1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "There are people who do not …

"There are people who do not have a house."

Translation:Es gibt Menschen, die kein Haus haben.

November 12, 2017



What about the "die" here? I miss something in the german sentence, like a "da" or "wen(m)"... What's going on here? Thanks


People, who... = Menschen/ Leute, die...

"Wem/Wen/Wer" are used for questions and are turned into "dem, den, der/die/das" if a statement is made. "Da" is used either with locations (= there) or if you there is logical causal construction like " Ich gebe ihr Geld, da /weil sie arm ist" = I give her money, as/because she is poor .


What you said makes perfect sense. However how do you know in this case that you use "die"? Is it because "menschen" is feminine? If the sentence was "Es gibt ein Mann, __ kein Haus habt". What would you use? Dem or der?


Yes, you are right: It depends on the article of the noun, in the simple version it is just repeated.

So it is Die Menschen, die..., Der Mann, der..., Das Wasser, das... or Akkusativ: Den Mann, den... and Dativ: Dem Mann, dem...

Later there are constructions like Der Hund, den du magst (der) bellt. (Der Hund bellt. Nominativ. Du magst den Hund. Akkusativ. But Den Hund, den du magst (den) streichelst du. Du magst den Hund. Du streichelst den Hund. Twice Akkusativ.

This special Grammar is for later, I think. For the moment it seems to be enough to repeat the article in relative clauses (see above).

I'd like to correct your sentence: Es gibt einen Mann (Akkusativ), der kein Haus hat (3. Person Singular). You can proof it, if you make two sentences: Es gibt einen Mann (Akkusativ). Ein Mann (Nominativ) hat kein Haus.

It is not easy to explain for a german native speaker. So I hope, I did not confuse you.


great answer; have a lingot


To be precise, it's because Menschen is plural, and therefore uses the article "die".
The word itself is masculine, so "der Mensch".


Oh, so it is like the English translation: "There are people THAT have no house." Instead of "There are people WHO have no house."Dankeschön!


That's something i can wrap my head around


There is also a group of relative pronouns that look like the question words wer/wem/wen or welcher/welchem/welchen: Die Menschen, welche kein Haus haben, sind meistens arm. Ich sage, was ich will. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativpronomen


Du hast ja Recht, aber wer sagt heutzutage noch "Die Menschen, welche..."? Würde man doch immer eher ",die..." benutzen. Mit "was ich will" haste natürlich Recht.


Ja, natürlich, das Beispiel ist etwas konstruiert. Ich benutze solche Wörter allerdings durchaus noch in formellen Texten.


Oh my god, that's so confusing. So if it's not a question then "wer" will turn into what looks like a definite article?

[deactivated user]

    Ich gebe einer arm frau etwas geld.

    "I give the poor woman some money"?

    Is it correct?


    thank you for your clear explanation


    wow a duolingo explanation before this kind of exercise would be appreciated. My brain was going to die. Thanks for the info.


    Die serves as a relative pronoun here. it translates to who.


    Noted. Though why is there a comma in the German text? Is it necessary?


    A relative clause is always separated by commas.


    Are there other words aside from 'die' that are used in this way?


    Yes, it is necessary. That's how German punctuation works :)


    Our strike same :)


    So to summarize:

    1)"Gibt" with an "Es" in front of it translates to there are

    2)The way "die" is used here it means who or whom

    3)There is also this weird german thing with the verb in the end

    Question: Is number 3 necessary whenever number 2 happens?


    Yes, number 3 is necessary when number 2 happens. "die" here further identifies the "Leute" in the first part of the sentence, so the second part "die kein Haus haben" is a dependent clause and you know from an older Duo lesson that the verb comes last in a dependent clause.

    Here's a good article explaining it (German Subordinate Clauses at the bottom of the page): https://www.thoughtco.com/german-sentences-in-the-right-order-4068769


    Thanks for that suggested article, helped me loads!


    Gibt means to give But with es It translates to Es gibt=There are


    Why not "..., dass kein Haus haben"?


    Dass is a conjunction, but you need a relative pronoun to initiate a relative clause.


    Thank you for your answer. Can you please explain a little bit more in detail? I don't understand :(


    Late answer: ... who don't have a house is a relative clause, who refers to people and is called a relative pronoun. To translate the sentence you need a German relative pronoun that matchs with "Menschen", that is a nominative (subject case) plural here. Thus you can choose from die and welche.

    Das is a relative pronoun for singular neuter, for example "Ich kenne ein Mädchen, das kein Haus hat".

    Dass with the double s is a conjunction, it is used to begin a secondary clause, e.g. "Ich weiß, dass es Menschen gibt, die kein Haus haben". In English, "that" can be a relative pronoun, a conjunction and also a demonstrative pronoun. German has different words for that (conj. "dass", rel. pr. "der,die,das,dessen,dem,den,welcher,welche,welches,welchem,welchen", dem. pr. "der,die,das,dies,dieser,diese,dieses,jener,jene,jenes,jenem,jenen"), that are used depending on the word class, and for the pronouns the gender and the case (and the number) of the thing they refer to.


    Why does "haben" go to end. Is "who" a subordinating conjunction? I forget...


    when die is used to mean who, the verb goes to The end


    Can't i say "Es gibt Menschen dass haben kein Hause" as well?


    No, you would use in the end 'die kein Haus haben' because that translates to 'who do not have a house', whereas yours would translate to 'that do not have a house'. Though they are similiar, we are looking for the 'who' in the sentence.


    Is it just me or did this one come out of nowhere?


    What the ❤❤❤❤


    "Es gibt Leute mit kein Haus" - does that work?


    No, because mit is always followed by a dative (keinem) and it's a logical error to use mit with kein here.


    In the second sentence, "die haben kein Haus" is also right?


    Es gibt Leute ohne Haus.


    No the verb has to go at the end of the dependent clause


    Why is "Es gibt Leute, die kein Haus besitzen" wrong? Thanks


    I don't know why they call them hints since they are regularly so dependably misleading, as illustrated yet again here.


    Why die and not dass?


    Wow I got this one because it was the only option with "people". I dont get why it's pratically structured like to seperate clauses here, with a comma


    How does gibt come in picture when there is no give in the English sentence?


    Every time you can replace "there are" or "there is" with something like "exist", this is translated as "es gibt" in German. There's no further explanation. Oder: Es gibt keine weitere Erklärung.


    I think it can be Es gibt Menschen, die haben kein Haus. Is it correct also?


    It is not really correct, it's rather something that children would say or someone in a very colloquial or low-level context. Correctly one would use a relative clause to describe or specify "Menschen" in greater detail. In a relative clause, the finite verb comes always last (die kein Haus haben). If you use the main-clause structure with the verb at the 2nd position instead (die haben kein Haus), you have two main clauses connected with a comma, which is a colloquial construction, as in correct German you can only connect to main clauses with a conjunction like und, aber, denn, ... Also "die" becomes a demonstrative pronoun in this construction, but it is considered colloquial or even impolite to refer to people/persons with the demonstratives der, die, das, e.g. "Der hat nicht mehr alle Tassen im Schrank" ~> "That [guy] is one short of a six pack".


    Is haben in its second position here? Shouldnt it be "..., haben die..."?


    No, it is correct german. Menschen, die... is a relativ-clause, so the verb is in the last position.


    Why not keiner since, correct me if I'm wrong, geben is a verb that calls for dative and Haus is a neuter noum?


    'Keiner' translates to 'none' which wouldn't work here.


    Pfft, millenials



    I wrote "Es gibt Menschen ohne einen Haus", which was wrong. Would it have been correct if I wrote "einem Haus" (das Haus, dative)? Or would this sentence never be a correct translation? Thanks!


    You are right using accusativ after ohne, but Haus is neutrum (das/ein Haus - in nominativ and accusativ the same!) Es gibt Menschen ohne ein Haus.

    Einen is the right masculine form, e.g.: Es gibt Menschen ohne einen Hund . (der/ein Hund - nom., den/einen Hund - acc.)

    It will be still wrong, because Duolingo wants us to translate "There are people who do not have a house." do not have a = haben kein versus ohne = without.


    Why isn't it "keinem"? Isn't das Haus the indirect object here?


    No, it's the direct object of "haben", so it uses the accusative case.


    I'm just so confused with the order of this.. its like its saying "there are people, the house they do not have."


    This is the question that made me immediately remember the phrase: Deutsch Sprache, schwere Sprache


    Why put hints in place that make you get things wrong continually?


    lol, it shows proof you're a noob if you're looking at suggestions. never count on them unless it's showing you a noun or a verb or maybe an adjective. all the 'hints' aren't WRONG, they were just wrong in that SPECIFIC situation. in a different situation they might be correct.


    Can someone explain the word order at the end bitte


    I said "es gibt menschen die haben kein haus"

    Is there a rule I'm missing about why "haben" goes at the end?


    Why "die" stays after, but not before the "Menschen"? Why not die Menschen, but Menschen die?


    Why "die" is after, but not before "Menschen"?


    "Es gibt Leuten, die kein Haus haben" - this was marked wrong.

    Is 'Leute' not declined with an -n in dative?


    No Leute is a plural noun like in english people. It is a number of persons. There is no singular word for it. For singular you have to help with one man/woman or in german ein Mann/eine Frau/ein Mensch.

    In the sentence Leute is Akkusativ. For Dativ you are right with Leuten, but that would be a sentence like: Das Haus gehört den Leuten.


    ヽ(゚ ー゚ )ノ what i don't undersyamd this help ,meua psl whyu uhtis happens in thies case? ヽ(゚ ー゚ )ノ

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