22 Comments
In this sentence, the English translation should be either "to TAKE care of" or "to care FOR."
No, the meaning is different. It would be "Nemusà se o nikoho starat.".
Also "care for" and "care of" are a bit different although both are "starat" in Czech, but I am not 100% sure.
"She doesn't have who to care for" is an accepted answer but I don't think that's possible to say in english
This must must be the first time somebody compains we accept too many forms...
I think it is possible.
"She doesn't have who to care for" shouldn't be accepted. Anybody or somebody would work in place of who.
I (AmE) wouldn't expect to hear it either, and if I did hear it, I'd think it was wrong. Maybe it works in BrE? Or maybe I just don't know enough to know that it IS actually correct? :-)
I am the person guilty of listing this in the accepted translations because I have encountered it. I would never say it myself, as it sounds horribly sloppy, but so do things like the abuse received by neither that your compadres never cease to report as being unfairly rejected. Long story short, too many sentences, not enough hours in a day, so I can't do a dissertation on every marginal grammar piece included in the side translations. If someone else has the energy and ability to provide the evidence for incorrectness, please do.
Authored by someone with an English-sounding last name, Google books:
Yet such a monk deprives himself of great spiritual benefit: he does not have whom to ask for spiritual counsel, for an answer to doubtful notions and perplexing moral questions[...]
367
Interesting. I am a native British English speaker. "Who to care for" works for me where "who" is the first word of a phrase. It's a question. Asking who to care for is therefore ok. "Who to care for" is what you're asking. Having who to care for doesn't work for me. "Who" is being used as a pronoun in the middle of a phrase here, rather than a question, and it just isn't right. Maybe Nueby's example is a misprint? Maybe some people do use it that way? What I do know is that I couldn't begin to get my head around Czech without the Tips and Hints, and for every idiot who abuses you guys there must be a dozen of us out here who are just grateful for all the hard work you do setting up these lessons and this course. Keep up the goid work!
I don't know. I found only one occurrence of something similar using Google: "Are you asking who to care for first: 1) the person who is not breathing and has no pulse... or 2) the person who is threatening people?" Probably from an American.
Ah... good example! In THAT sentence, I would bet that almost everyone would use "who." Of course, it should be "whom," though I'd be surprised to hear anyone use it. But somehow "who" doesn't sound weird there, as it does in "She doesn't have WHO to care for."
Nueby's example is also a good one... But even that one uses "WHOM" (which is correct , even though it sounds a little weird just because it's so rarely used properly, especially in speaking) and not "WHO" (which is incorrect as an object and would sound even more weird).
=== "Long story short, too many sentences, not enough hours in a day, so I can't do a dissertation on every marginal grammar piece included in the side translations. ===
The Czech Team has done and is doing a wonderful, wonderful (and probably thankless) job with this course!!! If I could help in a REAL way, I'd be happy to do so. Meanwhile, I'll keep trying to help with the easier stuff, while trying to avoid being too wrong or too annoying... :-)
Yes those all work. But "she does not have who to care for" does not work in the English language, English or American...
"She does not have who to care for" was recently removed from the list of acceptable translations.
who and whom have to refer back to an object in the sentence, so to use "whom" it would have to be something like - "she does not have anyone whom she can care for" to be grammatically correct in english
The course generally does not accept "someone" in sentences like this. See the link that follows for more, especially the first and last notes regarding the use of "someone/anyone" in negative sentences and questions. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/someone
Well you definitely should not be accepting "she doesn't have who to take care of". If you used "someone" like this: "Well it's because she doesn't have someone to take care of" it completely makes sense. I thought it would make more sense in this translation because koho means whom so saying "no one" isn't really a direct translation. I'm a native English speaker and I would say that someone does sound strange with out any additional info before it but the course does make some strange sounding English sentences that are accepted. Much more strange than using "someone" in this instance. So maybe you should check some of these things.
The website you cited says "usually anyone is used instead of someone in negative sentences". So I will stick to my claim that someone should be accepted. Something like "Now I don't have someone to take care of" when referring to a person who you were taking care of in the past makes sense. Someone is specific and anyone is nonspecific. You are taking these sentences out of context so you can't really say which one is more correct.
I appreciate your points about usage in negative sentences and specificity vs. non-specificity. Since this sentence, it seems to me, is both negative and non-specific, I support the decision not to include "someone" in the (nearly 700) accepted translations. Perhaps another member of the team will have a different view.
