"I am not breaking anything!"
Translation:Ich mache doch nichts kaputt!
Not exactly necessary, but you would be very likely to hear or say it with the "doch". You use the "doch" to emphasize a protest or that you contradict a statement.
"Fass das nicht an, du machst das nur kaputt!"
- "Ich mache doch nichts kaputt!"
"Don't touch it, you will only break it!"
- "I am not breaking anything!"
As far as I understand, most of the time auch noch doch and these other words are unessecary. My teacher calls them "the untranslatables" Because most of the time, they have no meaning in English. All they do is convey a stronger importance to the subject. For example 'immer noch' means exactly always but by adding noch it somehow makes it stronger. Dude don't ask, germans sre strange.
It's not necessary from a grammar point of view.
It doesn't mean "still" or "yet" -- it's one of those "flavour words" here that are difficult to translate.
Perhaps "I'm not breaking anything, after all!" comes close to the idea.
It's a tricky sentence that Pearson included in their course here.
Adverbs go after the main verb unless you want to change normal order for emphasis.
I'm no expert but I think "doch" is an adverb of manner and so goes after adverbs of time but before adverbs of place. German has an order for adverbs.
Axel591520 has listed others besides "doch": "aber" i think like "doch" means "nevertheless", and "auch" and "ja" mean "also", I think, but these shouldn't be seen as word-for-word equivalents. As others have said, they tend to be sort of untranslateable.
"Noch" ("still") is an adverb of time, so comes before adverbs of cause, manner or place. Another such is "schon" which means "already", among other things.
If you use another adverb to modify (for example by strengthening) an adverb, the adverb doing the modifying goes before the one it's modifying, in this example "noch", thus "immer noch" ("yet still" which sounds odd in English).
You can use "noch" to modify "nicht" and as "noch" is the one doing the modifying it comes first: "noch nicht" meaning "not yet".
As far as i know with any adverb you can break with normal order by putting it or a phrase containing it first in the sentence (with the verb next, of course).
I'd be grateful if anyone more knowledgeable would correct me if necessary. I'm just finding my way with all this.
I gave an incorrect response and the correction at the bottom of the page stated that the correct response is, "Ich zerstöre nichts." On this 'Discussion' page, the translation reads, "Ich mache doch nichts kaputt." Is there a reason why the verb 'brechen' can't be used? "Ich breche nichts!" or "Ich breche doch nichts! In addition, hovering over the word 'breaking' does not yield either zerstören or kaputtmachen.
For the second time, what is a Pearson course?
WHY we cannot say "ich breche nichts" or "ich breche doch nichts".
It's just not an accepted translation on this exercise.
Because the people who created the exercise (for pay) apparently don't come back to look at the reports and improve their sentences.
And I (a volunteer) do not see why I should clean up after something people got paid to do.
No, it's not. I am a native speaker and it definitely doesn't make any sense. As for the hints, "breche" can mean "I break", but not in this context. Google Translate is helpful and I use it a lot, but it's far from perfect. I reported "Ich zerbreche nichts" and "Ich mache nichts kaputt" as correct translations to Google.
Well, I realize you consider yourself an infallible deity on this board, so please explain why the first hint on Duolingo was "breche." I had never seen the weird, colloquial sentence before, and BOTH Duolingo and Google Translate (which isn't perfect but should be pretty serviceable for such a simple sentence) said "breche." So I guess I learned that breaking something in German is making something kaput, and Duolingo hints are rarely to be trusted (hence my reliance on Google).
Wouldn't the literal translation be "ich zureite nichts"?
Not only is zureiten completely the wrong verb (it's used for getting a horse used to being ridden, not for damaging objects), but since zureiten is a separable verb, it would have to be ich reite nichts zu.
Yet zureiten is the suggested word for breaking.
Who suggests that?
Do you mean the hints? Those are called hints for a reason; they're not "suggestions", let alone "recommendations" or "answers".
That said, many hints in the German course seem to have been created from a dictionary at some point and contain many less-common forms. I'll delete zureiten from the list here since that meaning is not only uncommon outside of the context of taming horses but also not used in this course.
Still, you can never justify a word choice from the hints -- as I said, they are not "suggestions".
They can jog your memory but they're not reliable enough to simply accept them unquestioningly.