantically and structurally.
The analysis in the first phase consisted of dissecting the various dictionary definitions and extracting individual differing meanings from them, and then matching them with examples from the corpora to confirm the dictionary meanings; however, the extracted contextual material included such examples of usage that were not signaled in the dictionary entries.Usage contexts for Croatian were cited only for the verb sudjelovati, for e.g.: 1 For the Polish language, the uses of the synthetic verb and collocations have been extracted: 1.To be in a place where a certain activity is performed and to perform it together with other people, or to perform another function that results from the essence of this activity (WSJP PAN, n.Thanks to the corpus analysis, another meaning defined as being part of a chemical or physical process has been extracted for the languages in question.This meaning can be considered to appear in specialized texts because of the content it represents.It is also encountered in journalistic and popular science texts. A corpus analysis of Croatian and Polish legal texts carried out on parallel texts made it apparent that in most of the languages in question, at least on the example of the Croatian verb sudjelovati and the Polish collocation take part (brać/wziąć udział) and the verb participate (uczestniczyć) semantically coincide.Most often, a change in meaning and equivalence occurs when there is a syntactic discrepancy in translation.The divergence effect may be the result of translating the texts of EU legal acts from English or French (Grčić Simeunović & Fileta, 2012, p. 233), so translating them into Croatian or Polish also contains a certain amount of semantic and syntactic interpretation by individual translators.
In the framework of the present analysis, 12 sentence pairs were extracted from the parallel corpus4 and confronted with the meanings previously confirmed in the definitions and general corpus analysis.The aforementioned additional meaning referring to a chemical or physical process was not found in the texts of the legal acts.The extracted pairs showed that only in a few cases there are syntactic discrepancies, entailing semantic discrepancies: 1. Porezna uprava (SAR) surađuje s ICF-om u okviru centralizirane koordinacije za potrebe poreznih prijava i poreznog nadzora kako bi osigurala da subjekti [koji sudjeluju -added by the Author] u lancu proizvodnje šumskih proizvoda ispunjavaju svoje porezne obveze.-For the purposes of tax registration and control, the Tax Administration Service (SAR) works in centralized coordination with the ICF to ensure that those taking part in the forestry production chain meet their tax obligations.(Polish: Na potrzeby rejestracji i kontroli podatków Służba Administracji Podatkowej (SAR) pracuje w scentralizowanej koordynacji z ICF w celu zapewnienia, by podmioty biorące udział w łańcuchu produkcji leśnej wywiązywały się ze swoich obowiązków podatkowych.)-the omission of the verb in the Croatian version of the sentence is due to the word order used in that language, which is similar to that of the original English, and which has allowed the insertion of another subordinate clause, thus simplifying the construction of the whole sentence, but the meaning has not changed; 2. Neovisnost od drugih funkcija LAS-a: organizacije i pojedinci uključeni u upravljanje šumskim resursima ili njihovu regulaciju jasno su odvojeni od organizacija i pojedinaca uključenih u neovisnu reviziju.-Independence from other functions of the LAS: there is a clear separation between organizations and individuals taking part in management or regulation of the forest resource and those taking part in the independent audit.(Polish: Niezależność od innych funkcji systemu zapewnienia legalności: istnieje jasny podział pomiędzy organizacjami i osobami biorącymi udział w zarządzaniu zasobami leśnymi lub ich regulowaniu a organizacjami i osobami biorącymi udział w niezależnym audycie.); 3. U ožujku i travnju 2020.pripadnici skupine 3R bili su uključeni u sedam slučajeva seksualnog nasilja u trima selima u prefekturi Ouham-Pendé.-Between March and April 2020, members of the 3R group were involved in seven cases of sexual violence in three villages in the Ouham-Pendé prefecture.(Polish: W okresie od marca do kwietnia 2020 r. członkowie grupy 3R brali udział w siedmiu przypadkach przemocy seksualnej w trzech wsiach w prefekturze Ouham-Pendé.) Examples 2. and 3. in the Polish translation contain the collocation take part, even though in the Croatian version there is a participle form of the verb uključiti, one of the meanings of which corresponds to the Polish meaning for the verb participate.From Polish dictionary definitions, one of the extracted meanings for this verb is: "to have a contribution, share, be a partner in something, be a member of something" (SJP PWN, 2012) and it is the same as the one listed in HJP (n.d.) for the verb uključiti, hence such interlingual equivalents are not surprising.

Semantic and structural equivalence of the linguistic units in question
By semantic equivalence is meant the semantic adequacy of the linguistic units in Croatian and Polish, while by structural equivalence is meant the adequacy related to the formal structure of the equivalents, to their structure.In the case of the analyzed linguistic units, this refers to whether a given unit, which in Croatian is a multi-word unit (in the case of this study -a two-word unit) in Polish is also translated in a multiword or synthetic form, and vice versa.
For Croatian, the standard language form sudjelovati is the only possible form that semantically represents the content analyzed above.The linguistic units for the Polish language collocation as well as the synthetic verb are semantically identical, so both can be used as semantic equivalents for the Croatian synthetic form, as can be seen in the analyzed examples extracted as representative from the parallel corpus: "Radi dosljednosti i jasnoće trebalo bi utvrditi odredbe koje se odnose na ovlasti i obveze dužnosnika, drugih službenika i upućenih nacionalnih stručnjaka koji sudjeluju u inspekcijama u vezi s vlastitim sredstvima Unije."-"For the sake of consistency and clarity, provisions should be laid down regarding the powers and duties of officials, […], who take part in inspections in respect of the Union's own resources."(Polish: "W celu zapewnienia spójności i jasności należy określić przepisy dotyczące uprawnień i obowiązków urzędników, […], którzy biorą udział w inspekcjach w odniesieniu do zasobów własnych Unii."); "Danska ne sudjeluje u donošenju ove Odluke te ona za nju nije obvezujuća niti se na nju primjenjuje.",-"Denmark does not participate in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application."(Polish: "Dania nie uczestniczy w przyjęciu niniejszej decyzji i nie jest nią związana ani jej nie stosuje.")Thus, it does not matter to which functional style the text belongs, the semantics of the interlingual equivalents remain unchanged, even though they may differ in structure.

Conclusion
The analysis carried out highlighted that, in a specific example of equivalence between the sudjelovati and take part, participate (brać/wziąć udział, uczestniczyć) the structure of the linguistic unit is unimportant for meaning.It can therefore be concluded that the greater problem, however, is the choice of semantics, not of form.This is not a conclusion that can be translated to all such linguistic units that constitute a synthetic verb in one language and a collocation and/or a synthetic verb in the other, and vice versa, but the present analysis can contribute to further translational and glottodidactic studies of interlingual verb and multi-word equivalents.
The problem of structure choice may be important for language learners and translators if they do not find in general dictionaries which form is the adequate form necessary for use in an utterance of a given linguistic style.In the corpus analysis in general texts, but also in legal texts, it turned out that, at least for the Polish language, it does not matter whether a collocation or a synthetic verb is used in one of the definite meanings, as they do not differ in this respect.However, the difference in the use of the form was due to the desire of the constructor of the utterance to achieve greater precision, as users often perceive collocations as forms that make the text clearer.
The number of collocations and synthetic verbs used in the analyzed corpus of legal texts does not indicate, as Croatian and Polish linguists recognize, that the administrative style is more analytical than other functional styles.However, one cannot generalize on the basis of one pair of equivalents; more analyses of the condemned phenomenon should be carried out.The disproportion, however, between the use of collocation and synthetic verb for the take part and participate (brać/wziąć udział and uczestniczyć) is ten times higher in favor of the verb.For Croatian, due to the lack of a collocation semantically corresponding to the verb sudjelovati, it is not possible to carry out such a comparison of the analyticity and syntheticality of the forms used in the texts.Determining the degree of analyticity or syntheticality of a text on the basis of statistical data can only be the basis for further syntactic and semantic research, and should not prejudge the structural character of a given text or the texts of a particular functional style.
Magdalena Baer (magbaer@amu.edu.pl)-PhD in Slavic linguistics, researches the contemporary Croatian language in comparison with the Polish language.Her main research topic is collocations, their Croatian-Polish linguistic equivalence and semantics.The researcher is also involved in analysing the relationship between language and nature.She is the originator of the project "Humanistyka w przyrodzie.Przyroda w humanistyce" [ Humanities in Nature.Nature in the Humanities], as part of which conferences are held and postconference publications are published.