Translation:I am not a woman.
Yep, 女ではない works too. Might start thinking about situational use for formality though.
女ではない = 女じゃない. じゃ is a contraction of では, hence they both have the same level of "formality", ie. they're both plain form.
Shouldn't 'that's not a woman' be accepted? Wouldn't this be what you'd say in a situation where you mistook some inanimate object (tree, poster, post, shadow, three cats in a trench coat) for a woman?
If you were saying that (thing) is not a woman then you would use それ/あれ. Also, I've always felt that 女 is closer to female in general whereas adding either の子 or の人 adds the distinction of girl or woman.
That's an interesting question. I think so.
I was going to say that maybe you'd use 女の人 or similar to be a bit more respectful when referring to someone else, but if the thing turns out not to be a person you probably don't need to bother :p
How could you say " there are no women" as in, there are no women present, there are only men? Thanks!
「女がいません。」, I believe. Remember - です (and ではありません, the formal negative of です being used above) is about describing states of being. いる and ある, on the other hand, is about existence, so would be used for your phrase.
I should add that I've heard it may be considered rude to speak of women as 女 as opposed to 女の人 when in the presence of women. This only effects the converse of your example, though.
ではありません is the formal negative "to be" verb. It's just how you formally say "is not/am not/are not." ありません without the では means "to not exist" and only applies to inanimate objects. It would also be preceded by either a は or が particle depending on the situation.
Sorry, I remember じゃありません, I just forgot this one because I hadn't seen it in a while.
じゃ is a contraction of では.
Always use ではありません to describe "sb./sth. am/is/are not. sb./sth." The difference between ありません and いません appears in "there is/are not", like "女がいません": There are no women.
ではありません is the negative present active of です. Nothing to do with あります、います or animate or inanimate.
I guess, but there's probably a more technical term for 'female', in the biological sense.
It is not a female was not accepted... I guess it seems odd to me that someone would say "I am not a woman."
"It" implies that you're talking about something not human. To say that an animal is female, you would say 雌 (めす) instead of 女. That's probably why that answer wasn't accepted.
No, because じゃない is in itself a negation of です, so that would be (I think) kind of like saying "I am am not a woman."
These out of context sentences are driving me crazy. This could also mean "There are no women".
No I'm wrong. That would be "女ではいません”
Why are we using arimasen with a description of a living being versus imasen? Is there a special exception?
In context could this also mean "i am not a woman" ? Or would that be a different form?
i'm mad that "it's not a woman" is not accepted. if someone thought a person was a girl, but it was a man, I could say: "that's not a woman" or "it's not a woman" and that could be said as 女ではありません, am I right >:(
I put, "It is not her." which is correct depending on the context. An example of difficulty of translating between languages out of context. :-(
I think かのじょ would be a better translation for "her". That's a pronoun, おんな is a noun.