"In our era one does not need this."
Translation:בעידן שלנו לא צריכים את זה.
26 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
but this would mean "in our time" not "in our era". Duo can be very picky :')
What is wrong with בתקופה שלנו for "in our era"? Can someone please explain the difference between תקופה and עידן? Thanks
It does help, thank you, but in the light of your comments I still think תקופה should be allowed here too
Me too, the other thread is only for reference what the difference between the two words may be.
Its a course in Hebrew, not in English, and l believe (you can disagree with me) that verb (also adjective) צריך (צריכים) was used in the original form, of which the translation seems to be hard to duplicate for all concerned. לא צריכים את זה means 'we do not need this' (object or subject, we do not know, its a 'this'). The course so far defined צריך very clearly, as 'need' or 'have neccesity to' or 'being in a position that something is nessesary to you due to the circuimstance, but not because you wish it'. In the sentence such as לא צריכים את זה, it just seems like there is a negative connotation to the context, it sort of read between the lines, that this is the modern world and that 'thing' is sort of outdated, therefore we do not need it. I sort of feel this because it is how israelies would say when they want to discard some subject or thing under discussion. They say לא צריכים את זה! Sort of, 'forget it', we dont need it... I am not sure if that's an official idiom in modern Hebrew, but l can just share my experience with you, this this is how l hear it being used around the block. So, as far as non literal but conceptual translation of this sentence is concerned, an Israeli wanted to say: we are modern people, in our modern era we do not need this. It is sort of a flavor you get in Israel that israelis want to have latest gatgets, to be updated on the latest discoveries, being 'modern' in style and food habbits and be in step with the rest of the 'modern world' (it is just my opinion, but they do not consider surrounding arabs to be very modern) as well the more religious unhabitants of Bnei-Barak or Jerusalem neighborhood '100 gates' might not neccesarily share a believe that they 'have to be modern'. Guys, its my observation only and might not be a truth for everyone. But l wanted to share with you why l think that from the israeli prospective, a translation to English might look just fine... Dont try to learn English from Duolingo Hebrew course... But hopefully this comment will help you to understand something about צריך, which is, per my humble observation, one of the top 100 most frequent words used in Israel, even 'olim hadashim' know it and often do not know the difference between צריך and רוצא.
One of the right answers has את זה while the other one just has זאת. Why do we need את for the masculine 'this' but don't need it for the feminine? I thought this was a trick answer and didn't pick it at first.
Well, זֹאת as a direct object is typical of more flowery language, which uses more idioms used in the Bible, where זֹאת often leaves out the direct object marker אֶת, like in Is 48.1: שמעו זאת בית יעקב hear this, house of Jacob.
I have a question. I always understood that in english "one" was used to kinda make the sentence "impersonal", and not to literally mean "one person", in which case – indeed – one would write "one person".
I.e. "in this era one doesn't need to walk to school" (meaning: it's not necessary because there is public transportation, nobody is forced to do that)
vs.
"one person doesn't need to walk to school" (that specific person, for some reasons, is not in need to walk to school)
Shouldn't "one" then be always translated with the plural masculine form in Hebrew – the one that is used in that language to make the sentence impersonal?
I ask because I had an option with צריך, ruled it out because of all of the above, and it ended up being the correct one...
Well, the problem is that you use the third person masculine plural without pronouns to express impersonality only with verbs. But צָרִיךְ needful, necessary is an adjective molded after the Aramaic pattern פָּעִיל, filling a slot, where European languages usually use verbs like need, so the Mishnaic construction אֲנִי צָרִיךְ לַסֵּ֫פֶר I am needy to the book shifted to its use as a verb with direct objects אֲנִי צָרִיךְ אֶת הַסֵּ֫פֶר I need the book, but צָרִיךְ is still not a fully fledged verb with full conjugation and behaves here more like impersonal expressions like אֶפְשָׁר.
I thought only the plural form was used for the special multipurpose meaning. Why is צריך accepted here?
Well, צָרִיךְ without a subject means already "it is necessary". Because צָרִיךְ is an verbal adjective and not a verb per se, you do not usually use the impersonal plural.
Well, in both languages the בָּעִדָּן שֶׁלָּ֫נוּ in our era would be less stressed, if it is not fronted any more.
In a previous lesson we were taught to add personal suffixes to nouns. So בעידן שלנו could be rendered as בעידנו, right?
1430
Almost. It would be בעידננו. However, suffixes are only taught and accepted in those two skills on possessives. Otherwise, they are not accepted, because they are considered formal and not commonly used in everyday language.
I wrote בעידן שלנו איננו צריכים את זה just to see if one could use איננו here. Seeing that we can´t, could someone please explain why?
- 1430
Well, איננו צריכים is specifically "we don't need" and that is why it's not accepted, as the sentence is neutral - "one does not need". You could say it also in singular לא צריך or there is an option to use the noun צורך "need" and say אין צורך (literally there is no need).