"No people are living in this forest."
Translation:Ebben az erdőben nem laknak emberek.
Shouldn't this be "People don't live in this forest"? It seems to me that "no people are living in this forest" should rather be something like "Nincsenek emberek, aki ebben az erdőben laknak". No?
Shouldn't this be "People don't live in this forest"? - Yes. My versions:
Nobody lives in this forest - Senki sem lakik, ebben az erdőben. or
Nobody would live in this forest - Senki sem lakna, ebben az erdőben.
I think the above translation is good enough. But maybe "Senki sem/nem lakik ebben az erdőben." is more literal, and also good.
Your suggestion: "Nincsenek emberek, akik... " is not how a Hungarian would phrase this. But a close alternative is "Nincs olyan ember, aki ebben az erdőben lakik." But, still, this sentence focuses on the people, not the forest. The other versions emphasize the forest being without human inhabitants.
The "nem' has to go before the verb. (The position in front of the verb is key and always takes the focus, a question word, or a negation)
Also there is ameaningful difference between "people don't live in this forest" and people are not living in this forest" (this can also be stated as "no people are living in this forest"). The use of "don't" implies a habitual refusal of people to live there. The use of "are not" implies people might live there sometimes, but not at present.
Isn't emberek nem laknak people don't live and nincsenek emberek láknak NO PEOPLE LIVE?
No. "nincsenek emberek láknak" has two verbs. "Nincsnek" - means there is not existence for a plural thing. "Láknak" means they live. Hungarian does not tend to use two verbs together (exceptions include future, past conditional, and handful of specials like "kell").
That sentence has two verbs - and there is no such word as "hazbaan".