"He should have said that."
Translation:הוא היה צריך להגיד את זה.
Biblical Hebrew את wasn't obligatory. While in Modern Hebrew it is almost always obligatory, in this case (before זאת meaning "this" in general), it is formal Hebrew, so for some reason it sounds better to Hebrew speakers without את.
I mean it came about because people thought it sounded better. according to Hebrew grammar it should have an et.
הנה שני המשפטים המאושרים:
הוא היה צריך לומר את זה הוא היה צריך לומר זאת
אלה היו האפשריות שהיו מוצגים לי.
Is the הוא obligatory in this sentence or would the sentence be grammatically correct without it? If it is obligatory - why? I don't quite understand because in many other sentences with this structure the personal pronoun is left out. But this was marked wrong here.
it is the hardest part of the course, UNTIL i realized my Arabic privilege (LOL)! if i translate the sentence to Arabic and then to Hebrew it becomes much easier. So the way it goes is to treat "היה" as "كان" in Arabic...
"If I were...." = " ... לו הייתי..." = "لو كنت"