Learn Hardcore Polish: Ten stół jest wolny, ale tamten jest zajęty przez rodzinę. - This table is free, but that one is occupied by a family.

ten = “this” (near the speaker).
tamten = “that (one over there)” or “the other one” (farther away or not the one just mentioned). Gender forms you’ll meet:
Masculine: ten / tamten
Feminine: ta / tamta
Neuter: to / tamto
Plural (non-masculine-personal): te / tamte; plural (masculine-personal, for male people): ci / tamci

Why can tamten stand alone in the second clause?

Because it replaces the understood noun stół. Polish often drops a repeated noun if a demonstrative pronoun alone makes the reference clear. Here, tamten means “that one (table).” It still agrees in gender/number with the omitted noun (masculine singular).

Why is wolny used for “free”? Could I say pusty or darmowy instead?

wolny = free/available (not occupied). This is the right choice for a seat/table.
pusty = empty (no items/people), but it might still be reserved. Different nuance.
darmowy = free of charge. Not about availability. For a free (no-cost) drink, you’d use darmowy.

Why is it zajęty (not zajęta or zajęte)?

Adjectives agree with the noun’s gender and number. stół is masculine singular, so:

masculine singular: zajęty
feminine singular (e.g., ławka): zajęta
neuter singular (e.g., miejsce): zajęte
plural non-masculine-personal (e.g., tables): zajęte Note: zajęty also means “busy” when describing a person.

Why is it przez rodzinę and not przez rodzina?

The preposition przez (“by/through”) takes the accusative case. rodzina (nom.) → rodzinę (acc. sg.). So “occupied by a family” = zajęty przez rodzinę.

Could I say zajęty rodziną instead of zajęty przez rodzinę?

Not here. zajęty przez + accusative names the agent in a passive-like idea (“occupied by a family” sitting there). zajęty rodziną (instrumental) typically means “busy with (one’s) family” (a person’s time/attention), not “taken by a family” (a table/seat).

Do I have to repeat jest? Can I say: Ten stół jest wolny, ale tamten zajęty…?

You can omit the second jest in coordinated, parallel structures. Both are natural:

Ten stół jest wolny, ale tamten jest zajęty…
Ten stół jest wolny, ale tamten zajęty…

Is the comma before ale required?

Yes. In Polish, you place a comma before ale when it connects clauses or parallel predicates. So the comma is correct here.

How do I pronounce the tricky words?

stół ≈ “stoo-w” (ó = “oo”, ł = English “w”)
wolny ≈ “VOHL-nih”
tamten ≈ “TAHM-ten”
zajęty ≈ “zah-YEN-tih” (final -y like a hard “i”)
przez ≈ “pshehz” (rz like “zh”)
rodzinę ≈ “roh-JEE-neh” (final ę is lightly nasal, often close to “eh” in everyday speech)

Would stolik be more natural than stół in a restaurant?

Often yes. stolik (small table) is very common in cafés/restaurants:

Ten stolik jest wolny? = “Is this table free?” You also hear seat-focused versions like To miejsce jest wolne? (“Is this seat free?”).

Can I change the word order for emphasis?

Yes, within limits:

Neutral: Ten stół jest wolny.
Emphasis on “free”: Wolny jest ten stół. (more marked/literary) Avoid splitting elements unnaturally; Polish allows flexibility, but the neutral order is safest.

Does Polish mark “a/the” with articles here?

Polish has no articles. przez rodzinę can mean “by a family” or “by the family,” depending on context. The English article is inferred, not expressed.

What are the plural equivalents if I’m talking about multiple tables?

Te stoły są wolne, ale tamte są zajęte przez rodziny. Here: stoły (tables), te/tamte (these/those for non-personal plurals), są (are), wolne/zajęte (plural forms), rodziny (families).

When should I use to vs ten before a noun?

To works as “this/that” in “This is…” sentences: To jest stół.
Before a specific noun, use the gendered demonstratives: ten stół, ta ławka, to miejsce. You don’t say “to stół” to mean “this table” in a full sentence.

Could I use lecz instead of ale?

Yes, lecz also means “but,” but it’s more formal/literary. The comma rule remains: …, lecz …. In everyday speech, ale is far more common.