Note of interest: In German a single pair of pants is called "die Hose" and is singular, e.g. "Die Hose ist nicht groß". In this sentence, though, we are talking about more than one pair of pants because the verb "sein" is conjugated in the 3rd person plural.
So it is in French, singular : le pantalon. I'm curious : do you use plural or singular in the other countries ?
No, pants, trousers, britches, pantaloons are plural nouns that refer to a single garment. I can only find "pant" as a singular noun in in connection with another noun as in "pant leg" or "pant skirt." "The pant" as a garment doesn't exist. You can translate "Hose" (singular) as "pants" or "a pair of pants" .
So if you say in German, "Ich habe heute 3 Hosen gekauft" The best translation would be "Today I bought 3 pairs of pants."
If they were not. And you were just wearing a pant. You are Very Weird!! :D And I think you would be arrested lol.
Just like in Spanish Pantalon - pair of pants Pantalones - various pairs of pants
wow,, we in Egypt call it pantalon too .. but in Arabic language we say "Pintal"
If the app is a globally orientated service perhaps pants is a bad translation for hose. Many English speaking countries would understand pants as being underwear. Perhaps trousers would be a more universal translation for hose?
It would certainly be a valid translation. Next time, report it with the flag button so the moderators can know...they rarely look at these forums
I still do not understand where to put 'nicht' in the sentence. I am confused because some sentences, nicht comes at the end. Now it is the same as how it would be in English...
I need help.
This should help http://german.about.com/od/grammar/a/The-Position-Of-Nicht.htm
The following link provides a more comprehensive approach to working out where the nicht goes if you have the time to read it, but you might need to come back to it when you understand the structure of German subordinate clauses (if you don't already that is) https://yourdailygerman.com/2016/06/23/position-nicht-german/
This is awesome, though to be honest I'm still just as confused as before.
I understand 'Hose' - one pair of pants. 'Hosen' - multiple pairs, but how do we know how many are being referred to in the question. I was marked wrong for thinking the (pair) of pants are not big. Is there a clue I've missed? Help please!
I had to read it 5 times to finally notice. It's because it says "sind" not "ist." Sind=are and ist=is.
Is it just a fact that Hosen here has no umlaut above the 'o' or is there a reason.
It's just a fact.
Some nouns form their plurals with an umlaut, some don't.
I'm sure there are historical reasons but unless you learn Old High German, there's probably no rule one can see inside the modern-day language.
Sometimes, the same word-form even forms a plural both with and without an umlaut, when there are two words that look the same in the singular but not in the plural, e.g. Wort has plurals Worte and Wörter, and Ausdruck has plurals Ausdrucke and Ausdrücke.
I'm confused about placing "nicht" in this sentence. Is it always placed before or after an adjective in general?
If you're negating an adjective, the nicht is generally before the adjective.
I have the same question. I am not sure, but I think that it's because "night" usually precedes an adjective.
Duolingo uses US English.
It usually accepts UK English, often other varieties such as Australian English as well, but the default words and spellings will be US English.
That would surprise me - though mistakes do happen, I think you may be misreading the entry: perhaps applying the "pl" that belongs to the English words "trousers" or "pants" to the German Hose instead of the "f" that it should have.
Anyway, even if your dictionary does have an error, die Hose is feminine singular in German.
(The plural -- for multiple pairs of trousers/pants -- is die Hosen.)
"shorts" is too specific.
That would be like translating Tier as "poodle".
All poodles are animals, but not all animals are poodles. Similarly, not all pants are shorts, so "shorts" is not a good translation for Hosen.
Both of those are wrong.
But the difference between die Hose and die Hosen is that die Hose refers to one pair of pants and die Hosen to multiple pairs of pants.
Drainpipe trousers have narrow legs, so hosepipe trousers must be even slimmer.
There are already accepted translations that include the word "trousers".
If an answer of yours got rejected, it's possibly not because you used the word "trousers" -- what was the entire sentence that you wrote?
Would you be able to write "Die Hosen sind klein"? Or translate this as "The pants are small?" Or does it have to be a literal translation?
ß is not a B and shouldn't be used as one, but you can use ss to substitute for ß if your device doesn't support the ß.
You wouldn't describe pants as tall in English. You would say "the pants are not long".
They count it wrong, because they're considering the plural of pants to be pants but ignoring that it's a pretty common American English construction to say "pair of pants." Wish they'd fix it!
Is Hosen in the plural for one PAIR of pants or for two PANT LEGS as in English?
Hosen in the plural refers to multiple PAIRS of pants.
If you have one pair of pants, it's eine Hose.
One time Hosen are trousers, second time Hose are trousers. I don´t understand.
One pair of trousers is eine Hose.
Two pairs of trousers is zwei Hosen.
So whether you use Hose or Hosen depends on how many there are.
So, in English, "pantyhose" basically translate to "panty (underwear) pants" ? Ho ho ho, English and German are closer than I ever knew.