"Even though they like tea, they don't drink tea."

Translation:אף על פי שהם אוהבים תה, הם לא שותים תה.

July 14, 2016

This discussion is locked.

  • 2160

Why is למרות שהם not also acceptable?


It should be accepted.


Does אף על פי require the conjunction -ש?

And what is the literal meaning of this phrase?


Yes, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁ־ belongs to the group of subjunctions compounded with שֶׁ־, like אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁזֶּה בִּכְתַב־יָד, הַצַּוָּאָה שֶׁל אָבִיךְ דֵּי בְּרוּרָה although it is hand-written, your father's will is quite clear. The corresponding preposition is לַמְרוֹת despite and there is an adverbial expression אַף עַל פִּי כֵּן nevertheless, like אַף עַל פִּי כֵּן אַתָּה מִחוּץ לַזְּמַן nonetheless you are out of time. I always hoped אַף עַל פִּי means nose on my mouth with some crazy explanation why it ended meaning although, but the מִלּוֹן אֶ֫בֶן־שׁוֹשָׁן lists it under אַף also, even ;-)


What I find curious, and maybe you can shed more light, is that you can drop על פי, and have אף ש with the exact same meaning. Which of the two came first? Did they have a different meaning at some point? על פי alone means "according to", and I can imagine how it got this meaning from the literal meaning "on the mouth of".


Your nikkud of כן- is incorrect, there should not be a dagesh in the כ and it should be pronounced "khen", just like in לפני כן (beforehand), כמו כן (also), הלוא כן (is it not so?) etc.


Oh thank you. In the grammar of the Masoretes, a word beginning with a בגדכפת letter can lose its dagesh lene, if it is joined to the previous word with a conjunctive accent. Although this usage was not continued in modern Hebrew, it seems to have survived in some close-knitted formation like these here. Are there more examples for this?


See here. It appears that the only survivors are לא כלום and fixed phrases with כן-.


With אף על פי there are two options - for "although" you use -אף על פי ש, and for "nevertheless" you use אף על פי כן.


af al pi she-hem ohavím te, hem lo shotím te.


I was marked wrong for not including the second הם. Is that necessary?


Yep, it's necessary.


הַאִם הֵם מוֹרְמוֹנִים


Haha! Hey, i have a question for you: Is the 2nd הם truly necessary? If so, why?


Well, לֹא שׁוֹתִים תֵּה without a personal pronoun means impersonal one does not drink tea. Hebrew tends to repeat elements of grammar, I think, like putting several אֶתs in a row for several direct objects, or expressions like בֵּין א וּבֵין ב for English between a and b. Look at Ex 9.3 where the בְּ־ is six times repeated before each element.


But do you think that if we left the second הם out would be strange? Or would that be perfectly understandable?


Well, wouldn't even though they like tea, one does not drink tea imply that they do not want to violate a general proscription, but even though they like tea, they don't drink tea rather may suggest a more personal reason, like their stomachs are too sensible to it.


As Ingeborg says, Hebrew "likes" repetitions more than English (and ancient Hebrew more than modern Hebrew, although modern Hebrew still more than English).

But in this case, English also requires repeating the pronoun, and so does the bunch of other languages I know (granted, all of them European or Semitic...)


the hebrew translation is wrong. it must be ... הם לא שוחים תה and not הם לא שותה תה as suggested


Where did you see הם לא שותה תה suggested? That, of course, is not correct.

But you also made a mistake in your other example - you wrote שוחים instead of שותים.


sorry my mistake

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