"Itt nincs tűz."

Translation: There is no fire here.

[SineOlesen]

Here is no fire
- is also okay

[david.altmayer]

No one would ever say it like that in English.

[TobyBartels]

You could in context, to stress ‘here’. And since ‘itt’ is being stressed in the Hungarian sentence, I would argue that it should be accepted.

More common would be ‘Here is a fire.’ (translating ‘Itt van tűz’.).

[Gizella70]

report it

[JustinHuberts]

We didn't start the fire...
I guess I'm on fire today.

[NealFisher]

So what's the difference between "nem" and "nincs?" I'm having trouble telling them apart sometimes.

[dcseain]

Nincs is "nem van"

[Fekete_magyar]

Here is no fire? Really? What kind of English is that?

[dcseain]

Grammatical, but unnatural, yeah. Report it as wrong, but mention that "No fire is here" is better.

[hunkev]

If there is NO fire here , it means there is a fire here . double negative ?

[dcseain]

It is not a double negative. There is not no fire here is a double negative. It is a slightly unnatural construction, in English though, i'll give you that.

[MrtonPolgr]

I still don't get where you are going with this. Maybe you are missing the point of "double negative"? It's not about you need two random negations to make one, it's about things cannot happen "nowhere" or "never" or be done by "noone". By Hungarian logic (and also Romanian logic and probably Slavic logic as well), actions can only not happen "never" or "nowhere" and "noone", as a non-actor can only not do something.