I am seeing that there are three comments here but then it says no one has commented when I try to see what they are. I cannot report this as a problem, as they do not give me the option to report it. Harrumph.
Anyway, I am hoping to see how niebieskich is a plural ending and butòw as well. Perhaps I will find out in future exercises?
I have this problem too sometimes. Someone answerd a question as I was told per e-mail, but I can't see it in the discussion.
Why couldn't "he hasn't" be? Has it different meaning? "He hasn't blue shoes"? Thanks a lot.
I'm also puzzled. Bevore when I translated: I have no books, he has no pants... it always was counted as wrong. It should be: I do not have, he hasn't.... Here I wrote "He hasn't blue shoes" and ist again was counted as wrong. I know this is English grammar, but when du I use: "I have no..." and when do I use "I do not have..."?
You would need to add "got" to this sentence to make it sound right. "He hasn't got blue shoes"
While it still sounds strange to me, it appears that in English (one of the varieties, at least) it is possible to say it without 'got'... Duolingo comments and discussions with natives have taught me that several things that sound completely wrong to me aren't actually wrong.
Speaking as an Irish person, I would more naturally say "He doesn't have blue shoes." Would this be right?
That's the main answer. Well, "does not" is, but that's basically the same thing.
Why does "He doesn't has blue shoes" is wrong? It shows that instead "has" must be "have".. I'm a little confused.
I strongly recommend that you finish the English-from-Russian tree first. Do(es) (not) + infinitive is a very, very basic construction.
Oh, it just dropped out from my mind. Seems like I really have to repeat some skills.
'he hasn't blue shoes' should also be correct. It sounds better than 'he has no blue shoes'