1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Czech
  4. >
  5. "There was nothing to look at…

"There was nothing to look at."

Translation:Nebylo se na co dívat.

December 6, 2017



"nebylo se na co dívat" and "nebylo na co se dívat", both options are recognised as correct. it looks kinda strange to me, because the second position rule seems to be quite rigid... what is that i don't understand here?


na co is also clitic and it can be switched with se in the infinitive phrase


See the discussion for "Neni čeho si vážit." for the embedded or climbing clitic explanation and a further link.


how would you say at a specific place "There was nothing to look at" "tam nebylo se na co divat", because i've understand the czech translation as "it was nothing to look at" like you shouldn't have seen it.


There was nothing to look at there. Tam se nebylo na co dívat.

The there is ... construction is about the existence of something. However, see also https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/28927967?comment_id=37604191

"Nebylo se na co dívat." means the place is understand from the previous context. Maybe the TV, maybe some other place from which we returned.


Why not "Nebylo se co na divat."


na is the preposition that binds to co, so it must always be "na co" together. It can even connect into "nač", so closely they are bound.


So in these sentences does "co" have a completely different meaning than "what'? It's just a bit confusing to me.


Not really, it is just that English does not use it here. But in Czech it is the same what.

Na co se budeme dívat?

Není na co se dívat.


okay, and may I ask when the right time to use "co" and "nic" would be? will this be covered in any future lessons?


Proč ne "Nebylo nic k videní"? Prošlo by třeba "Nebylo tam nic k vidění"?


videt - see
divat se - look


A jo. Ale když tam není nic k vidění, tak se není ani na co dívat, ne?

Asi je to etymologický rozdíl (to mi nedošlo), ale ne významový. :)

Tak třeba: "Nebylo tam nic ke koukání / k dívání"? To už asi zní divně, že?

A jak by se řeklo "Není tam nic k vidění"? "There is nothing to see there?" A "Není tam nic vidět" - "There is nothing ..." Už se strácím.


Čeho přesně chcete dosáhnout?


Chtěla bych pochopit co nejvíc angličtinu. Třeba tuhle větu. její smysl, strukturu... Konkrétně v tomto komentu - jak mám vnímat význam té anglické věty. Jestli jsem smysl pochopila správně, nebo se to dá / má říct jinak...


Je to jak v češtině nic na co koukat / nic k vidění, nothing to look at / nothing to see. Význam v obou jazycích odpovídá a znamená skoro totéž, ale nejsou to totožné věty.


Aha. OK, ďakujem. :)


"To se nebylo na co dívat" was marked wrong. Why?


The English "there is/are/was/were" construction is simply "není/nejsou/nebylo/nebyli..." in Czech.

Your sentence would work colloquially, but then the "to" does not mean "that", but it's used like a particle, a bit like the English "well" or "then". Such a "to" can be added to many sentences though and it would make no sense to include them in the accepted answers.


Sometimes in czech the negations are cumulating and i'm struggling how to use them. Why we cannot use for this sentence "nebylo nic" and "nedivat"? Diky


Yes, Czech uses negative concord, one must use multiple negatives in a simple clause.

But the infinitive here is independent. The multiple negatives rule does not apply. Negating it changes the meaning, it does not simply negate the sentence. It is the same as in English:

Nebylo se na co dívat. There was nothing to look at.

Nebylo se na co nedívat. There was nothing not to look at.

You would meet a double negative in:

Nebylo nic, na co bychom se dívali. There was nothing that we would watch.


"That was nothing to look at." Would like the czech version. Thx

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