Learn Hardcore Polish: Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.

ten – masculine singular (for example: ten kucharz, ten chłopak, ten stół)
ta – feminine singular (for example: ta kobieta, ta ryba, ta patelnia)
to – neuter singular (for example: to dziecko, to okno)

Kucharz is a masculine noun, so you must use ten: ten kucharz = this/that cook (male).

Do I have to use ten here, or could I just say Kucharz smaży rybę na patelni?

You can absolutely say:

Kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.

That would usually mean A cook is frying a fish in a pan (more indefinite).

Adding ten makes it more specific: this/that particular cook.
Both are grammatically correct; ten is optional and just adds the idea of this/that.

Why is it kucharz, not kucharzem?

Kucharz here is the subject of the sentence, so it is in the nominative case (dictionary form):

kto? co? (who? what?) – kucharz = the cook (subject)

Kucharzem is the instrumental case, used for things like:

On jest kucharzem. – He is a cook.
Pracuję kucharzem. – I work as a cook.

In Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni, we just need the nominative subject, so kucharz.

What exactly does smaży mean? Is it “fries” or “is frying”?

Polish has one present tense form that covers both English simple and continuous:

Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.

Depending on context, it can mean:

This cook is frying a fish in a pan (right now), or
This cook fries fish in a pan (as a regular action, for example at work).

The verb smażyć is imperfective (focus on the process, not completion).
So smaży = he/she/it fries / is frying.

Why is it rybę and not ryba?

Ryba (fish) is a feminine noun. In the sentence it is a direct object, so it takes the accusative case:

Nominative (dictionary form): ryba – fish
Accusative (object): rybę – (a/the) fish

Pattern: many feminine nouns ending in -a change to -ę in the accusative singular:

kawa → kawę
waga → wagę
ryba → rybę

How do I know that rybę is the object of the sentence?

Word order in Polish is flexible, so case endings tell you who does what to whom:

kucharz – nominative (subject: who is frying?)
rybę – accusative (object: what is he frying?)

Even if you change the order:

Rybę smaży ten kucharz na patelni.

…it still means the same thing, because rybę has the object ending and kucharz has the subject form.

Why is it na patelni and not na patelnię?

The preposition na can take locative or accusative, depending on meaning:

na
- locative → static location (where?)
  - na patelni – in/on a pan (location)
na
- accusative → movement onto (where to?)
  - na patelnię – onto the pan (direction)

In the sentence, the fish is already being fried on the pan (location), so we use na patelni (locative), not na patelnię (onto the pan).

What form of patelnia is patelni?

Patelnia (frying pan) is a feminine noun:

Nominative: patelnia – a pan
Locative: (o) patelni / na patelni – in/on a pan

With na and a static location (where?), we use the locative:

na patelni – on a pan
na ulicy – on the street
na stole – on the table

Why doesn’t Polish use words for “a” or “the” like English does (“a fish”, “the pan”)?

Polish has no articles (no equivalents of a/an/the).
Definiteness or indefiniteness is usually understood from context:

Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.
Depending on context, this might be translated as:
- This cook is frying a fish in a pan.
- This cook is frying the fish in the pan.

The Polish sentence itself doesn’t mark a vs the; the listener infers it from what is already known in the conversation.

Could I say Ten kucharz smaży ryby na patelni? How would that change the meaning?

Yes, that’s correct, but the meaning changes:

Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.
– He is frying one fish (or a specific fish) in a pan.
Ten kucharz smaży ryby na patelni.
– He fries fish (plural) in a pan, often as a general or habitual action (he cooks fish).

So rybę = one specific fish, ryby (plural) = fish in general / more than one.

What is the difference between smaży and usmaży?

Both come from verbs meaning to fry but differ in aspect:

smażyć – imperfective (process)
- smaży – he/she/it is frying / fries (focus on the action)
usmażyć – perfective (completed action)
- usmaży – he/she/it will fry / will have fried (focus on the result)

Examples:

Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.
– The cook is (in the process of) frying a fish.
Ten kucharz usmaży rybę na patelni.
– The cook will fry the fish (and it will end up fried).

You wouldn’t normally use usmaży rybę for an action happening right now; it’s more about a single completed event, usually in the future or reported in the past (usmażył rybę).

Is the subject pronoun on (“he”) missing here? Why don’t we say On smaży rybę?

Polish often drops subject pronouns, because the verb ending already shows the person:

smaży → clearly third person singular (he/she/it)

So:

On smaży rybę na patelni. – He is frying a fish in a pan.
Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni. – This cook is frying a fish in a pan.

Both are correct. When you have a noun like ten kucharz, you usually don’t also say on, because that would be redundant in most contexts.

Can the word order be different, like Ten kucharz na patelni smaży rybę?

Yes. Polish word order is flexible. All of these are grammatically correct and mean essentially the same thing, with slightly different emphasis:

Ten kucharz smaży rybę na patelni.
Ten kucharz na patelni smaży rybę. (emphasis on on a pan)
Rybę smaży ten kucharz na patelni. (emphasis on the fish or on this cook)
Na patelni ten kucharz smaży rybę. (emphasis on on a pan)

The case endings (kucharz = subject, rybę = object, patelni = location) keep the roles clear even if the order changes.