"Non ho niente in tasca."
Translation:I do not have anything in my pocket.
78 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Unless you have "non ... niente," "niente" means nothing: http://italian.about.com/library/fare/blfare141a.htm
Finally, my query as to why sometimes we find: "non...niente" and sometimes "niente" only. All the sites I've checked emphasis that the double negative is acceptable in Italian but nothing about poor lonely "niente" I didn't even notice the change of position. Many thanks. I would very much appreciate it if you have any grammar sites to recommend? Here 'a couple or three' lingots for helping me understand.
See my post above: "Unless you have "non ... niente," "niente" means nothing: http://italian.about.com/library/fare/blfare141a.htm" As for grammar sites, I find About.com usually helps, but I just search Google most of the time.
I think "niente is't the double negative. We have the same in polish. We say (in literal transaltion): I don't have nothing. I haven't never seen him. etc. Maybe in italian is similar - is it with word "never" in italian as well? Somebody can tell?
But apparently it isn't uncommon in english too (not official english) Like in pink floyd another brick in the wall "We don't need no education We dont need no thought control"
Actually, double negative is used in English quite frequently, especially with the originally so called 'lower working class' or 'chavs', although it's considered bad English. (Sorry to sound snooty. I'm not a snob, really). "I don't have nothing in my pocket" would be, "I ain't got nothing in my pocket". Pronounced, I ain't got 'nuffink' in 'mi' pocket!", with some expletives thrown in.
"Ther nas* no man no wher so vertuous" —Geoffrey Archer (c1343–1400)
*nas = never was
Double negative belonged to English once, but suddenly some grammarians felt very posh and important. Double nagative was indeed used for emphasis; it still is, but it is considered dialectal today.
"To be in pocket" is an English idiom for "having made a profit"; but you have something in your pocket, not "in pocket". Granted, "to be in one's pocket" also means to be under one's influence and control, which in Italian is "essere in pugno" (to be in one's fist). In Italian it's fairly common to omit the possessive adjective when it refers to the subject; when to drop the article as well is pretty idiomatic though.
Technically yes, but "nella tasca" sounds pretty awkward by itself: just like for a possessive with family members, it's the only way when using a plural or modified noun (nelle tasche, nella tasca della giacca), but "in tasca" means in any pocket on your body, while "nella tasca" would be in the one pocket that everyone knows, which is a bit strange. It works better with "in borsa" vs "nella borsa", possibly because it's more common to hold one bag that everyone can see, I guess.
The English word is "pocket".
In sentences like this one Italian uses no possessive pronoun whereas English requires it, logically "my" because we have "ho" (first person singular).
I don't know if duo accepts "I have nothing in my pocket" but it is a correct translation, as well as "I don't have anything in my pocket".
Regardless of whether an English speaker says I do not have anything in my pocket or There is nothing in my pocket, it is understood immediately in English to mean one and the same thing. Given the multiples options in Italian, I'm disappointed there isn't a little more flexibility with English.