Tohle je vše, co mám nabidnout. This can mean both This is all I have to offer. and This is all I should offer
We do not say: Tohle je vše, co mám nabídnout. You can say (as a shopkeeper): Tohle je vše, co mám v nabídce. Other correct possibilities with different modal verbs: Tohle je vše, co musím nabídnout. This is all I must (have to) offer. Tohle je vše, co mohu (jsem schopen) nabídnout. This is all I can (am able to) offer. Tohle je vše, co smím nabídnout. This is all I may (am allowed to) offer. Tohle je vše, co bych mohl nabídnout. This is all I could offer. (conditional) Tohle je vše, co jsem mohl nabídnout. This is all I could offer. (in the past) ... ...
Zeisig=that is helpful So in english This is all I have to offer Would be translated to This is all I am able to offer Tohle je vše, co mohu nabídnout. but to clarify 'have to' here can have two different meanings have to=muset=be compelled to do something then This is the only thing that I have(in my possession) which I am able to offer. Tohle je to nejlepší, co vám smím nabídnout, říká použité autové podaváč. Please And then how do you say This is all I should offer, because I do not want to pay too much.
Hm, to have seems to be ambiguous: This is all I have to offer. 1. To je vše, co mám v nabídce. To je vše, co mám. = This is all I have. 2. To je vše, co musím nabízet (or nabídnout). = This is all I must (am compelled to) offer. As for: This is the only thing that I have(in my possession) which I am able to offer. Tohle je to nejlepší, co vám mohu nabídnout. mohu = I am able, I can smím = I am allowed As for: This is all I should offer, because I do not want to pay too much. I am not sure. Maybe: To je vše, co bych nabídl, protože nechci platit příliš mnoho. To je vše, co nabízím, ... (= This is all I am offering ... I think the conditional is not necessary here)
yes, it is ambiguous How about these Musím to udělat zítra. I must do it tomorrow. (we would also say, I have to do it tomorrow). Nemusím to udělat až se tady dostanou? I do not have to do it until they get here? nebo...dokud tady nejsou? Mám to udělat zítra.=I should do it tomorrow?
"I do not have to do it until they get there" VEEERY tricky to translate and even trickier to explain: "Musím to (u)dělat, dokud se sem nedostanou." The point is the "dokud" implies longer period until some point. So: "musím to (u)dělat, dokud tu jsou" - they are here, and I have to do st. until they leave (the act of leaving is not mentioned, only implied by the "dokud") "musím to (u)dělat, dokud tu budou" - "I will have to have done it until they have left" It says that they will be there but it also imply that they will leave after a period of time. On the other hand, "musím to (u)dělat, dokud se sem nedostanou" says that they are not here but at some point, they will come. So it is necessary to negate the part which has not yet happened. And without negation with perfective verb after "dokud", it does not exist (*musím to udělat, dokud se sem dostanou) because the verb in perfective must signify the turning point (the imperfective with "dokud" merely implies this point). In conclusion: The fist proposed translation is... mix, but ungrammatical. You may express it by words "Nemusím to udělat, než se sem dostanou" ("než" is also, I think, historically "ne+až" contracted, but today there is no sentiment of negation in it) but it does not really convene me... I think that the emphasis in this sentence is on the first clause (usage of "dokud" give it to the second one). The other possibility, which I consider somehow better, is "Nemusím to udělat, dokud se sem nedostanou". You proposed another variant "Nemusím to udělat, dokud tady nejsou" which is completely correct, suitable and means the same. a special remark: note that I also altered some adverbs of location "sem" is "to this place" (so it is directional, answer for question beginnig with "kam?") but "tady" is "in this place" (so it is locative, answer for a question beginnig with "kde?") On the other hand "tam" is both "to that place" and "in that place" (answering to both questions) a more special remark: there are dialects in Czech that do not distinguish the directional sense and use "kam" and "tady" in sense of both "to this place" and "in this place". But this is not standard Czech and if I can speak for myself, this usage really irritates me.
Ok=hmmmm=I think I kind of get it Musím to dělat dokud tady jsou, ale dokud odtud odejdou už to nebudu dělat. I must(have to) do it while they are here, but as soon as they leave I will no longer do it. Musím to dělat, dokud se sem nedostanou. I do not have to do it until they get here. ok=direct translation I must do it, while to here they will not have gotten. Even if I use Wers as soon as I must do it as soon as they will get here. it still to me does not quite imply the Not having to do it until they get there. hmmm==I am being to picky I get it, just have to think about stating differently. How about this Není třeba, abych to udělal dokud se sem nedostanou? Jsem rád, že jde Nemusím to udělat, dokud tady nejsou. Poj'd sem. Ne, nechci jít tam. Ale tady je to tak hezké. No, potom je to hezké tam a tady.
Musím to dělat dokud tady jsou, ale jakmile odtud odejdou, už to nebudu dělat. as soon as = jakmile another possibility is "až" but in English it would rather be "when they leave" or "after they have left" Also the word order is better: "...odejdou, už to dělat nebudu" The new information is at the and of the sentence. Tricky sentence because there is too much negation and even a Czech may have problems with it... what is really a negation and what is negation conditioned by "dokud" and so on (because "dokud" requires often a negation, but not in this case)... But yes, it is completely correct equivalent to "Musím to udělat, dokud nepřijdou/dokud se sem nedostanou" if somehow confusing. In larger utterance, it would be comprehensible due to context but when isolated, the phrase becomes more a cipher. It is like "I do not think that the negations would not be unimportant" - what does it say? there are 3 negations, 1 conditional (that is somehow similar to the principle of negation because it refers to something that is hypothetical = is not per se) and the word "negation" itself which is not negative per se but only adds to the entire confusion.
Ahem, I wrote as LONG as (= dokud), not as soon as (= jakmile). Try to correct yourself first. :wink:
A few other topics like that and even I will start wondering how it is possible to speak Czech fluently...
Sorry about that wer You did write as long as That does make it easier. 8) Musím to dělat, dokud se sem nedostanou. Musím to dělat až sem přijdou. Když se sem dostanou, musím to udělat ale nedřiv. 8) Odmítám to udělat, dokud se sem nedostanou. Je to snadnějí (to?) udělat, když tady nejsou.
Mince = coins - can't be used instead of "peníze". OK, sometimes yes. "Potřeboval bych nějaké mince (=peníze)." (argot)
ok, prodavačka mi dala zpět jen pár minci, a to, po tom, co jsem jí dal hromadu peněz. To není fer! Koupil jsem si jen pomerančy a rajčata. Musím si najít zaměstání, která mi platí líp. Jakmilě přijdu domů, žena se mě zeptá, a kde je peněz? Tohle je patek. A odpovím, srdičko, podívej se ale na hezké pomerančy a rajčata. A kde je brambory?
Heeyyy, to nebyl tak hrozné. 8) V pátek musím hledat zaměstnání co platí líp. Tohle už není k vydření. Jsme unavení jen pomerančy a rajčata. Chceme také brambory. Dř mi palce. Jedu ráno do náměstí. Přítel mi doporučil, abch mluvil svému kamarádu co má tam Italské restaurace. Bylo by to skvělé tam pracovat. Je to jen pár kruků od metru. Po prace, tři stanice a jsem doma. První výplatní šek žena a já hodujeme jak královská hodnost.
Musím najít zaměstnání, kde patí líp. Nikdo může tak dlouho žit. Žena chce brambory, já také. Chceme královský hodovat. S maslem na chleb. Někde ráno šunka a vajce. Chci pracovat v té Italskou restauraci na náměsti nedaleko stanice metra. Abych tam pracoval, musím nějak dostat nové košili a kalhoty. Majitel je přítel mého sousedu. On říká, že tam platí dobře, a že, jeho přítel by byl dobré šef. Za první vyplatí šek, oslavíme.