"She is not standing."
Translation:वह खड़ी नहीं है।
Why do we need the है here if it's negative? Weren't there some cases were it was left off with नहीं?
As far as I know, using हूँ/है/हैं (and any other form of /hona/) is optional in negative sentences and it doesn't make it grammatically wrong. In other words - it's just up to you.
You are right. Both are correct but the one without "hay" is more suitable. Voh kadi nahe or. Voh nahi kadi
I had the same question. As far as I can tell, खड़ी is a verb, and therefore, based on what I've seen so far, नहीं would come before it (with an optional है at the end.)
If there's a logical reason why that's not the case, then it isn't exactly intuitive and should be explained.
It's because खड़ी is an adjective and not a verb. It's hard to think of "standing" in English as an adjective, but think of a phrase like "standing ovation", in which "standing" is just a descriptor and not a present progressive/continuous verb. So this sentence is describing the woman by saying that she is in the position or in the state of standing, as opposed to saying that she is actively completing an action.
Replace खड़ी with another adjective like छोटी and you will see why नहीं then is coming after the adjective (and before the verb होना):
वह छोटी नहीं है। - She is not short.
Thank you so much for the explanation!
But is it still acceptable to say वह नहीं खड़ी है ? I was marked correct for that. Maybe it is not preferable but still okay?
Why is it not 'खडी रही' as the English sentence is in present continuous 'Standing'?
English and Hindi tenses don't overlap perfectly, especially simple present and present continuous. You'll have to get used to the feel of Hindi sentences.
वह खड़ी है। - She's standing.
वह खड़ी नही है। - She's not standing.