"She eats neither chicken nor fish."
Translation:Ella no come ni pollo ni pescado.
That is an interesting phrase. In the sentence" "Ella no come pollo" She doesn't eat chicken.
"Ni pescado" Nor fish. You could also say "Ella no come pollo o pescado" or "Ella no come pollo y pescado".
The "ni" the "o" and the "y" are there to tie both entities "pollo and pescado" to the context that she does not eat them.
I know it may sound weird, but that's how we construct the sentence in Spanish.
I tried "ella come ni pollo ni pescado" because it, the English sentence, says "she eats" and then goes on to use the word "neither" to denote that she does NOT eat those things. So, since the state of "not eating" chicken or fish is told to the reader or listener by the "neither" part of the sentence, I didn't think it was necessary to put "no" before "come"
would it ever be said the way I put it or ... ?
Wouldn't it make more sense to say, "Ella no come pollo ni pescado". The ni pollo part seems redundant.
Yes, that makes the most sense imo. "ella no come ni pollo ni pescado" just feels awkward ya know? I know that it's the literal translation that trips me up "she doesn't eat neither chicken nor fish" ... which just sounds horrendous.
BUT .. I put "ella come ni pollo ni pescado" which to me, looks right. Literally translated of course.
Just so everyone is aware, double negatives are actually REQUIRED in Spanish. For example, "Yo no hago nada," would directly translate to, "I don't do nothing," though this is the correct grammatical format in Spanish.
In English, we would say "She eats neither chicken nor fish." There is no word for "neither" in Spanish. In Spanish, double negatives are not grammatically incorrect as they are in English.
is the answer duolingo gives a double negative? if so it would means she does eat chicken (in english "she doesnt not eat chicken" would mean that she eats chicken).
I think that in the sentence "Ella no come pollo, ni pescado" we have two negatives. She doesn't eat chicken, nor fish.
Another way to say that sentence would be "Ella no come ni pollo, ni pescado". In this case you have a double negative in Spanish which is valid in Spanish and makes sense to us, however the double negative doesn't get translated into English because as you said, that wouldn't work in English, so the correct translation to English remains the same as with the first sentence: she doesn't eat chicken, nor fish.
The "ni" is used in tying things that are negatives. For example: "Ella no come ni pollo, ni pescado, ni puerco, ni rez". All of these are different types if meat. Now we are getting the picture that she is probably vegetarian :)
"She doesn't eat chicken, nor fish" is grammatically incorrect. The correct English translation would be "She eats neither chicken nor fish."
It makes grammatical sense in the long form "she doesn't eat chicken, nor does she eat fish."
I would say she doesn't eat chicken OR fish. You only use nor if you have used neither, which duolingo did.
Hi. From an accuracy perspective, normally we use the word Pez to refer to the fish when it's alive. And we use Pescado when the fish has been caught and is no longer alive. From a colloquial speaking perspective if you said that you wanted to eat Pez, I would understand what you want.
Correct. In English, we have different words for meat and animal as well. We don't say "I want cow for dinner" in English.
I put "Ella ni come pollo ni pescado" and Duolingo accepted it. Should they have?
So, just to clarify, are these 4 correct in general conversation..?
Ella no come ni pollo ni pescado. Ella ni come pollo ni pescado. Ella no come pollo o pescado. Ella no come pollo y pescado.
But this next one is incorrect..?
Ella come ni pollo ni pescado. Or do only the first 1 or 2 really make sense in Spanish?