Because the French sentence is singular. The plural would be "Nous voulons voir d'autres choses"
"other things" is in plural and "autre chose" is singular and should translate to something else/something different/another thing.
Weren't we taught that another thing would be une autre chose and not autre chose? I'm a bit curious about it...
In this context, the French use set phrases:
- je voudrais voir autre chose
- je voudrais voir quelque chose d'autre.
In set phrases, time and usage have often dropped little words like articles.
"Autres choses" in plural would need an article: "d'autres choses", as the plural of "une autre chose", remembering that the regular plural indefinite article is "des", which becomes "de" in front of an adjective and is elided before a vowel.
Besides "voulait" and "voudrait" do not sound alike.
if this is so, why does "autre chose" not need an article - on voudrait voir une autre chose? OR on voudrait voir d'autre chose?
"autre chose" without an article is a set phrase. With time and repeated usage, many set phrases have lost their articles.
"D'autres choses" can only be used in plural, with d' elided from de, which replaces "des" in front of an adjective and which is the plural of "une".
We would like something else to see = Nous aimerions quelque chose d'autre à voir.
Why is "we want to see other thing" not acceptable instead of "we want to see another thing"?