"Ingen rök utan eld"
Translation:No smoke without fire
40 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
2566
I guess that Spanish is the only one who is weird... We say "cuando el río suena, agua lleva" (it means "when the river sounds, is because it has water")
324
In Italian we don'y even have such a proverb if I'm not mistaken. Btw in Spanish there should also be "donde fuego se hace, humo sale".
We have a funny one which is similar to the Italian "Molto fumo e poco arrosto" which goes Mycket skrik för lite ull literally 'Much screaming for little wool'. The continuation is usually not said, but it's like this: sa bonden när han klippte grisen 'said the farmer when he sheared the pig' [sheared as in 'cut its hair off like you do with a sheep']. – The English version of that would be 'much ado about nothing'
324
Well, I have never heard it in this way, good to know! I just knew "Molto fumo e poco arrosto" ("A lot of words, but few facts").
199
Kalau tiada angin masakan pokok bergoyang
If there is no wind, how can the tree sways?
(Malay)
~Vir pius sacrificat~
1770
Amazed at all the upvotes for the comment at the top of this thread. I wouldn't call that an idiomatic English expression. I'm native speaker but never heard it expressed that way. It's much more common to say "no smoke without fire" as the person below pointed out , and as here in the lesson .
One is primarily American, one is primarily British. Both are incredibly common. If you said your prefered version in the wrong place, I don't think people would assume you weren't a native speaker - so perhaps that should go the other way as well? :)
Source: see e.g. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/where-there-s-smoke-there-s-fire
1770
Well having lived here all my life I never heard anyone say where there's smoke there's fire. Only ever "no smoke without fire". Believe me the former is an idiom nobody ever uses in the UK . All those upvotes must be from Americans then :)
'Where there's smoke, there's fire.'
This must be an Americanism because I've rarely, if ever, heard someone say it that way. It sounds like you've adopted the 'where there's a will, there's a way' format when there is already a 'better' idiom.
Generally outside the US (I assume, at least in my experience), the expression is, 'there is no smoke without fire'. But it wouldn't sound odd to drop the 'there is' as the Swedish does here. I wonder can we use 'det finns' or would that sound odd?
Also: I don't think I've ever heard anyone on American TV use your idiomatic equivalent. It sounds fine, but where I'm from, I'd probably think, 'oh, you mean, there's no smoke without fire'. I also wonder if there are any subtle differences in usage.
1816
Canadian English speaker here. 'Where there's smoke, there's fire.' is the only way I've ever heard it-
40 comments so far just goes to show (Oh, and that's an idiom as well) that we are all attached to our own idioms. I am thinking of the application. Where there is smoke (smoldering looks), there is fire (secret affair perhaps). The smoke reveals the truth and it just can't help it because the fire is hot.
Saying this any other way just doesn't cut it for me, ha ha. Because, as an American, perhaps we are the only ones who say it that way (except Portugal).
But wow, do we all care, and that is why I LOVE the discussion area of Duolingo. Amusing. Love to you all.