"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!"
Why is doch neccessary here? Would not it be then "And still I am not breaking anything" or "Yet I am not breaking anything"?
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.
I wrote 'ich mache gar nichts kaputt' but it was marked incorrect. I think it should be correct - any thoughts?
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?
Doch is not necessary. Ich mache nichts kaputt is the literal translation of I am not breaking anything and should be accepted. Doch might even sound strange if used in the wrong context.