But you can not translate the sentence that way, because you need a context.
I agree with Louis, this doesn't work without a context. And implies something like "inside that I will not bike", which doesn't make sense
As a German native speaker I feel that in the Dutch logic this probably works without context, though of course when you encounter this idiom for the first time you can't know that yet. If I heard the literal translation in German, the meaning with 'wearing' is the first one I'd think of.
On the other hand, in this course I often approach things from the English point of view because English is the working language. I keep getting things wrong that are hard to English speakers and obvious to German speakers. This was one of them.
We must keep two interpretations of "works without context" apart. One question is whether the sentence "Daarin fiets ik niet" will be understood as being about apparel by competent Dutch speakers without further context. I think that's the case.
The other question is whether typical English speakers learning Dutch can guess the meaning without context. That's obviously not the case. But presenting us with questions that we will get wrong at first is just how Duolingo works, so I don't see it as a problem.
well if we were in dutch for german speakers that would be great. Trouble is, dutch usage has diverged even from the obsolete english equivalents, such as therein, therewith, and thereby, so we english speakers are in trouble.
Hi Hans, but to content who disagree with the little context, and allowing them to pass at the first attempt respons, why Duo don't accept the more simply translation "I don't bike in that" , "that" meant as that sort of (sport)shirt, or having another significance, "that" as " that dark, little ( dirty) gallery... Does Duo basically not prefer the most general, large interpretating meaning? I was just wondering. Thanks, Lu.
It makes sense to me (Native English speaker) because I am thinking of it as "Therein (inside that item of clothing clothes), bike I not!"
I think the best translation is "I do not bike in that" where that could either be a puddle as well as an outfit
Context is often a problem when using deictic expressions like "daar(in)" and the duolingo lessons are not made to provide it. I actually like that they include them, anyway, because that way you get a glimpse of how they might be used, though the translations pages are probably better suited to fully grasp them.
oke! this is a terrible translation and pronunciation.... i am from holland and i could not understand this computer voice.
I think you should avoid the sentence 'Daarin fiets ik niet'. You can translate it as: - I do not bike wearing that. - I bike not in it (in the tunnel or cave) The way you translate depends on the context: if you see a cyclist at the entrance of a tunnel or if you see a cyclist in a bathing suit.
A good sentence is: - Ik fiets niet in die kleren or - ik fiets niet in die tunnel/grot
'Ride' should really be used instead of 'bike' if you want a more accurate english translation
It might be more common in English, but a less literal translation, since fietsen specifically means riding a bicycle, while to ride can mean riding anything, e.g. a bike, a motorbike, a horse.
How in the absolute flying **** does ANYONE the first time around come up with "daarin" to mean "wearing that" !!!???
I did because it reminds me of an old fashioned thing that parents used to say to their teenaged children re. clothing choices "Daarin gaat u niet uit!" - "You are not going out in that!" (Hope I never catch myself saying it)
It isn't, but I guess nobody has proposed it yet because it sounds so funny. The problem is that sentences of the form "I don't wear that dress" are so common that one is automatically led to parse your sentence the same way: Someone is claiming not to wear a specific 'biking', whatever that is. Most people automatically avoid such sentences.
to reiterate, 'I don't wear that biking,' is a perfectly natural sentence for a competent English speaker.
how would this work using "draag"? (for the "wearing that" meaning). Or in this case it couldn't be used?
I wrote 'Wearing that I do not bike' and it was marked incorrect, despite the hover text offering that translation.
Happens to me all the time but now I'm kinda learning to change the words when I translate from dutch to english. This time I got it right (to my surprise) so you should try it too
Is a better translation here 'I do not bike in them/that'? I feel adding the verb 'wearing' to the translation is very confusing.
Hi Rootale. "I do not bike in that", in my opinion shouldn't be marked wrong as it is the literal of the Dutch version. But using "wear", every not Dutch speaker can immediately understand in what case or situation this sentence is used in the Netherlands. And that's not a bad idea. Good study!! Lu
Hi Kevin, previously I mentioned 'them' as a pronoun that not refers to 'clothes' but to persons only. That was definitely wrong. Some hours have passed, but I have now deleted that uncorrect information. I apologize to you for this little inconvenience in meantime already fixed. Learning a language (in my case English) is as rising up and having some falling down too, due to confusion or distractions... I wish you a beautiful Sunday, Lu
Thanks Lu for your help! No worries - no inconvenience! Best of luck with learning English. Are you a native Dutch speaker?
Thank to you "rootale" for replying so kindly! Yes I am native Flemish, which means I grewn up in the Dutch culture. Always available for Dutch linguistic suggestions (but I like being correct too, of course). Best wishes, Lu
It's not present in the Dutch sentence, but it's required for an idiomatic translation of the most likely meaning of the Dutch sentence. A literal word-by-word translation is "Therein cycle I not", and a still overly literal but freer translation is "I don't cycle in that". In Dutch (and German), therein / in that is often used idiomatically to describe what you are wearing.