"Neha has two sons."

Translation:नेहा के दो बेटे हैं।

August 13, 2018

This discussion is locked.


So when you want to say "X has Y" the actual Hindi phrasing is more like "X's Y exists" or "Y of X exists"? Am I getting it right?


Why is it के ? Shouldn't it be का or की? Is the oblique case used?


No, but here the object is plural (two sons). के is used with the object is either oblique OR plural.


Why not just न‌॓हा ढो बेटे हैं?


That would be 'Neha is two sons' and does not make any sense.

'नेहा के दो बेटे हैं' is literally 'Neha's two sons exist' and therefore means 'Neha has two sons'.


How about this sentence"मेरे दो बेटे हैं " - i have 2 sons


That's correct.
You can think of मेरे as मैं+के.


Now that I'm at level 14 I understand and it looks so obvious haha, you're right. बहुत धन्यवाद, मेरा लिंगोत लो!


It should be नेहा के दो बेटे हैं


It should be नेहा के दो बेटे है it is saying that im wrong


So in a previous example I had "Mere do bete hai" (I have two sons) Why would it not be "Mere ke do bete hai" as it is here. (Neha has two sons)


You can think of मेरे as being मैं+के.

(Similarly, मुझे is मैं+को, मुझसे is मैं+से, मेरा मैं+का etc)

Essentially, postpositions are used only with nouns. Pronouns change their form instead.


Each of your comments are so usefull, thank you to share your knowledge.


It's confusing as it is Neha who possess so one could think it should be है and not हैं as it is the case in English, in French and in Dutch... Yes, I know Hindi is a different language and we must forget all logic while learning it, but still


The problem is that it's not a literal translation because Hindi doesn't have a verb equivalent to 'to have'/'avoir'.

The literal translation of the Hindi sentence would be something like 'Neha's two sons exist'. So, the subject is 'Neha's two sons' which is why we use हैं.


To me it makes sense to read this sentence like this: "Two sons are Neha's". Except that in Hindi you start with "Neha's", then add "two sons are".


What about "neha ke paas dho bete hai"


You can't use 'के पास' when the thing being possessed is a person or something else that cannot be 'owned' in a literal sense.


You are so helpful vinay92...thank you so much !!!


How about Neha * ko* dho beta hai ? Is that right?


No. Possession is indicated by का की and के. को is different.

नेहा को will be something like 'to Neha'. Eg: नेहा को दो बेटे हुए हैं। - Neha has given birth to two sons (literally, 'To Neha, two sons have been born').


if - Neha has two sons :नेहा के दो बेटे हैं। then how we can write Neha's two sons?


'Neha's two sons' would be 'नेहा के दो बेटे'.

Basically, the way to say 'Neha has two sons' in Hindi is to say 'Neha's two sons exist'. Hindi does not have a verb equivalent to 'have'.


This looks correct to me. What am I missing?


Can one say: neha do bete ke pas hai?


Nahi, one cannot. I get what you want to say but Google Translate is wrong. "Neha do bete ke paas hai" means something completely different. It would translate to "Neha is close to (her) two sons". In proximity or relationship or both, haha. Also, I'm not sure if I can explain linguistically but if I wanted to say that, I'd use बेटों instead of बेटे: "नेहा दो बेटों के पास है".


Thank you! this was also my question and you have explained it well.

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