"The bags are not outside."

Translation:Nincsenek kint a táskák.

September 23, 2016

This discussion is locked.


A táskák nem kint vannak should be accepted


What's about ?: A táskák nem kint.


If you say that something is (or isn't) somewhere, you need a form of van. In this case the form of van is nincsenek.


Thank you :-) Does it mean, that the word "van" is ALWAYS a part of nincs/nincsenek? Maybe I didn't understand something essential at the very beginning.


Yes. Nincs is basically the lovechild of nem and van. Whenever "nem van" or "nem vannak" would appear in a sentence, you replace them with nincs or nincsenek instead, respectively. Those are basically (very weird) conjugational forms of van.
It also works with sem + van/vannak, resulting in sincs and sincsenek.
Itt sincs túró. - Hier gibt es auch keinen Quark. Sehr platzsparend. :D


Ja, :-) wirklich sehr platzsparend, danke!


And with "sem" being the lovechild of "is nem", that gives us two generations of bastards! :) More seriously though, without the word bank, I'd have been tempted to offer "nem kint vannak". What would have been the relative merit of that?


The merit of that would be that the bags are somewhere but not outside. The listener would then expect you to mention where they are instead: "A táskák nem kint vannak, hanem fent." - "The bags are not outside, but upstairs."

Generally whenever you put a word between nem and the verb, you're putting focus on that specific property not being true and you will usually reveal what property applies instead.


I am replying to your reply to me, but the level of replying has exhausted the website app, so I've had to reply to this lower level reply. There you mentioned that the merit of that ("nem kint vannak") would be that the bags are somewhere but not outside. Since the English sentence, "The bags are not outside", assumes the existence of the bags (it did not state "There are no bags outside"), then the English original is stating that the bags are not outside but somewhere else.


Don't you bring logic into my house. :)

The English sentence only states that the bags are not outside. Whether they are somewhere else or not is not an immediate concern.

Let's look at the Hungarian sentences, because the difference becomes a bit more obvious with the word order change:

  • A táskák nem kint vannak. - The bags are not outside. Either I know where they are instead, or we really need to find them, so I'm ticking a possible location off the list. (You get that same vibe in the English sentence when you emphasise "outside".)

  • A táskák nincsenek kint. - The bags are not outside. I'm just stating a fact, possibly not even caring about where the bags actually are. (The same in English when you don't put a special emphasis on a word, or you emphasise the "not".)

The first sentence puts a focus on the location of the bags, the second is more ... binary, I'd say. It just wants to state whether "bags = outside" is true or not.


Should "A táskák kint nincsenek" be accepted? If not, why?


It is possible, but it doesn't sound too good. Negations naturally want to be more in the front of the sentence, and putting nincsenek at the end here makes it unclear where your focus is. Or rather, it's unclear how your words relate to each other. As it stands, your sentence could also have grouped "a táskák kint", so it'd mean "The bags outside don't exist."

"A táskák nincsenek kint" would be a lot more natural.


a taskak nem kint . Why is this not accepted?


You need a verb when relating an object to a location. Just above, jzsuzsi has offered "A táskák nem kint vannak". Note "nincsenek" is "nem vannak".

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