1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Hebrew
  4. >
  5. "השוטר מסמן לכלב לאכול."

"השוטר מסמן לכלב לאכול."

Translation:The policeman is signalling the dog to eat.

July 9, 2016



This sentence will come in handy in the future, I think...


how is שוטר actually used? can it be used for guard or officer as well?


The word שוטר means only a police officer or a policeman. An officer (like in the army) is קצין, a guard is שומר.


What does it mean?


signals or indicates should both be accepted


It's now more inclusive and accepts both answers.


When would anyone actually say this?!


For example in a K-9 dog unit, the dog might not be allowed to eat until its duties were performed. Once ready the policeman signals (is signalling) the dog to eat--probably by a hand gesture. I signal my dogs all the time with hand gestures---although they pay little attention.


I can't listen the resh in השוטר.


Why not? It's pronounced correctly


Its like the french R, a velar fricative, rather than the alveoral fricative most common among languages.


There are two types of accents. Sfaradi and Ashkenazi. The latter is common in Jerushalem and the former in most of the rest of the country, such as Tel-Aviv. You are exposed to both. With the sfaradí accent the r is said a lot like Spanish, or Italian, though only trilled once regardless of the place in the word. The r is softer in the Askenazi accent, more like a French r. Both are correct. I find the Sfaradí accent infinitely easier myself, but forms of pronunciation are equally correct.


This sentence is technically correct, but... it doesn't make any sense considering any realistic use case, which is none.


Should it be להכלב, or לכלב is right?


ll להכלב is not used: the -ה (ha-) is merged with the -ל (le-) preposition. There's no difference in writing without nikkud, but it's pronounced differently (la- instead of le-).


I'd only ever say "the policeman is signalling TO the dog" in English. "Signaling the dog" sounds strange.


I completely agree with tensory, can't believe nobody has pointed this out till very recently. You don't signal a dog.


Why is this not signalling TO the dog?

Is לכלב not to the dog?


Yes, לכלב is to the dog. My theory (trying to second-guess what was in the mind of the person who created this exercise) is that they were thinking: If it was "the policeman is telling the dog to eat", in English we use word order alone, but in Hebrew it would be השוטר אומר לכלב . (Or if he was telling the dog a story, in English the position of "the dog" shows that it's the indirect object, but in Hebrew השוטר מספר לכלב סיפור ) So by analogy, if the cop is telling the dog by means of a signal instead of using words, they thought it would be all right to dispense with "to" in the English, but the Hebrew version retains the -ל . Or maybe I'm overthinking this?

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