1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Ihr habt Hosen."

"Ihr habt Hosen."

Translation:You have pants.

January 8, 2013



Can anyone tell the difference between "Er" and "Ihr" when spoken by the robot? They both sound like "ear" when I think "Er" should sound like "air".


I have no idea why you you downvoted. You are correct, er should sound more like air. Ihr is more like ear. You had a valid question.


One of the most frustrating things on Duolingo. Half the wrong answers I give are because there is no audible difference between Ihr and Er. But there should be.


There is audible difference, I guess we become used to it.


Sometimes, as in this sentence, you can also tell by how the verbs are conjugated. Er hat vs. Ihr habt


Sometimes when they say "essen" it sound like "ess"


Probably because it's pronounced "essn" like how "little" is pronounced "littl", and the final consonant is quite weak.


I get confused when there's no context, how are we meant to guess?


The same way you did with English. It just takes time and mistakes.


isst and ist. Sie isst ein Fisch, depending on the context, could also plausibly be misheard as she is a fish!


She is a fish = Sie ist ein Fisch

She eats a fish = Sie isst einen Fisch


er is /ʔeːɐ̯~ʔɛɐ̯/, and ihr is /iːɐ̯/, so it's a mid and high vowel difference.

To compare, ear is /ɪə̯<sub>ɪɹ</sub>iɹ/ and air is /ɛə(ɹ)~ɛː(ɹ)/, and these are good approximates.


This really confused me as a British English speaker! For me, 'pants' are underwear :S


In the USA, pants are pants. :P


God bless america!


You meant United States, because America is the whole continent.


Hey, Canadians call pants pants too.


I call 'em trousers a lot, actually.


I believe a lot of Mexicans speak Spanish and they do call pants "pantalones"


@Sabiha, no??? In the Uk everyone I know calls them trousers.

Pants are a certain type of underwear; the type females usually/stereotypically wear, whereas men usually wear 'boxers' or sometimes 'trunks' or 'boxer shorts'

Edit: I just looked at everyone's streaks and they don't have one so they've all stopped on Duo. To anyone in 5 years time: hey in advance, I hope you have a great day, and SMILE :P
Un-Ami, 02.25.2021 :)


Same with Australians



@Un-Ami this hurts to read. German date separators and on a German learning course no less. Unless you mean there are 25 months in a year ;)


Not true. "America" is a commonly accepted shortening of "The United States of America", just like how "Mexico" is a common shortening of "The United States of Mexico".


United Mexican States, but ya got close enough there, mate.


A lot of people would disagree with you. If you are from USA, then sure, that is the perception you get. But at least a lot of South Americans call themselves Americans and the people from USA as Unitedstatesians. There are people in Europe for example who use both meanings of America interchangeably; for example in the very popular statement "Columbus discovered America", which refers to the continent.


Try calling a Canadian an American. They will laugh or it'd be taken offensive. Hell, even Germans call us Amerikaner/in.



It is true though. Most european countries act as though Canada is non-existent, it's quite irritating, really.


@Eiswolfe, I love Canada :P


@Eiswolfe, no most Europeans probably just considers America to be the whole continent.


Yeah but when people say America, they are usually talking about the united states, sooo...


"American" is the only demonym for people from the US.

"America" as opposed to "The Americas," "North America," etc. refers to the USA. There's no other country with America in its name. However, it's officially The United States of America.

For the demonym, there's no other choice but American.


There's no such continent as America, only North or South. They can also be referred to as the Americas. S denoting more than one.


yes but it never said continent, it said "the lands". see what i mean?


God bless North America.


No, actually. That’s “North America”... USA=United States Of America=America...


No, North America and South America are continents. There's no continent called America. "American" is also the only demonym for someone from the US, and the USA is the only nation with America as part of its name.

Canadians are North American, not American.

You can look this up in many places, or you can simply listen to people who speak English. In common use, America refers to the USA and there's no other country where its inhabitants call themselves American.

Maybe you want to check an encyclopedia.


Two continents, North and South


Same, I am from England and I moved country and everyone was like 'I like your pants' and I was thinking 'can they see my underwear???'


Here in Australia, pants = trousers. Bloody pommies...


Not exactly underwear, but underpants = die Unterhose


Two languages for the price of one! A youthful taste for British children's books spared me some interesting surprises.


Indeed, my reaction was, "I surely hope so" -- yet, I learned English in the US and Canada, but my family was quite clear about the difference between pants and trousers. I wonder if Americans wearing their pants on the outside is not just a symptom of informality -- or carelessness, perhaps


Superman does


Technically those are shorts worn over tights. It's based on the costumes of circus acrobats the time. Batman, however...


Same here. It's very weird discussing underwear.


It's from your silly word "Pantaloons."


So is it trousers thats widely used in Britain? Is it the same in Scotland and Ireland?


Yes. Scotland and Wales and Ireland use trousers, pants are underwear though we may call them scants or other local words.


Are you sure? I always thought it was "panties", not "pants"

  • 505

Panties are only female bottom underwear (top underwear being a bra which is short for brassiere). Just to clarify, NOBODY calls them top underwear and bottom underwear, but the term underwear can include both or specifically refer to just the bottoms. You should see the number of names for men's underwear, which vary by region.


What is the exactly translation of "pants"? Die Hose or Die Hosen?


Even though "pants" or "trousers" are plural in English, in German "die Hose" is singular, as is "die Jeans".

'Meine Hose ist zu kurz.' looks like 'My pants/trousers is too short', which wouldn't work in English but does in German. The plural "die Hosen" would refer to multiple pairs of pants/trousers. A school child has grown during the summer and now 'Die Hosen sind zu kurz.' Time to go school shopping!


This was very helpful! Thank you!

[deactivated user]

    Thanks, it's so much clear now! I was confused because it's singular in French too: "le pantalon"


    Thanks, I understand now.


    That's not necessarily true, "die Hosen" or "ein Paar Hosen" meaning just one pair of pants does exist in German, it's just not used as frequently (and maybe getting outdated?) Cf.: https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Hose ("häufig auch im Plural mit singularischer Bedeutung").


    Die Hose= 1 pair of pants, die Hosen=multiple pairs of pants


    Since there is only one word for singular and plural pants and trousers in English both are correct, it depends on the context.


    Mostly there is NO context though!


    If this was a question, can i say Habt ihr hosen?


    Yes, this is the correct word order for a question.


    Hosen, does it translate to trousers or underwear? I'm british


    How do you know when Ihr is "you" and when it's "her"?


    "Her has pants" doesn't make much sense, does it? Besides, "habt" it only used for "you plural". For "she" (sie) it will be "hat".

    There is always something that tells you the correct meaning. It may be a verb form, the case that is appropriate or just context.


    Y'all isn't a word, is not proper English.


    Although not proper, it is acceptable in American English (specifically in the southern states) and Duo will acknowledge it for plural 'you.'


    Does "Hosen" have a singular form? I'm assuming not.


    Yes, die Hose. Unlike English, most other languages don't refer to a single pair of pants as a plural form. So, die Hose means one pair of pants while die Hosen means two or more pairs of pants.


    Italian uses the plural like english altough even the singular is by someone (especially taylors) used. The same is for glasses: almost everyone use the plural but the opticians prefer the singular. In german Brille is singular


    Yes, it is "die Hose".


    Why not "Du habt Hosen"? When do you use Ihr instead of Du??


    Du is singular, ihr is plural. Keep in mind that one says du hast and not du habt.


    why it is not Ihr hast instead of Ihr habt , Ihr is informal plural of You I guess

    • ich habe
    • du hast
    • er/sie/es hat
    • wir haben
    • ihr habt
    • sie;Sie haben


    why is 'you guys got pants' wrong?


    That would technically mean you guys received pants, in correct English it should be: you've got pants or you [guys] have got pants


    Why isn't it 'ihr haben'?


    I know in english pants is always plural....is German the same way? there is never a time when I'd say "hose" right?


      No - unlike in English, a single pair of pants is referred to in the singular in German. Ich habe eine neue Hose, for example.


      Y'all is a regional thing. It is not the correct answer to 'Ihr'! You should accept all forms of 'you guys' (which the english language does not have a proper gender neutral form of).


      OK, I just got corrected from "I have pants" (it was Ihr habt Hosen so I should have put "You have pants") to "Y'all have pants". Duolingo just used y'all.


      Makes sense because "y'all" is informal plural 'you'...same as "ihr"


      is it "you" plural or formal ?


        ihr - plural informal
        du - singular informal
        Sie - singular/plural formal


        I thought ihr was “you” formal? No?


        No. As a subject pronoun, ihr is informal and plural.


        I have put "you have pants" an it said it is wrong and "Y'all have pants" is right. really?!


        Y'all? Well ok, I am from Alabama!


        Why not only pants .


        Because "pants" does not mean the same thing as "You have pants".

        You forgot to translate the words ihr habt.


        Ok, here in the states, no one says trousers, lol.


        Of course we do. Not all of us are teenagers.


        Y'all is for Yocals. What a ridiculous answer.


        Ihr and Er sound the same. Messes me up.


        why ihr and not du?


        Because the speaker is talking to several people at once.

        du is used when you're speaking to one person, ihr when speaking to several of them.


        Whats crazy about this sentence is that in english "pants" is both singular and plural and "you" is both singular and plural. So in english the sentence "You have pants" could refer to a single person having one pair or many pairs of pants and also refer to many people having one pair or many pairs of pants.


        Did anyone else get " y'all " as the correct translation???


        I said, "I have pants." It was incorrect. Why? In English, "I have pants" can mean one or many pairs.


        I have more errors with the male robot speaking because he doesn't enunciate very well, often dropping the volume of his voice you you can't hear the work clearly! So frustrating!


        I've made the same mistake confusing "Er" and "Ihr". However, "habt" is clearly (sort of) articulated which suggests the proceeding word is more likely to be "Ihr" than "Er". This is because if the first word was "Er", the second word would have to be "hast", not "habt". Please correct me if I'm wrong ;)


        Close— if the subject is Er, then the verb is hat.

        The verb form hast goes with the subject du.


        I'm finally hearing the difference (sometimes) between ihr and er, but I still have trouble telling "r" from "h" sometimes. I thought they said "Ihr habt Rosen'. :-(


        Why is the translation for Ihr habt Hosen "You have pants" right but when I translate "I am wearing pants" to Ich trage Hose it says it is wrong and wants me to add "eine". If that is the case then why is "You have pants" not Ihr habe EINE Hosen? This seems weird to me.


        eine Hose is one pair of pants.

        Hosen is multiple pairs of pants.

        In the “I am wearing” scenario, “pants” must refer to one pair, since people don’t generally wear multiple pairs of pants at once. But in the “you have” scenario, “pants” most likely refers to multiple pairs of pants.

        (Ihr habt eine Hose may also be accepted, though.)

        eine Hosen does not make sense — that would be like “a shirts” (singular article with plural word).


        Is is correct if I translate the sentence like this: You all have pairs of pants. Because it is plural, and I think it is right, but Duo doesn't accept it. Thanks!


        Pants= hose or Hosen?



        See the comment thread started by mvcmboucas.


        Get rid of the female voice or use a Better one


        I have a doubt. In my country we commonly use this expression when someone is brave, it could be used with that meaning in Germany?


        No, it doesn’t have that meaning in Germany.

        But we have a similar expression involving wearing trousers: sie hat (in der Beziehung) die Hosen an “she wears the pants (in the relationship)” means that she is the dominant person in the relationship.

        Or similarly, zeig ihr, wer die Hosen anhat! “show her who wears the pants! = show her who’s the boss!”


        In the USA we have the same expression, the one who wears the pants in the family.


        In British English, that would be "she wears the trousers"... https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/wear-the-trousers I would definitely understand the expression "she wears the pants", but it would sound like an "americanism" to the UK english ear.


        Yes, trousers would likewise be well understood here but would sound very British.


        Mizinamo, you have just informed UK English speakers that (she) wears the underwear garment covering the lower abdomen and genitalia. Shorts in the US (?) would seem to be Pants in the UK, or sometimes knickers for women's pants. Are you effectively telling us that UK English is no longer acceptable on the course? Knowing and allowing regional variations in English has been a big part of Duo's global success. I decided to try to learn German to honour Europe and because it is useful. But both French and German have featured more exclusively US English translations than ever before. It is that enforced learning of sometimes baffling US terms and the apparent change towards a USA only app model, that is saddening fans of Duo as a Global phenomenon.


        Are you effectively telling us that UK English is no longer acceptable on the course?


        Duolingo courses use US English to teach other languages, and this hasn't changed.

        However, UK equivalents will generally be accepted in translations, where this does not cause confusion.

        But if you read something in English from Duolingo, you can assume that it's US English -- the language spoken where Duolingo comes from (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and the language spoken by more people than British English.


        In the US we have something similar - put your big boy/girl pants on. It means to do what you have to do, even if you don't want to do it.


        I don't know about Germany, but that's an interesting usage. Which country are you from?


        Oh, I am from Mexico.


        Ah, cool. Always interesting to learn more about my neighbor country.


        In Australian and British English, trousers and pants are synonymous. We can use the words to describe both suit trousers and suit pants. The word, Pant/s anyway, is/are derived from the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries` word: " Pantaloons."


        Can you make it easier for people from the UK by also accepting "Trousers"


        There are already accepted alternatives with “trousers”.


        In NZ pants can be both underwear or pants as in trousers. It is all down to context


        How come in this sentence pants is plural (Hosen) but in other examples like “Ich trage einen Hose” it’s singular?


        Just a suggestion, but surely Duolingo could enable the ability to set the language you are learning in so that this confusion can be avoided? eg USA English for pants and UK English for trousers.


        What's the difference between Ihr habt hosen and Du hat hosen


        Ihr habt Hosen: You guys (plural) have pants / trousers. Du hast Hosen: You (singular) have pants / trousers.


        Thanks. I guess I found it a little confusing to exemplify "You (plural) have pants" - it seems like a very uncommon thing to say, especially in comparison to "You (singular) have pants".


        Shopping for school clothes and talking to your kids... “Okay, you have trousers/pants, now we need to go get you some nice shirts.”


        Is duolingo based in America or England? Does Hosen mean trousers or underwear


        They're based in the USA. Hosen means trousers.


        Why don't they accept 'trousers'?


        We do.

        What was your entire answer?


        This was so annoying because hose means trousers not pants which would be underwear in Europe pants=trousers and it should accept trousers as the translation


        This was so annoying because hose means trousers not pants which would be underwear in Europe

        Duolingo uses American English to teach German. So if you see "pants", you can assume that it refers to outerwear, not underwear.

        it should accept trousers as the translation

        It does. British English is usually accepted in German-to-English translation exercises, unless the result would be confusing to an American English speaker. (For example, we don't accept entrée in the meaning "A smaller dish served before the main course of a meal" to translate Vorspeise, because in the US, entrée refers to the main course of a meal, so if you translate Vorspeise with entrée, it's not clear whether you have understood the sense of the German word.)


        Yes, in England the word is trousers. Pants are worn underneath.


        Can anyone explain the difference between Hose and Hosen


        Uh. Trousers please


        Why is it 'Hosen' and not 'Hose' ?


        Forget the US/UK two different words for the same thing. I am puzzled about why Hosen can exist in the singular. Surely Hosen means trousers/ pants, and you can't have one pant/ trouser?


        Pants in UK English refers to underpants! Trousers would be a better translation.


        Would it not be ,You have a pair of pants


        I made a mistake typing "hat" instead of "habt" and Duo didn't tell me it was a mistake :(


        Hosen are trousers and pants are underwear.


        wait a minute. I have a question. before this I found pants is "eine hose"... and now its "hosen".... why it is not consistent.... please educate me....


        before this I found pants is "eine hose"... and now its "hosen"

        In English, "pants" is always plural, whether it refers to one pair of pants or to several pairs.

        In German, eine Hose (capital H! it's a noun) is one pair of pants; Hosen is the plural.

        So in "I am wearing pants", you would say Ich habe eine Hose an or Ich trage eine Hose, since you're just wearing one pair of pants.

        But in "I bought some pants", you would say Ich habe ein paar Hosen gekauft, since you bought several pairs.


        For the love of God please always accept trousers as a translation for hosen. Ffs. Doing my head in.


        Why not " Ihr habst hosen"


        I think using the translation of hosen as 'pants' is not right. Hosen are trousers. Pants is an Americanism. Pants mean underpants here, which are not trousers.


        You have trousers - an equally valid translation, yet not recognised by the Americo-centric software.


        You have trousers - an equally valid translation

        Indeed, which is why that is also accepted in a translation exercise.

        yet not recognised

        It isn't? Do you have a screenshot showing that translation being rejected?

        If so, please share it with us -- upload it to a website somewhere (e.g. imgur) and tell us the URL of the image.

        I'll give you 50 lingots if it turns out to be an error on Duolingo's side.


        Die Hosen = pants Hoe about shorts?


        Shorts, jeans, khakis, chinos, etc. are all kinds of pants. They're more specific.

        Hose is as general as "pants" is.


        When is "Ihr" you and when is it "she".


        Trousers are pants. Pants is an American word for trousers. I am English


        Duolingo uses American English to teach German -- whether you come from England, South Africa, Australia, Canada, the US, Malta, or somewhere completely different.

        If you require a course that uses British English, then Duolingo may not be right for you.


        What's the problem? Duolingo, being based in the USA, naturally uses American English by default, but mostly, British words and spellings are also accepted. For example, for this sentence, I put, "You have trousers" and it was marked as correct.


        Whats the real diffrence between hose and hosen? Hosen is plural?


        Whats the real diffrence between hose and hosen? Hosen is plural?

        Hose is singular, Hosen is plural -- one pair of pants vs. multiple pairs of pants.

        Lowercase hose and hosen are both wrong.


        Trousers and pants are the same.


        You can say also, "You have trousers."


        Should it not be he has pants?


        Should it not be he has pants?


        ihr habt = you have -- speaking to several people at once

        er hat = he has

        This sentence has ihr habt, not er hat.


        Trousers, not pants. Pants are what you wear under your trousers


        Duolingo uses American English, where "pants" refers to outerwear.

        Whenever you see an English word in a Duolingo sentence, interpret it in its American context.

        (For example, a "torch" would always involve fire and "pants" are always outerwear.)


        That is an incredibly arrogant response. I am English. Why should I use a bastardised version of my mother tongue? In fact there is no such thing as American English. It's either English or it's wrong.


        It sounds as if Duolingo might not be the right language-learning tool for you.


        Really? Why? Because I choose to use the vocabulary I learned as a child rather than a version forced upon me by American film, media and business?


        Why? Because I choose to use the vocabulary I learned as a child rather than a version forced upon me by American film, media and business?

        Not quite -- because you refuse to recognise the legitimacy of American English as a form of English.

        In translations from German into English, British English words are almost always accepted as alternatives, so you can still "choose to use the vocabulary [you] learned as a child", e.g. you can translate meine Hose ist rot into "my trousers are red" if you wish.

        However, Duolingo's English sentences (in translation exercises into German) will use English words in their American meaning, as I had explained before. You appeared to find this unacceptable and "wrong".


        Pants is an American saying. In England they are trousers.


        Yes, and as many people have already said here, "You have trousers" is also accepted.



        Could you please, let me know how can I share a screenshoot for future instances?

        You can't upload a screenshot directly to a sentence discussion here, unfortunately, so you will have to upload it to a website somewhere and then link to it.

        Any website will do (imgur, postimage, ibbco, a public Instagram, even Google Drive), as long as you can get a link where anyone will be able to see the picture. (On Google Drive, for example, you would have to edit the sharing options to make the picture visible to anyone with the link.)

        Once you have uploaded it to that website somewhere, take the URL and put it into a comment here.

        Thank you!

        Learn German in just 5 minutes a day. For free.