Translation:We have nothing in the house to eat.
If they're anything like me, there's tons to eat... it just needs to be prepared.
Isn't it more natural, in English, to say "We have nothing to eat in the house"? (btw, it is an accepted answer). I am not a native English speaker but it seems like that to me.
My question is actually: is this form more natural in Esperanto than "Ni havas nenion por manĝi en la domo." ? Or does it not matter at all?
From my perspective as a native English speaker, either form of the statement is fine. There could be a very, very subtle difference. Your version "We have nothing to eat in the house," stresses that there is no food. The other version, "We have nothing in the house to eat" stresses the absence of food in the house. You might use this form if you were also going to suggest that we eat elsewhere or go shopping for groceries. Still, it's a tiny difference and not one someone is likely to put any thought into.
Thanks for learning my language by the way :)
The way I translated it at first was " We have nothing in the house for eating", as in "we don't have any dishes". How would you say that?