1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Kühe tragen keine Hüte."

"Kühe tragen keine Hüte."

Translation:Cows don't wear hats.

January 3, 2018



Quick question, why do we put "keine" after "tragen"?


It's not so much after tragen but before Hüte.

kein is more or less the negative version of ein -- an article that goes before a noun.

The plural version keine is similar to the English "any", which also acts as a kind of negative indefinite plural article, as in "Cows do not wear any hats" -- the "any" goes with the "hats". But while English needs a "not" together with "any", keine already contains the negative meaning inside it.

Also, tragen as the conjugated verb has to be the second thing in the sentence, so it comes right after Kühe.


Duo seems to default to non-acceptance of the 'cows wear no hats' option. See others comments below. Both options are correct in English. Both should be accepted.


If Hut is masculine why is it keine?


Because it's plural here, so you need accusative plural keine, not masculine accusative singular keinen.


It is plural in this sentance (Hüte)


I have an annoying issue. This phrase and "Fische trinken keinen Orangensaft" are repeated a million times in the same day or next. Is this happen to you?


Well you have to be prepared for the eventuality of having to use those sentences!


This has happened to me, but with other different sentences. I think it has something to do with software pairing up with the user and thinking that he needs to practice this sentence


The long awaited sequel to "Plumbers don't wear ties"


tragen means carry or not?


That's the basic meaning of tragen, yes.

But in connection with clothing, it means "wear".


It is similar to the French "porter", which also means both "to carry" and "to wear"


The most relevant scientific discovery of the 21st century.


Would it be wrong if i'd say kühe tragen hüte nicht?


The rule is to use "kein" instead of nicht, when you negate a sentence with an indefinite (i.e. with an indefinite article or no article at all) accusative object. So it is: "Der Hund bekommt einen Knochen" --> "Der Hund bekommt keinen Knochen"
"Der Hund bekommt den Knochen" --> "Der Hund bekommt den Knochen nicht"
"Kühe tragen Hüte" --> "Kühe tragen keine Hüte"
"Kühe tragen diese Hüte" --> "Kühe gtragen diese Hüte nicht"


That would sound unfinished to me — as if you are denying the verb tragen but not telling us which verb is appropriate. Kühe tragen Hüte nicht; sie essen sie. “Cows don’t wear hats; they eat them.” would be an example of a sentence that starts like that.


Is it possible to make a correct German sentence with the same meaning using nicht instead of kein?


Not if you want to negate the sentence as a whole. If the sentence has an indefinite accusative object (i.e. one with either an indefinite article or no article at all) a sentence is negated using "kein", not "nicht".
Here the positive sentence would be "Kühe tragen Hüte", "Hüte" is an indefinite accusative object, hence "Kühe tragen keine Hüte".

There are two exceptions to this rule:
1.) If you move some part of the sentence to the very beginning, in order to emphasize it, then "nicht" comes in again, e.g.
"Hüte tragen Kühe nicht" (note the stress on "Hüte")
2.) If you want to particularly negate one part of the sentence in order to contrast it with other options. In this case you put the "nicht" directly in front of the respective part of the sentence, but you have to give some continuation then, e.g.
"Kühe tragen nicht Hüte, sondern Kappen" = "Cows don't wear hats, but caps".


Is there a difference between "don't wear" and "are not wearing" in German?


Is there a difference between "don't wear" and "are not wearing" in German?

In the standard language, no.

However, note that this is a general sentence -- it talks about cows in general. So in this case, only the present simple is appropriate in an English translation: not because of how tragen can or can't be translated, but because of what verbal tense is appropriate in English when talking about general truths.

If we had been talking about a specific group of cows, then both "the cows are wearing hats" (= at the moment) or "the cows wear hats" (regularly) would be appropriate as a translation of die Kühe tragen Hüte.

But für Kühe tragen (keine) Hüte, only really "Cows (don't) wear hats" makes sense, because of how English grammar works.


Ah I see. I think I understand, thanks!


Cows do not carry hats muss akzeptiert werden. Englische Muttersprachler?


In the context of clothing, tragen would be interpreted only to mean "wear" by any German, without further context.


I tried to put 'cows do not wear hats' it's the same thing without the contraction.


I did the same. Still not accepted at jan19


"cows do not wear hats" should be accepted.

However, there was a report from about the same time that you posted this comment asking for "cow do not wear hats" to be accepted. Was that what you had typed?

Singular "cow" is not a suitable translation for plural Kühe.


Thank you that explains it. On my part 'cow' was a typo for cows. I thought I had written cows. But because it changes the sense it was not seen as that.


Screenshots are helpful in diagnosing this sort of thing :)

The next time you run into a translation that was marked wrong and you're not sure why (error in the program, missing alternative in the system, typo on your part) -- if you can, take a screenshot, upload it somewhere, and past a link into your comment.


Dear Duolingo Team, you urgently need an AI in your app. So, I wrote Hütte (houses) instead of Hüte (hats). Yes, it's an error, but it's also a typo as it is in Kuh - Kug. Your app thinks all the two are words, and your app notices typos only in 1 word, on that one who isn't another real word, getting? Thanks, may the AI be with you!


Yes, that’s a limitation of Duolingo: if the result of a minor typo (one letter or so) results in a non-word, then you get a typo warning, but if it results in a real world, Duo can’t tell the difference between a typo and a mistake (i.e. you think that the German word for “hats” is Hütte and typed that word intentionally).

An AI that actually understands German would indeed be awesome.

How much are you willing to contribute to the programming costs?


why is cows doesn't wear hats correct?


"Cows" is plural.

"does" / "doesn't" is for singular subjects.

The two do not go together.


what is keine keinen and kein


"kein" is the translation of "no" (not as an interjection like "yes", but as an indefinite pronoun) or "not any". It is inflected like an adjective, so you find forms such as "keine", "keinen", "keinem", "keines" in different genders and cases.


Does "hats" have to ve plural? Could either "cows wear no hat" or "Kühe tragen keinen hut" be accepted? What's the rule, in both languages? Sind there are many cows, there would be many hats?


Though you can use the singular for expressing nearly the same thought in both languages, the given sentence is plural and should therefore be translated as such.


why is keine? and not keinen if hüte is plural?


It has to be plural accusative here, therefore keine.

keinen would be masculine accusative or plural dative.

Also, hüte is a verb meaning "(I) herd" or "(I) watch over (a flock)". The German word for "hats" is Hüte -- capitalised.


"keinen" is only masculine singular (or dative plural)


I'm dying to use this phrase in Germany...


Why does Duo not accept my answer: Cows do not wear hats.


Is this supposed to be a German saying?, if so, what does it mean to them besides the literal translation?


Is this supposed to be a German saying?

No. It's just a funny sentence.


Did not accept "do not" ,answer was "don't"????


Did not accept "do not"

What was your entire sentence?

Do you have a screenshot of your answer being rejected?


why is it ''keine'' and not'' kein'' cus i dont know when its'' kein'' or when its'' keine''


"Hüte" is plural.


Why does it say "do not" as wrong, but "don't" as correct????


Why does it say "do not" as wrong, but "don't" as correct?

"do not" and "don't" should be accepted interchangeably.

Perhaps you made a mistake your first time?

A screenshot would be helpful to let others see what happened -- upload it to a website somewhere, please, and tell us the URL to the picture.


The sentence simply is not true: Ermintrude wore a hat...


a quick google search instantly disproves this statement


Cows are wearing no hats - why not? Duo answer is given: Cows aren't wearing hats. but not: Cows don't wear hats


"Cows are wearing no hats" (and also "Cows aren't wearing hats") isn't a correct English sentence, because the idea is that cows never wear hats, in general. So you'd need to use simple present: "Cows wear no hats", or (more elegantly, I think) "Cows don't wear hats". German: "Kühe tragen keine Hüte."

If it's "the cows", you can use present continuous: "The cows aren't wearing hats", "The cows are wearing no hats"; German: "Die Kühe tragen keine Hüte". This would mean that only these cows are not wearing hats now.


While I agree with you, I must point out "Cows wear no hats" wasn't accepted as a correct answer by duo in my case...



Duo' sent an email saying they're accepting it now!


In my case as well...


But the sentence isn't "cows never wear hats", it's "cows don't wear hats". (No neimals). However, there has to be a way to say "cows are not wearing hats" in German and if you wanted to say that, this would be the way, wouldn't it? If they are going to ask you to translate silly sentences without context, then all silly viable translations should be accepted.


Of course there is no "niemals/never" in the sentence. But nevertheless it is a general statement that applies all time. What should "Cows are not wearing hats" even mean? I can only imagine very funny settings, where this could work. Maybe something like: "There is a big party on the farm. All the horses are dresses as red indians and are wearing feathers in their manes. And all the pigs are wearing basketball caps. But cows are not wearing hats ..." Doesn't work there either, should be "The cows are wearing hats".
Could you give a better example?

But even if I could accept something like "Cows are not wearing hats today" the German sentence would still be "Kühe tragen heute keine Hüte".


F: "Beth, Don't you think the cows ought to be wearing hats for our shindig? After all it is a party."

B: "Fred, the cows are NOT wearing hats. That would be rediculus."

F:"But we're dressing the horses like Indians."

B:"Fred! I said, the cows are not wearing hats. We already decided they're wearing bows."


well, that contains only "the cows are not wearing hats", that's easy. I was looking for examples for "cows are not wearing hats" (without article).

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