"It is probably him who has it."

Translation: Det er nok ham der har den.

[trevro]

Can someone explain the difference between "nok" and "vist"?

[sifogrante]

isn't nok ~ enough ? This and the unpredictable use of på are slightly annoying..

[BaryLevi]

can be used both for enough and for probably.

[Carl497541]

How would I rephrase this sentence to use "vist?"
"Det er vist ham der har den."

[NumsgilDid]

I have the same question. Anyone?

[benlost]

'Det er vist ham der har den'. What's wrong with it?

[Gylej-Gulay]

I would like to ask, why not "Det er vist ham der har den/det"? This question has been here for more than a year now, first asked by Carl497541.

[Javid.Abbasli]

I am asking the same question.

[Helene666293]

again a wrong hint, here for 'who'. i wrote 'der' but after checking the hint i wrote 'hvem' because that was duo's first and only hint...

[NicholasPa38063]

Better English is "It is probably he who has it": this sort of formulation is very formal in English, and with such formal phrasing "book grammar" is necessary. Yes, we all say "it's me" and so on; but if you're going to go all formal and say something like "It is I who am looking for you", then you've got to get the book grammar right. Normal spoken English, of course, would be "I'm the one who's looking for you". Likewise, no-one would say "It is probably he who has it" -- one would say, "He's probably the one that has it/that's got it".

[milbern]

I wrote "det er vel ham der har det" and I know that is correct. Duolingo marks it wrong.