"He does not give you chocolate."
Translation:Er gibt dir keine Schokolade.
Er gibt Ihnen keine Schokolade. is correct answer, but here is Translation: Er gibt dir keine Schokolade. why? Is this bug?
They are both correct. Dir is the informal "you" and Ihnen the formal one. (In the dative, that is).
We used to always capitalise Dir (including mid-sentence) when addressing someone in a letter. Today, capitalisation in this context is optional.
The only reason for dir to start with a capital D is being the first word of a sentence.
If that's not the case, let us see those texts.
Incorrect... see second para: http://www.duden.de/sprachwissen/sprachratgeber/gross-oder-kleinschreibung-von--em-du-du--em--und--em-ihr-ihr--em--1
Isn't this saying "he gives you no chocolate"? (perhaps he gives something else?) Er gibt dir nicht Shokolade would reflect "not giving" as opposed to "giving no chocolate". oder was...
Well, since I posted this I've come to understand that in any event, nicht would come at the end of the sentence... but I'm no closer to understanding why, when one is negating the concept of "giving" (the verb) instead of the concept of "chocolate" (the thing being given) one would not use "nicht" instead of "kein/e". On the other hand, I have little to say to someone who won't give me chocolate.
I really don't get why should one use "kein" instead of "nicht" here
Agreed, I felt it should be "er gibt dir keine schokolade" but just as a test I put "er gibt dir schokolade nicht" but that isn't accepted and I came to the comments because I wanted to find out why but don't see any comments relating to this.
I'm not really sure why the latter would not be accepted, I'm still fine tuning when to use nicht and where to put it vs kein/e but also, for whatever reason I had a hunch that it should have been keine for this one so maybe there is a rule I'm subconsciously learning through repetition.... I'd love to know why the latter is not acceptable though.
I think it has something to do with the particular verb that you are negating but I don't know for sure.
It has to do with the fact that you are negating an indefinite noun that follows. "Er gibt dir keine Schokolade." can be translated as "He gives you no chocolate." or "He doesn't give you any chocolate." or also as "He does not give you chocolate.", but if it is possible to use the first translation with the sentence, then you must use a form of "kein". https://www.thoughtco.com/german-negation-in-grammar-1444455
But why does German force one to use "kein" instead of "nicht" when possible?
It really seems like the answer is always "because".
English distinguishes between "doesn't give you chocolate" and "gives you no chocolate", so why can't German? The words exist, but for some reason we're not allowed to use them? That makes no sense.
You cannot apply the rules from one language to another. Germans probably wonder why we don’t have to use “no”.
I'm just learning too, but it seems to be the general preference in German to negate the direct object (especially if it's indefinite) rather than the verb when communicating such a concept.
I think that would be "Er gibt dir keine Schocolade", not sure though.
I'm not sure but I think kein goes before a noun and nicht before a verb.
There is more to it then that since "kein" is used for an indefinite noun. Please read the following article: https://www.thoughtco.com/german-negation-in-grammar-1444455
Thanks for the link. I read the pretty good explanation there, but in this case it seems to me that the advice is contradictory: use 'nicht' when the verb is being negated (as could be inferred from this sentence, since "give" could be construed as the negated aspect); use "kein/e" when the noun has no article, as is the case in this sentence. So, perhaps it comes down to prioritizing the use of "kein/e" in the event those rules don't provide an unambiguous choice. I guess that's what I'll do from now on... unless I'm missing something.
It is. That's why this sentence uses the accusative form keine Schokolade.
Only masculine words have a separate form in the accusative case -- feminine, neuter, and plural words (whether pronouns, adjectives, or nouns) all look the same in the nominative and accusative.
Since Schokolade is feminine, keine Schokolade is both the nominative and the accusative form.
How about "Er gibt euch keine Schokolade"? It would appear that both "die" and "euch" are correct here.
Er gibt euch keine Schokolade is also possible.
It depends on whether you are speaking to one person (dir) or to several (euch).
Why wouldn't it be er gibt dir Schokolade nicht? To me er gibt dir keine Schokolade would translate as he doesn't give you chocolate (but rather something different), and er gibt dir Schokolade nicht would translate as he doesn't give you chocolate (but he gives someone else chocolate) but wouldn't either way still work?
In German, if you can use “kein” or one of its forms, then you must use it. So it is not the same as it is in English.
You would use keine in both situations.
If English can distinguish between "he gives you no chocolate" and "he doesn't give you chocolate", why can't German? It's beyond annoying that Duo forces one to say "he gives you no chocolate", but doesn't have the common courtesy to phrase it like that in English.
If you're expecting to learn a language that is just English with funny words but the same sentence order and constructions, then German might not be the pest one to pick.
Or any foreign language, really.