Translation:I like everything except turtles.
Is there no difference between turtles and tortoises in Swedish? That must make for some frustrating pet shop situations.
If you want to be specific, you can say havssköldpadda or landsköldpadda for sea or land turtles respectively, but that's about it.
Tartaruga é sempre aquático. Da terra é sempre Cágado. Mas todo mundo chama de tartaruga.
But you were right that in spanish there is not... =P... unless you use some specific name of a kind of turtle...
It's just awkward in English; it needs a plural noun after "all". If "all" is used by itself, it's only ever a poetic/archaic way to say "everyone": but then turtles aren't people, so the sentence falls apart.
We'd say "everything" in English, because the word all as a noun is pretty much limited to (1) usage after a preposition to mean "everybody", e.g., "the museum is open to all" or "there is food for all" (2) the idiom "give it one's all", meaning "give it one's best effort". By itself it sounds incomplete; we need "everything" or "everyone", or some other pronoun, to make a complete noun phrase that sounds like English.
English speakers would probably understand you if you said "I like all except turtles", but they'd be thinking "all what?"
Native english speaker here. I wrote all not everything and it sounds right to me.
Really? It sounds weird at best to me: it's missing the crucial context to say what "all" refers to.
I suppose I should amend what I said above, to allow that "all of __" is a common noun usage as well, as in "I like all of the animals except turtles."
I could see it sort of working if there's clear context, e.g.: "Do you like reptiles?" "Yes, I like all except turtles." Even then, though, I'd always feel compelled to say "them all" or "all of them" instead of a bare "all".
I'm curious where you're from — this is an interesting difference. (I'm a Californian, albeit one with some southern dialect features from living in Mississippi.)
[Replying here because for some reason there's no "reply" link on your last post.]
"Everything misses that same context."
Yes, and the key difference (in every usage I'm familiar with) is that "everything" is solely a pronoun and typically functions without an explicit context, where "all", as a pronoun, is rarely used without a qualifying phrase — most, if not all, such cases being poetic uses, as in "liberty and justice for all" or "all is lost" — and even more rarely as an object pronoun.
In looking around for more info on this usage, I found one written example of "all" as an object pronoun, similar to our original sentence here. The OED has the following quotation, from Ben Jonson in 1609: "...I shall want that, and wanting that, want all For that is all to me."
And for a third data point, I asked my girlfriend — a native Clevelander — about "I like all except turtles", and her response was that it sounds a little weird but not incorrect. After reading up on the word, I could almost agree with that, but it'll probably always sound wrong to my ears. So, my best guess is that we're looking at a regional thing.
Everything misses that same context. It is doubtful that the speaker intends everything to mean every single atom in the multiverse and every single item or animal or person, etc. Therefore it really is not any different then using all.
The sentence is intentionally vague like many of the sentences on duolingo.
I'm originally from NY. Though I've lived in different parts of the States, though most years were spent in NY or OR.
Consider the following conversation:
Q. Which animals do you like?
A. I like all except turtles.
This is a totally natural English sentence.
'I like all but (or 'except) turtles' is fine, people are just letting their regional syntax bias their judgement as to how correct alternatives are.
If I heard “all but” I’d say ohhh straight away, I’m unambiguously hearing an old fashioned English pattern. “All except” seems a transition, or “wrong” to my ears, depending on context, it’s certainly a less common use. I wonder how much of this use is region and how much of this is age, class etc. If I was teaching English though I would suggest the safe bet “everything” just in case to avoid the speaker being thought of as making a mistake. Hastening to add I’m not judging usage, just trying to contextualise it! All English dialects and pidgins are valid!
Edit: googling “all except” gives top ranking results to various programming syntax examples and ESL racist catchphrases.
Anyway, relating this somewhat to svenska, I love how directly translating Swedish grammar/words often sounds like old fashioned or archaic English to my ears, revealing common roots/influences. I wonder if it’s the other way round!?
Utom seems to be from ut and om btw. Not u-/o- and tom.
The problem here however is that context doesn't translate back to Swedish. The Swedish response to that question would be "Jag tycker om alla utom sköldpaddor", not "allt", because "djur" is an en-word and "allt" is an ett-word.
Is it possible to change the sentence into:
Jag tycker om allt utan sköldpaddor. I like everything but turtles.
No, they have entirely different meanings:
- utan = without
- utom = except