# There was no one there to help him.



## zhizn9

How would you translate this in Russian?

My try - Там было некому помочь ему.


----------



## Budspok

Никого не  оказалось рядом, кто бы помог ему / чтобы помочь ему.

Your choice is not wrong either.


----------



## Vadim K

Там не было никого, чтобы помочь ему.


----------



## Maroseika

zhizn9 said:


> Там было некому помочь ему.


"Там было" is a calque of English construction, not used in Russian, unless "там" means exact place:
В новом городе она оказалась в одиночестве, там было некому помочь ей.
Otherwise "там" is not used:
Она осталась в одиночестве, некому было помочь ей.


----------



## Drink

Никого не было ему помочь. (Not sure if a comma is needed after было)


----------



## Sobakus

Drink said:


> Никого не было ему помочь. (Not sure if a comma is needed after было)


I'm afraid this in an Anglicism and is ungrammatical in Russian. The predicative can only be expressed by the negative pronoun _не́кого_ in the Dative, and not by the negative pronoun _никто́ _(you have to make a compound sentence like the suggestions above to use it).


----------



## Drink

Sobakus said:


> I'm afraid this in an Anglicism and is ungrammatical in Russian. The predicative can only be expressed by the negative pronoun _не́кого_ in the Dative, and not by the negative pronoun _никто́ _(you have to make a compound sentence like the suggestions above to use it).



I originally wrote "Некого было ему помочь.", but corrected myself thinking that was wrong. Would that have been better? Or maybe "некому"? My grammar sense seems to be failing after repeating this phrase too many times.

My wordy backup is "Никого не было, кто бы ему помог."


----------



## Vadim K

Drink said:


> My wordy backup is "Никого не было, кто бы ему помог."



Could you please advise me if there is any difference in English between "There were no one there to help him" and "There were no one there who would help him"? I am asking because there is difference in Russian between "(Там) никого не было, чтобы помочь ему" and "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог".


----------



## Drink

Vadim K said:


> Could you please advise me if there is any difference in English between "There were no one there to help him" and "There were no one there who would help him"? I am asking because there is difference in Russian between "(Там) никого не было, чтобы помочь ему" and "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог".



"No one" is considered singular, so "there was no one". But I guess you're right, I wasn't thinking about that difference. The second English example can only be translated with the second Russian example, but I think the second Russian example can mean both things.


----------



## Vadim K

Drink said:


> "No one" is considered singular, so "there was no one".



Yes, sorry.



Drink said:


> "The second English example can only be translated with the second Russian example, but I think the second Russian example can mean both things.



Without special context, the Russian phrase "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог" means that certainly there were some people there, but all people who were there for some reasons were not able to help him". And the real question in my previous message was does the phrase "_There was no one there to help him_" mean the same. Or does that phrase mean "There was not anybody there. So nobody could help him"?


----------



## Drink

Vadim K said:


> Without special context, the Russian phrase "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог" means that certainly there were some people there, but all people who were there for some reasons were not able to help him". And the real question in my previous message was does the phrase "_There was no one there to help him_" mean the same. Or does that phrase mean "There was not anybody there. So nobody could help him"?



"There was no one there to help him" could mean either. And what I was saying was that I think "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог" can also mean either. Maybe it depends on intonation.


----------



## Vadim K

Drink said:


> "There was no one there to help him" could mean either. And what I was saying was that I think "(Там) никого не было, кто бы ему помог" can also mean either. Maybe it depends on intonation.



Ok. Thank you.


----------



## Sobakus

Drink said:


> I originally wrote "Некого было ему помочь.", but corrected myself thinking that was wrong. Would that have been better? Or maybe "некому"? My grammar sense seems to be failing after repeating this phrase too many times.
> 
> My wordy backup is "Никого не было, кто бы ему помог."


_Некого было_ is reserved for the Accusative, as in «Некого было мне спросить». As I said, the predicative null-subject construction requires the Dative.


----------



## Drink

Sobakus said:


> _Некого_ is reserved for the Accusative in the standard language, as in «Некого было мне спросить». As I said, the predicative construction in the agens role requires the Dative.



I guess that's why it sounded wrong to me in the first place. But you didn't answer whether it can be replaced with "Некому". Is it wrong to have two datives in a sentence like that, even though the datives serve different functions?


----------



## Sobakus

Drink said:


> I guess that's why it sounded wrong to me in the first place. But you didn't answer whether it can be replaced with "Некому". Is it wrong to have two datives in a sentence like that, even though the datives serve different functions?


Well, we're discussing the _[...] было_ part, and that's exactly what I'm saying should be in the Dative: _некому_.


----------



## Drink

Sobakus said:


> Well, we're discussing the _[...] было_ part, and that's exactly what I'm saying should be in the Dative: _некому_.



Ok, then can you tell me in "Некому было ему помочь.", is it wrong that there are two datives?


----------



## Sobakus

Drink said:


> Ok, then can you tell me in "Некому было ему помочь.", is it wrong that there are two datives?


Both Datives are independent and grammatically required so there's nothing wrong about them.


----------



## tacirus

Sobakus said:


> Both Datives are independent and grammatically required so there's nothing wrong about them.



Yes, both datives are quite in place.


----------

