This comes in handy very often, when I feel like pointing out, that the other person is not wearing pants.
I just got marked correct for putting “You have no trousers on.”, then wondered why this was correct when the given answer is phrased to include the “the”.
In English, “You are not wearing the trousers.” refers to a specific pair of trousers with the implication being that the speaker is probably either surprised or disappointed that you are wearing a different pair. Could a native Danish speaker confirm or deny that the Danish sentence means this?
Yes, the Danish sentence means "You are not wearing the trousers.". Your answer, "You have no trousers on.", would be translated as "Du har ingen bukser på.". Omitting the "the", i.e. "You are not wearing trousers.", would translate to "Du har ikke bukser på.".
Bukserne here is plural, does this mean that multiple pairs of trousers are being worn or is it the same as English trousers where the plural is always used?
In England we have an outdated expression, ' You can see who wears the trousers in this house!' This is suggesting that the woman is boss of the household.
In France, it's the same expression but with "panties" (Tu peux voir qui porte la culotte dans cette maison !)
This sentence seemed really odd to me and I got zero hits as I tried to google it within quotation marks, I translated it as "you have no pants on" (du har ikke bukser() på) which was marked false. I do see the logic but you know. Just feels very odd. I guess that's sort of the point.
IMO, I think the "the" is the important difference there. I got it wrong as well so that's just my take on it.
Exactly. The article is the key. It came easy to me in this case because I have to pay special attention to articles since Czech, my first language, has no articles at all and I often miss them.
So what I have learned today is that Google does not index Duolingo lessons.
Danish is odd, get used to it :P I don't have an explanation, but since pants is something you wear, that would be the most accurate translation
My point was that google couldn't find a single instance of any Dane typing that phrase EVER on the internet, which is a bit peculiar.