The way of thinking of it that makes sense to me is to say "I like not one hat out of these hats."
The understood "hat" is what makes the accusative "keinen" masculine, and is the actual thing being "possessed" by the group of hats.
So this sentence can be thought of as "Ich mag keinen Hut dieser Hüte."
Think of 'kein' as meaning 'none', as in 'not one'. So you're saying something like 'I like not one of these hats'.
In English this used to be the same but is changing, more purist types would say 'none of these hats is any good' ('is' implying that 'none' is singular), but more often people say 'none of these hats are any good' ('are' implying 'none' is plural)
Well, when talking about kein as an independent pronoun (standing by itself, pointing to nothing in the sentence), as suggested here, it will follow the declension table without removing the "es"
"kein Buch" would become "keines"
Ich mag keines dieser Bücher
I think quis_lib_duo tried to say:
"keinen" is accusative, because it is the main part of the whole phrase "keinen dieser Hüte", which is the direct object of the sentence.
Now "dieser Hüte" (which is not the whole object) is genitive.
- keinen = accusative (main element of the object)
- dieser Hüte = genitive (complement of "keinen")
The declension of "klein" for a plural noun is always "-en" no matter what the case.
Another way to think of it is that "kein" counts as a type of indefinite article. And the declension of an indefinite article or possessive pronoun in the plural is always "-en".
This one caught me off guard. After reading the other comments (Thanks for all the other commentators), this is the best explanation I have come up with : Kein can be treated as a pronoun, but for understanding it's place in this sentence, it's easier to think of it as a noun (even though grammatically wrong), meaning 'not one' or 'none'. Therefore the sentence can be divided into three parts : Ich mag, keinen, dieser hüte. In this structure the keinen is the direct object and therefore takes the accusative case. Although the 'dieser hüte' part, which can be translated as "of the hats", doesn't show real possession, it does describe the belonging (or in this case not belonging) to the group of hats, and hence takes the genitive case. To figure out the gender of keinen, remember that the expression 'not one' takes a singular noun which is in this sentence 'Hut'- masculine . Therefore the pronoun should also be declined as singular, masculine. Hope I helped a bit☺
I think you're exactly right. In fact, I just had a realization from a different phrase I learned that I think in this context, this standalone kein- word is declined with totally standard declension-- that is to say, it's not treated like an ein- word or even a strong attributive adjective. It gets the standard ending for everything like so
Masc, Fem, Neut, Plural
Nom: keiner, keine, keines, keinen
Gen: keines, keiner, keines, keiner
Dat: keinem, keiner, keinem, keinen
Acc: keinen, keine, keines keinen
(Sorry, don't know how to make clean tables)
And the gender depends on what noun WOULD have followed the word. In this case it's masculine for Hut, as you said.
Why is keinen used for plurals in nominative and accusative? That part of the pattern seems to be the only exception to this following the definite article declension pattern. If that applied completely, those combinations would use keine.
[EDIT: I've learned enough by now to confidently say those must be typos in JackBond's post.]
It seems to be "the ending that the definite article would have".
Whenever you have something in front of a noun that gets inflected, it has to somehow show the gender - that's the purpose of all the strong/weak/mixed stuff. Using the definite article (der/die/das/den/dem) is the most concise way to satisfy the need to show gender - it's always complete to simply say "[der/etc] [X]".
So what that kein- table shows is that when kein- is completely replacing a noun (possible when the actual noun is implied through conversational context, or as in the example of this sentence that sort of lazily leaves it out to avoid being repetitive), it is inflected as the definite article would be in that situation.
This is, as already pointed out, different to its usual behaviour when the noun is present, where in some cases and genders you can use the 'endingless' kein. When there's no noun, it must always have an ending.
But the -en ending doesn't match with plural declination of definite article. I assumed it would be der because it precedes a genitive plural. However, others say it's accusative since it follows mag. Definite article of plural accusative is die. So his kein table follows the assumption that others mentioned, that there is an implied "Hut?" ich mag keinen Hut dieser Hüte? That seems to be the only way I could make sense of this.
Think of it as "I like no hat of these hats".
Then you see that you need to use "I like [accusative]". "No hat of these hats" is one concept, collectively in accusative. Of course this can be further broken down into "[accusative] of [genitive]" in this example.
The accusative part is "no hat", which means it's accusative male singular (den) which requires that we use keinen when shortening it to leave out the noun.
The plural is only in the genitive part, so doesn't affect the inflection of kein- --> keinen.
Here's what's confusing me about the genitive case in German: There seem to be different kinds of changes to the noun (e.g., Hut), an adjective (e.g., schwartz), a definite article (der/die/das), an indefinite article (ein/eine), a possessive pronoun (mein/dein, etc.), a demonstrative pronoun (dies, etc.) and the whatever-it's-called negative article (kein/keine).
I'm a native English speaker so use simply the apostrophe + "s" (with possessive pronouns that change according to the "owner" rather than the "owned"). I've learned French and Spanish, where any word attached to a noun agrees with the noun. I'm confused by which of the above words decline to genitive--why, in this case, "kein" takes an accusative form instead of the genitive, whereas "dies" and "Hut" take the genitive form.
Can someone point me to a good site for giving an overview of this issue?
Because the verb "mögen" needs/ is causing the accusative. Welches/Welchen/Welche/Was davon magst du? lt. transl. as "Which/What of that do you like?" Ich mag keinen dieser Hüte. Another example: Ich mag keines dieser Bücher (keines= akk. sg. neuter.) Other examples (with ""haben) Ich habe das Beste aller Autos. (This would sound odd because a naitive German would just say: Ich habe das beste Auto) But this sentence is a good example to teach grammer even though it does sound "bescheuert" and doesn't make a lot sence...
So the English translation would be : I have/own the best (one) of all cars... If you would put "das Beste" into genitive (des Besten) you would say something like that: I have/own OF the best of all cars. That sounds wrong in English as well.
If Duo had wanted you to write "I don't like these hats," it would have given you "Ich mag diese Hüte nicht." The given sentence "Ich mag keinen dieser Hüte" translates pretty much word for word to "I don't like any of these hats" and has a difference in emphasis. It adds extra emphasis to the fact that there is not a single hat that you like out of them, and "I don't like any of these hats" captures that much more equivalently.
I agree that your translation has essentially the same meaning, but since there's a more direct translation into English, use that one.