1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Hebrew
  4. >
  5. "הנעליים אצלי."

"הנעליים אצלי."

Translation:The shoes are with me.

June 26, 2016



Mystery solved: we're all correct. "At mine" sounds absolutely bizarre to American ears, but it works just fine across the pond.


Yep! I'm English and can confirm this is a perfectly normal thing for us to say, and very common


Sounds normal to Canadian ears as well


May the shoes be with you


אצלי is translated as "at mine." That doesn't make any sense!


It does make sense. Think אצלי בבית.


It doesn't work that way in English AFAIK. You would say "at my place"


Trust me, you can say "at mine" or "over mine".


Looks like many of the commenters would prefer "by me", which is not currently accepted, to "at mine". Should at least add that.


"By me" for אצלי isn't standard English, it's Yeshivish (an English sociolect.)

From Wikipedia: "The preposition 'by' has a wide array of meanings in Yeshivish […] A possible cause for this is that the Yiddish preposition 'bei' is defined as at, beside or by. The similar-sounding English preposition 'by' has come to encompass these meanings."



Yes this is a mistake I saw as well. I hope they will fix it. :D


There is really no English equivalent of "אצל", but I believe it is the same as the French "chez". Any French speakers here who can verify that?


Native French speaking here. You are right, אצל often means "chez"" in French.


Absolutely. When I first met this word and it did not fit the English norms, I smiled and thought this will annoy the English speakers, it is chez, of course. This is why everyone is arguing about it.


50-60 years ago, when the French cultural influence in Israel was stronger than it is today, you'd see hair parlors and kiosks called אצל מיקי etc. - definitely a translation from French.


Why do think it was the French cultural influence if the same structure is used in Russian?


It's from before I was born, so a second-hand knowledge. One popular scholar, Ruvik's Rosental, claims so in http://www.ruvik.co.il/%D7%94%D7%98%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%99/2003/25042003.aspx; I think I read it elsewhere, too, as a common knowledge, but not 100% sure. I guess the signs for a French influence is (a) at the time (and still now), a French aura is more suitable to make a business look attractive. (b) At about the same time, many businesses of partners took the name "כהן את לוי". This את is obviously meant to mean "and" - but how comes, when in modern Hebrew it doesn't mean that, and actually sounds weird at first? Indeed it's half-justified by the fact that in Biblical Hebrew את meant "with", and it survived in modern Hebrew when inflected (איתו etc. from an earlier lesson in the course). But the real reason for coming up with this את, again according to scholars and maybe a common knowledge, is the french "et".


I wrote "The shoes are with me", and it was correct. This would be correct if you bought a new pair of shoes and someone asked where they were and you'd say, the shoes are with me. Am I the only one that thinks this is right as a native English speaker? Heh


I think you should report it. It's valid.


So "the shoes are with me" would not mean the shoes are on my side in the robot uprising....


Is "אצל" like "bei" in german? For example, as in "bei mir". I think that would have a better correspondence.


As far as I know, yes.


Going from Hebrew to German, I believe it is - you can translate most if not every אצל to "bei". Going in the other direction, sot so well - "bei" has many more uses than אצל.

[deactivated user]

    Correct solution: The shoes are at mine. ??? This can only make sense in English (which I speak natively) if: 1) אצלי means 'at my place' AND 'at mine' is elliptical for 'at my place' - in answer, say, to someone saying that the shoes were at his place. -OR- 2) אצלי means 'with me' in the sense of 'in my keeping'.


    Native English speaker and fluent Hebrew speaker here. I was also confused, אצלי doesn't mean 'at mine'.. i don't even know what 'at mine' is supposed to mean. אצלי means something more along the lines of the 2nd definition you wrote - i have it in my keeping. There is a difference between איתי - which means 'with me' in a more basic sense, and אצלי - which means 'with me' in the sense that you have it with you. This difference is slightly hard for me to explain, but i'll do my best. If someone is at your house, you would say they are אצלי בבית - like @airelibre suggested. If someone is simply with you - as in walking with you, you would say they are איתי. One would never say הנעליים איתי, because shoes are never simply 'with someone', they are always with someone in their keeping. The same goes for other objects - המחברת אצלו (he has the notebook/the notebook is with him), אצל מי החולצה שלי? (who has my shirt/with whom is my shirt). I hope this helped you. Good luck!


    Irish people and most British people can probably draw a parallel with "on", in, for example, "Do you have the keys on you?" (It doesn't mean, on top of, rather it could be that they're in your pocket).


    Native English speaking American here, who has lived in AU and NZ over the past 7 years. I associate "at mine" with British English (which would include this region) as a term, as I wouldn't imagine an American saying "The ___ are at mine" or "Let's meet at mine", though I hear (and say) it a lot after living over this way.


    Bob Dylan: "I'll Keep It with mine" https://vimeo.com/182493352 Doesn't entirely relate but it's one of my favorite Dylan songs. But regarding אצל: according to Giore Etzion (Routledge Introductory Course in Modern Hebrew, 192) אצל can mean "in one's possession" in addition to "at one's place." An example is הכרטיסים עצלך = יש לך הכרטיסים. Both mean "you have cards." Etzion writes that this prep. typically follows a verb that describes things that you do at a place such as ללון, לבקר, להיות. When there is no verb, it's only clear from context whether the prep. has the locative or possession sense. It seems that DL's translation, "the shoes are with me," combines location and possession.


    We use "on you" in the States also, exactly as in your sentence.


    How can I say at Hebrew "the shoes are at my place (home)" but not "with me" (I'm not home at this moment)? Before I was thinking אצל is for someone's place.


    The phrase אצלי can mean both - that they are at my place and that they are with me. However, if you want to stress that they are at home, and you aren't you could say הנעליים אצלי בבית, or more colloquially you could say הנעליים אצלי אבל לא עליי.


    I think this whole dispute is about English grammar, if it is ok to use the short slang form "at mine" meaning "at my place" or not. I guess most of us understand the Hebrew meaning. By the way: In Norwegian we say "hos" for the word עצל...

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