"Mia pantalono ne havas poŝojn."

Translation:My trousers do not have pockets.

3 years ago

34 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/estherhaza

They must be women's trousers...

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Sanguine_Dreamer

Stupid women's pants. I hate it when they don't have pockets and my smallish cell phone is too big for some pockets.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Cristian1914
Cristian1914
  • 23
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 10
  • 4
  • 2

The solution is easy, don't get dressed :D

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/zipupjacket

that went from 0-100 really fast

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/GhostThorn24258
GhostThorn24258
  • 25
  • 12
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 2
  • 120

The easy solution that allows you to be clothed is to wear men's pants.

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/ErinAndW
ErinAndW
  • 20
  • 10
  • 9
  • 9
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 2
  • 2
  • 10

Then I still don't have any pockets!

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/camcamcam753

Yeah but men look silly carrying a purse around so just carry a purse everywhere. MWHAAHAHA!

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/aufarizal
aufarizal
  • 15
  • 15
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 14
  • 13
  • 10
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2

can't I use pants here?

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rippler
Rippler
  • 13
  • 12
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 6
  • 6
  • 4

Yes, they just wanted to make it clear to people who speak British English that they weren't talking about underwear.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/andrewgtreantos

Yes, both pants and trousers are acceptable answers.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Xandaros
Xandaros
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10

Mi malŝatas pantalonojn sen poŝoj...

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/PatriciaJH

Jes, aû pantalonojn kun pli eta poŝoj, kiu ne povas enhavi iom.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AdamScott794079
AdamScott794079
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 113

JES, ESTAS VERA

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/emiirose

Welcome to the world of women's pants

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/cfreeman03
cfreeman03
  • 13
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 3

I rarely hear anyone under 30 use the word trousers these days in standard conversations. Just an observation.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

As an American, the only time I hear "trousers" is when I'm watching British TV shows.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/ThatOneDoge

Fitting with your profile picture :P I love it.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/DoctorWho01
DoctorWho01
  • 13
  • 10
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 8
  • 8
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2

How will be in Esperanto "Bigger inside than outside"?

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

Ĝi estas pli granda interne ol ekstere.

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/hidethedog
hidethedog
  • 14
  • 14
  • 9
  • 8
  • 6
  • 3
  • 3

I always hear everyone say trousers (except my Caribbean family). But I do live in England and 'pants' would mean underpants, esp briefs

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Demauscian

Yeah, in England pants means underwear, and trousers seems to be fairly common. In the U.S. people mostly say pants as it carries no implication of underwear and trousers sounds like something your grandfather used to say.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/StephenH0
StephenH0
  • 18
  • 13
  • 8
  • 2
  • 228

Not in Lancashire it doesn't. The usage here is the same as in the US. Perhaps this pants as underwear is a new development and the US keeps the older form. My parents always said "pants" for trousers but my grandparents called them "breeches".

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/XamLeumas
XamLeumas
  • 10
  • 9
  • 9
  • 5
  • 5

No magic ring to hide.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AmeyaBondr

Hey, english is not my first language. So I have a doubt, "pantalono" is given as trousers. Does that mean that it's a singular noun and not plural? Or is "trouser" the singular form? Then "trousers" should be "pantalonoj"...

11 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

In English, "pants" and "trousers" are never singular. http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-pai1.htm

Esperanto was invented after "a pair of pants" was a single garment, and that's why it has a singular.

11 months ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Jean-Phili358660

Spanish and French (at least) use pantalòn/pantalon, singular form

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/AdamScott794079
AdamScott794079
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 113

Where should i hide my ring?

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/camcamcam753

Kion gxi havas, en gxia posxoj?

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Jean-Phili358660

Why poŝojn and not poŝon? (as the result is nil, we should not use plural, ĉu ne ?)

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

Well, I mean, we use the plural in English with the negative.

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Jean-Phili358660

Dankon Rae. It not logical, but very acceptable! :) I'm not a native English speaker and still need to improve. Btw, Google translated from French to Esperanto as poŝon (singular). So, I guess, Esperanto is flexible enough to accept the 2 possibilities.

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

Language does not operate on logic. It is not mathematics. Language operates on convention.

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Jean-Phili358660

Yes, I agree. This is why Esperanto is easy to learn due to logical conventions!! Hehe

4 weeks ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Rae.F
Rae.F
  • 17
  • 16
  • 15
  • 11
  • 11
  • 10
  • 8
  • 8
  • 7
  • 5
  • 5
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1705

Well, sure. Artificial languages can be constructed on logical principles. But that's just not how natural languages work.

4 weeks ago
Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.