Learn Hardcore Polish: Z daleka wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku, bo słychać ich śmiech i widać kolorowe piłki. - From a distance it seems to me that the children are playing on the field, because you can hear their laughter and see colorful balls.

z
- a noun in the genitive (daleka is the genitive of daleko, “far”) often forms adverbial phrases meaning from some place / from some distance:
  - z bliska – from close up
  - z góry – from above
  - z tyłu – from the back

In this fixed phrase, z is the normal preposition; od daleka is not idiomatic. You can think of z daleka as a set expression meaning “from a distance / from afar.”

How does wydaje mi się work grammatically? What does it literally mean?

Wydaje mi się is an impersonal construction that we almost always translate as “it seems to me” or “I think (it seems)”.

wydaje – 3rd person singular of wydawać (się) – “to appear, to seem”
mi – dative of ja (“to me”)
się – reflexive particle

Literally: “(it) gives itself out to me”, i.e. “it seems to me”.

Grammatically:

There is no explicit subject; Polish often omits to (“it”) here.
The person experiencing the impression is in the dative: mi = “to me”.
The reflexive się is part of the verb wydawać się (“to seem”).

So Z daleka wydaje mi się, że… = “From a distance it seems to me that…”. It’s a very common way to soften an opinion: Wydaje mi się, że masz rację – “I think you’re right / It seems to me you’re right.”

Why is it wydaje mi się, not wydaje się mi? Is the word order fixed?

In practice, the normal order is wydaje mi się.

Reason: mi, ci, mu, jej, nam, wam (short dative pronouns) usually appear right after the verb and before the reflexive się in spoken, natural Polish:

Wydaje mi się.
Wydaje ci się.
Wydaje mu się.

You can technically say wydaje się mi, and it’s not ungrammatical, but:

It sounds more emphatic, unusual, or bookish.
In everyday speech, people overwhelmingly say wydaje mi się.

As a learner, treat wydaje mi się as the fixed, default pattern.

Why do we use że after wydaje mi się? Could we drop że or use something else?

Że introduces a content clause (a “that”-clause) in Polish:

Wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku.
“It seems to me that the children are playing on the playground.”

After verbs of thinking, saying, and feeling (myśleć, mówić, czuć, wydawać się, sądzić etc.), Polish normally uses że to introduce what is thought/said/felt.

You generally cannot drop że the way English often drops “that”:

English: “I think (that) he’s right.”
Polish: Myślę, że on ma rację. – not Myślę on ma rację.

You might see iż in more formal or literary writing:

Wydaje mi się, iż… – more formal, bookish.

In everyday spoken Polish, że is the standard and safest choice.

Why is it dzieci bawią się, not dzieci bawią? What’s the role of się here?

Bawić się is a reflexive verb meaning “to play” (in the sense of children playing, having fun):

dzieci bawią się – “children are playing”

If you drop się:

bawić without się means “to entertain (someone), to amuse (someone)”:
- Bawię go – “I amuse him / I entertain him.”

So:

Dzieci bawią się – “The children are playing (for themselves, having fun).”
Dzieci bawią go – “The children entertain him.” (different meaning)

For “play” as in playing a game/sport/instrument, Polish often uses grać:

dzieci grają w piłkę – “the children are playing football”
grać na pianinie – “to play the piano”

Here bawią się is about general play/fun, not specifically about a game or sport.

Why is it na boisku and not w boisku? What case is boisku in?

Boisko = “(sports) field, court, pitch, playground”.

na
- locative (-u here: boisku) often means “on / at (a surface, an open area)”:
  - na boisku – on the field
  - na plaży – on the beach
  - na ulicy – on the street

W + locative tends to mean “in/inside” something:

w domu – in the house
w pokoju – in the room

A field or playground is conceptualized as an open area/surface, so Polish uses na:

dzieci bawią się na boisku – “children are playing on the playground/field.”

Case: boisku is locative singular of boisko (boisko → na boisku).

What’s the difference between bo and ponieważ? Are both OK here?

Both bo and ponieważ mean “because”, and both would be grammatically possible here:

…, bo słychać ich śmiech…
…, ponieważ słychać ich śmiech…

Main differences:

Register / style
- bo is more informal, conversational, very common in speech.
- ponieważ is more formal or neutral, common in writing and more careful speech.
Position & commas
In most cases (especially when the “because” clause comes second), both behave similarly with commas:
- Zostaję w domu, bo pada.
- Zostaję w domu, ponieważ pada.

In your sentence, bo is natural and sounds spoken and casual. Using ponieważ would make it a bit more formal, but still correct.

Why do słychać and widać have no subject? What kind of verbs are these?

Słychać (“it is heard”) and widać (“it is seen”) are used here as impersonal forms:

bo słychać ich śmiech – “because you can hear their laughter”
i widać kolorowe piłki – “and (you) can see colorful balls”

Characteristics:

No explicit subject
There is no “who hears” or “who sees” expressed. It’s like English “you can hear” / “one can hear / it can be heard” without a clear subject.
They don’t change for person or number in this construction:
- Słychać muzykę. – “You can hear music.”
- Widać gwiazdy. – “(You) can see stars.”
They take an object (what is heard/seen), but no personal subject:
- słychać co? – ich śmiech
- widać co? – kolorowe piłki

So, they function like fixed, impersonal predicates meaning roughly “it is audible / it is visible” or “one can hear / see”.

What case is ich śmiech after słychać? It looks like genitive—how should I think about it?

Formally, ich śmiech is in the accusative, even though it looks the same as nominative:

śmiech (laughter) – masculine inanimate
- nominative: śmiech
- accusative: śmiech (same form)

Słychać in this usage takes a direct object in the accusative:

Słychać muzykę. – “(You) can hear music.” (muzykę = acc.)
Słychać samochody. – “(You) can hear cars.” (samochody = acc. pl.)

Ich is a bit confusing because:

ich is both genitive plural and accusative plural for “their”. So ich śmiech = “their laughter”, functioning as an accusative object.

You might also hear:

Słychać ich śmiechu. – here śmiechu is genitive; this adds a nuance of “some (sound of) their laughter”, more about the presence of the sound than the whole “entity” of laughter.

But in your sentence, ich śmiech is fine to treat as accusative object: “you can hear their laughter.”

Why is śmiech singular but piłki is plural? Could we say śmiechy?

In Polish, śmiech is most often used as a mass / uncountable noun for “laughter”:

słychać śmiech – “laughter can be heard”
wybuchł śmiech – “laughter burst out”

Plural śmiechy exists, but it tends to sound:

more colloquial or
like separate instances or types of laughter.

Compare:

Słychać ich śmiech. – We hear the general sound of their laughter.
Słychać ich śmiechy. – We hear individual laughs; can sound more playful/colloquial, sometimes even a bit mocking depending on context.

Piłki (balls) are naturally countable objects, so Polish uses the regular plural:

widać kolorowe piłki – “you can see colorful balls.”

So the singular śmiech vs plural piłki is natural: one is a mass-type noun, the other is countable.

Why is it kolorowe piłki and not kolorowa piłki? How does the adjective agree with the noun?

In Polish, adjectives must agree with the noun in:

gender
number
case

Here:

piłki – nominative plural, feminine (piłka → piłki)
So the adjective must also be feminine nominative plural: kolorowe.

Forms:

sg. fem. nom.: kolorowa piłka – “a colorful ball”
pl. fem. nom.: kolorowe piłki – “colorful balls”

Kolorowa piłki is ungrammatical because:

kolorowa is singular, but piłki is plural. They must match: kolorowe piłki.

Why widać kolorowe piłki and not widać kolorowych piłek? Are both possible?

Both are possible, but there’s a nuance:

widać kolorowe piłki – accusative plural
- Neutral, straightforward: “you can see colorful balls.”
- Presents the balls as whole, countable objects that are visible.
widać kolorowych piłek – genitive plural
- Less common here, sounds a bit more partitive: like “you can see some colorful balls” or only a part of a larger set.
- Genitive with verbs of perception/quantity often suggests “some (of), not all, a certain amount”.

In everyday speech, widać kolorowe piłki (accusative) is simpler and more natural unless you specifically want that “some (of them)” feeling. In your sentence, the accusative version is exactly what you’d expect.

Can the word order change? For example, could we move z daleka or the bo-clause?

Polish word order is relatively flexible, especially for adverbials like z daleka.

All of these are grammatically possible (with slight changes in emphasis):

Z daleka wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku…
(neutral; emphasizes the “from a distance” setting at the start)
Wydaje mi się z daleka, że dzieci bawią się na boisku…
(less natural; z daleka usually prefers the very beginning or end)
Wydaje mi się, że z daleka dzieci bawią się na boisku…
(changes meaning → suggests “from a distance the children are playing on the field”, which sounds odd; not how you’d usually say it)

You can also move the bo-clause:

Z daleka wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku, bo słychać ich śmiech i widać kolorowe piłki.
(reason clause at the end – neutral, common)

Putting the bo-part first is possible but heavier and more marked:

Bo słychać ich śmiech i widać kolorowe piłki, z daleka wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku.
(emphasizes the reason first; stylistically more complex)

The original order is the most natural and conversational.

Could we say jak instead of że, like wydaje mi się, jak dzieci bawią się…?

No, not in this meaning. Jak and że are not interchangeable here.

Że introduces a “that”-clause:
Wydaje mi się, że dzieci bawią się na boisku. – “It seems to me that the children are playing on the field.”
Jak mainly means “how / as / when” in various constructions, for example:
- Patrzyłem, jak dzieci bawią się na boisku. – “I was watching how the children were playing on the field.”
- Jak dzieci bawią się na boisku, to są szczęśliwe. – “When children play on the field, they are happy.”

So after wydaje mi się, you want a content clause (what seems to be the case), and that takes że, not jak.