1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: German
  4. >
  5. "Die Kuh trägt keinen Hut!"

"Die Kuh trägt keinen Hut!"

Translation:The cow is not wearing a hat!

January 6, 2018



Why is "The cow wears no hat" not accepted? I feel it's closer to the german sentence.


I think the same, they should accept that one too


But it sounds less natural to me in English :)


The cow wears no hat was accepted for me :D


The same question, because no where in german sentence is "eine".


no where in german sentence is "eine"

What? It's right here: Die Kuh trägt keinen Hut.

kein is the negative equivalent of ein.


Why is it 'keinen Hut'? I know that Hut is masculine. 'Apfel' is also masculine but 'Das ist kein Apfel' in the same lesson is saying 'kein' should be used for masculine. Maybe i missed a point. Appreciate some help on this.


tragen "to wear" is a transitive verb and takes a direct object in the accusative case.

So you need masculine accusative keinen here.

sein "to be", on the other hand, is not a transitive verb and it does not take an object -- instead, it connects or links a subject to a predicate, and predicates are in the nominative case in German.

Thus your example sentence has masculine nominative kein Apfel.


For anyone who's confused , Here is the brief explanation:

Nicht = Not

Nichts = Nothing

Nie = Never

Niemals = Never (Ever) ((Stronger than Nie))


I never understood why sentences like this with both a negator, verb and a noun use "kein" instead of "nicht" "Die Kuh tragt einen Hut nicht" seems logical as the verb is still being negated... Can someone please explain further


The same reason you wouldn't say "The cow wears no hat" in English: languages have certain forms which are usually used, and using forms which are unusual sounds unnatural. While "Die Kuh trägt einen Hut nicht" is not technically wrong in my opinion, it is not a speech form typical of German speakers, and if you say this in Germany, people will immediately recognize you as an English speaker who is not used to German forms. The same works in reverse: a German speaker who is not used to English forms might say, in English, "The cow wears no hat" when in fact, native English speakers would almost certainly say "The cow is not wearing a hat".


@LateBit - If one wanted to say "the cow is not wearing a hat, it is eating a hat" - so that the verb is being negated, could one then use 'nicht'?


No, because the object is indefinite, countable, and singular — there you need kein even if you’re negating the verb rather than the object.

If the object were definite and/or countable and/or plural, then you could use nicht.


aha, thank you for the explanation


Makes sense...well spoken.


The cow doesnt wear any hat?why not good


I'm sorry but...can we go back to "I am no banana"? I feel like something important was lost there...


"The cow doesbt wear hat." Why is ir not correct?


Because you forgot the indefinite article. kein- is "not a...", so you need the "a" as in "The cow does not wear a hat".

Also, you have a misspelling in "doesbt" -- the "b" should be an "n" followed by an apostrophe.


Yeah, only cowboys wear hats, silly!


Why "The cow doesn't wear hat" is incorrect?


Hats are countable (one hat, two hats), so keinen Hut is "not ... a hat", as in "The cow doesn't wear a hat".

You left out the "a" in "a hat".


Where is the difference?


The difference between what and what?

Please quote the things you are referring to -- as completely as possible.

[deactivated user]

    i thought when someone wears something, or doesn’t, it’s reflexive and it’s one of the verbs that break apart? When I want to talk about my daily routine in Deutsch and i’m wearing something or not wearing something i have to use reflexive verbs.

    Danke schön for any help.


    If you're putting on a hat, you could say Ich setze mir einen Hut auf with a reflexive, separable verb.

    But after you have put it on, when you are wearing it continuously, it's ich trage einen Hut -- not reflexive, not separable.

    [deactivated user]

      are reflexive verbs reserved for humans? let’s say it’s porky pig in a cartoon talking about his routine can he use reflexive verbs? Basically what i’m hinting at is frissen vs essen situation. I would imagine an animal cartoon might say “ich fresse” instead of “ich esse”, or no?


      let’s say it’s porky pig in a cartoon talking about his routine can he use reflexive verbs?

      Yes - it could say ich wasche mir die Schnauze, for example, if it's washing its snout.

      Or even non-speaking, non-cartoon characters: a dog could sich die Pfoten lecken "lick its paws", for example.

      I would imagine an animal cartoon might say “ich fresse” instead of “ich esse”, or no?

      I think that depends on how animal-like the cartoon animal looks. Mickey Mouse, for example, seems very human-like in its actions to me and would probably use essen, while Daffy Duck seems more animal-like to me and would probably use fressen.


      There are varieties of rendering the present tense to convey meaning so, "tragt" can mean: is wearing, wears, or does wear. This translator is not allowing that flexibility or nuances of meaning in English!


      Isnt it supposed to me "Die tragt nicht Hut" nicht applies to the tragt"


      Isnt it supposed to me "Die tragt nicht Hut"

      No. "not ... a" is almost always kein (keine, keinen), not nicht ... ein/eine/einen.


      If this has been asked before I apologize, although I didn't see it pop up in the conversation yet. How would you change it to say "the cow does not wear a hat"?


      How would you change it to say "the cow does not wear a hat"?

      You wouldn't. The German sentence would be the same.


      Why are we learning useless sentences? Where am i likely to use this other than recounting a tale to german speaking children?


      Trägt oder tragt


      So tragt is wears or carries? Because previously the woman carries apple juice instead of wears (she could have spilled it on her) but now it is wear, not carry. Makes sense...oh wait, no it doesn't.


      So tragt is wears or carries?

      Not quite -- tragt is the verb form for ihr, so ihr tragt is "you wear" or "you carry" (not "wears, carries" with -s).

      "he wears" or "he carries" is er trägt -- different vowel.

      Makes sense...oh wait, no it doesn't.

      As much sense as "taking a shower". (Where are you taking it to?)

      When you're wearing your clothes, you're basically carrying them around on your body.


      So then why would "she wears the apple juice" or "the cow is not carrying a hat" because as you just said, you are carrying your clothes on your body or thereby wearing apple juice when you spill it on yourself?

      And why would you have a question about a woman carrying apple juice in a clothing section?


      The cow does not wear a hat The cow is not wearing a hat! Are these not translated the same in German? Need an answer here.


      The cow does not wear a hat The cow is not wearing a hat! Are these not translated the same in German?

      Yes, they are the same in German, and both of those translations are accepted in a translation exercise.


      I had written the first response. The answer came back all RED, saying the correct answer was the second response, and, to me, saying my answer was wrong. Not good for learning.


      I'm guessing that you had a listening exercise, then, not a translation exercise -- and that it did not say that "The cow is not wearing a hat" is the correct answer, but rather, that Die Kuh trägt keinen Hut is the correct answer, which means "The cow is not wearing a hat" (or other translations).

      Do you have a screenshot showing exactly what kind of exercise you had and what you wrote?

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