Why the right answer is only "My pants have a pocket" and not "My pants has a pocket" I thought "My pants" also referred to the 3rd person in singular.
Your confusion is understandable. In French, pantalon is 3rd person singular, so it is 'mon pantalon a', but in English, pants are 3rd person plural, so you say 'my pants have'. :)
Thank you, my problem is that I'm learning English and French at the same time, I'm better in English, but I have a lot of doubts.
Happy to help when I can. I am also working on Italian, at which I am still a relative beginner, and there is someone really nice helping with that when I'm confused. :)
I cant comment on your spoken English, but your written English is pretty good :)
For your information, pants (or trousers in British English) is always plural; in full it would be "a pair of trousers" (probably due to it entirely being two pieces of fabric stitched together. It's a similar thing with shorts (un short) and scissors (des ciseaux) which is plural in both English and French
So how do you know if people refer to the "many pants" meaning?. This sentence is refer to the pants which is a unit of clothing, not many units.
If I understand your question correctly, you're right; in English it's ambiguous. "My pants" could mean one pair of pants, or two, or several. You have to rely on context. :)
Normally when we talk about one leg, we use "pant leg." English is weird, sorry!
This is such a ridiculous answer, if you are asked to translate something to English you have to translate it completely, without thinking "oh this is different in french" and this is all the same for all the languages
No, that's a ridiculous sentiment. Words and phrases don't translate directly all the time, because languages aren't just about having different words for different things - they're completely different systems of meaning. Sometimes the way you say something in French is different to the way you say it in English, and if you're trying to learn another language then surely you need to know how to say something in that other language?
There are several answers on this page including one in Spanish. Because I'm not sure which answer you are referring to, I'm not sure exactly what point you are making.
Two possibilities, Wendy.
1) My pants have a pocket. 2) My pair of pants has a pocket.
"Pants" is plural. "Pair of pants" is singular.
thank you, i was wondering why my pants has a pocket wasn't working... :O
"My pants have a pocket" is correct because 'pants' is plural word, no matter if it is referring to a single object.
Wendy it is incorrect in English i dont know where you are from but its wrong in this language nice job explaining KoolKaren
Pants in English is derived from a pair of leggings which later became joined to form a single garment. After the Norman conquest the British adapted the French pantalon to describe what they regarded as a pair of connected leggings. Of course, the French used pantalon then, as they do now, as singular because they are referring to only one unit of clothing.
Thus English pants and connected words are rendered plural and the French pantalon and related modifiers etc are given as singular.
In English, we only use the plural 'my pants'. I think, technically, they consist of two pant legs, so that's why we often say, for example, 'a new pair of pants' and not 'a new pant'.
If we have more than one of this type of clothing, we would say 'my pairs of pants', which I think in French would be 'mes pantalons'.
Right but in English we don't actually say so literally "My pants has a pocket" We say "My pants have pockets.".
-How ridiculous, my pants have no pockets! -My pants have a pocket. Look here! But I wish they had more ...
Is it wrong to say: "my pants DO have a pocket" ? Duo says so, but I'm not sure
It's only appropriate if you're stressing that, unlike other pants without pockets, this one DEFINITELY does and it was silly to ask. Like if someone asked, "Do your pants have pockets?" "Yes, they do [have pockets]." It affirms the existence of pockets.
If it's "mon pantalon" is considered to be plural, shouldn't it be "mes pantalon"?
It's not considered to be plural in French. When you translate it to English you translate it according to what English requires: a plural.
I non't understand so good, happened that i wrote "My pants HAS a pocket" why it's wrong?assumed that He/She/It uses the ending with "S".... excuse me for my english.
He/She/It is third person singular therefore he/she/it has. French mon pantalon is singular but English translation is my pants plural because that is how English treats pants.
French pantalon singular. English pants plural. Because the English translation is plural it is third person plural. Therefore it is they have not he/she/it has.
In 'English' English, a pair of pants is an article of underwear - they don't have pockets; but trousers have pockets.
I once had a pair of swiming pants with a pocket. Or do you prefer to call that kind of garment a pair of trousers?
No, they are called swimming trunks....or the older generation would call them bathers.
why (mon pantalon) and not (mes pantalon) since (pontalon) is plural -pants-
There are several comments on this thread that deal with your question.
Pants are plural in English but singular in French.
French sees it as one complete item while English sees it as a pair.
It is an important difference between the two languages to learn.
Because you always use the plural in English, even when referring to a single pair. French, however, makes the distinction.
Ma is for feminine nouns in singular, mon is for masculine nouns in singular and mes is for masculine/feminine nouns in plural.
Because it is a different sentence. Il y a une poche dans/sur (?) mon pantalon.
While it means the same thing, it's a different sentence in French as much as it is in English. "Il y a une poche sur mon pantalon."
Am I the only one who thinks it's weird for the pants to have A SINGLE pocket?
No, but this isn't about conforming to the expected; it's about learning French.
No, but those pants do exist. As a very young child did I have a pair of swmming pants with one pocket, with a very nice golden button to keep it closed. And I have trousers without any pocket. Trousers can have zero, one, two or more pockets.
No, since pants, in English, is plural and thus do not add an s to the verb get. Besides, to get is obtenir, recevoir, not avoir which is to have: Mon pantalon obtient/reçoit une poche=My pants get a pocket.
In English, although it is a single article of clothing, the word is plural, so 'My pants have...'. It is the same for jeans - always plural. I suspect that Shlyovich above is right as to the reason. :)
English third person plural form is have not has. The French is rendered in third person singular because pantalon is singular but the English translation pants is plural. Therefore the English verb must be plural.
Because that's not good English. It's not asking for a literal translation but a full English translation.
Because in some contexts the verb avoir=to have is used where English would use to get=obtenir, recevoir. This is not such a case.
I dont understand this at all. It says in the english translation that it's: MY PANTS HAVE... but ad I understand in the french part the pantalon wad singular as it is also using the singular conjugation of avoir. Then why is it plural in English?
Because English is weird. Seriously though, English just doesn't have a singular for that word. You always say pants.
Yes and no.
No in the sense that avoir only conjugates to a in the third-person singular, and in English the third person singular is "has" and only "has." Yes, in the sense that you might run into the odd case like this one, where you're required in English to switch from third-person singular to third-person plural, which is "have," because of the quirky noun.
I'm really confused; pantalon is a plural noun?? So why didn't use "mes" instead of "mon"
mon pantalon a une poche. Ok, which is it? "Has" or "Have" for "a" in french. I just translated one similar to this one and the answer was " has". Now I translated this one using "has". But, now the correct translation for "a" in french is have. J'ai pense ca "a" is avoir en francais pour exemple ( elle, il, on a).
It depends on whether the noun is treated as singular or plural in English. Normally, the singular in French is going to be singular in English too, resulting in "has," but this is not the case with "pants," which is plural in English even when talking about only one pair. Since plural nouns use "have" that, in effect, becomes the translation for «a» in this case.
What does not make sense? That French and English treat the word in different ways?
THATS NOT FAIR. IT SAID THAT IT MENT THAT 'MY PANTS GETS A POCKET'. THEN IT SAID IT WAS WRONG. IM SAD :( :(
It's not important to have the English so such strictly correct here. Pants has a pocket is commonly used!
It's really never used, and when it is, you will sound to anyone listening as someone who doesn't speak English fluently. It's not really a matter of being strict.
here i don't understand why use "a", I thought "a" is for single form like il or elle.. my pants why not use "avent" ?
The singular/plural problem is well spelled out in other comments, but I'll just add that the ils/elles form of the verb avoir is "ont," not "avent."
Mon pantalon=my pair of pants=my pants.
In French this kind of clothing is always singular except when we talk of several garments.
In English this kind of clothing is always plural, even when we talk about one garment.
Mon pantalon is thus 3 person singular and translates into My pants which is plural.
It is 'Mon pantalon a une poche' because it is third person singular, so 'it has' = 'il a'. The verb form 'ai' is used with first person singular, as in 'I have'. Hope that helps. :)
What exxact is it you think is stupid? That two different languages sees things differently?