# Her panties & bra were missing



## rupertbrooke

From a film shown on an American forensic channel. Would yok be the word used here or some form of kayıp? 
Is onun sütyeni ve külotu yoktu acceptable Turkish & the best way of rendering this sentence? But would that imply that she never had any in the first place, whereas kaybolmak implies more that she originally had them on but someone removed them. I trust you see the distinction I'm trying to describe or am I being too pedantic?


----------



## FlyingBird

Onun hem külodu hem de sutyeni kaybolurdu. (His/Her panties & bra were missing)

Onun ne külodu ne de sutyeni yoktu. (There was no neither her/his panties neither her/his bra)


*But how would you say 'she didn't had neither panties neither bra'?

Please correct me*




Cevabı bekliyorum


----------



## rupertbrooke

In correct English you can only say:-
1) she didn't have either panties or bra  or
2) she had neither panties nor bra  or
3) she didn't have any panties or bra

Popularly, you will commonly hear "she didn't have neither panties or bra". This is incorrect. 

In Turkish (I await swift correction) wouldn't Turks say onun ne külotü ne de sütyeni vardı or is it acceptable to use a double negative as in many languages.

My question is whether there is a distinction between 'she wasn't wearing them in the first place (yok)' or somebody had removed them (kaybolurdu). Or am I being unduly pernickety or simply pedantic.


----------



## DonnaNoble

"yok" is all you need. It doesn't matter whether she wasn't wearing any in the first place or somebody took them. you can use "kayıp" as an explanation after saying "yok"


----------



## serbestnazim

rupertbrooke said:


> But would that imply that she never had any in the first place, whereas kaybolmak implies more that she originally had them on but someone removed them. I trust you see the distinction I'm trying to describe or am I being too pedantic?



To my knowledge, the difference between "loss" and "lack" corresponds roughly to that between "kayıp" and "noksan" (or "yitik" and "eksik"), if that is where you are aiming at. They are not equivalent, though, and "yok" can be used to signify both "loss" and "lack" with further clarification as DonnaNoble indicated.

As for the translation of "She didn't have either panties or bra", "Onun ne külotu ne sütyeni vardı" is correct. "Külotu veya sütyeni yoktu." is also possible.

Hope this was helpful.


----------



## rupertbrooke

Thanks to DonnaNoble & to serbestnazim for their help. The question I asked has been adequately answered. Thanks also for the additional information.


----------



## FlyingBird

FlyingBird said:


> Onun hem külodu hem de sutyeni kaybolurdu. (His/Her panties & bra were missing)
> 
> Onun ne külodu ne de sutyeni yoktu. (There was no neither her/his panties neither her/his bra)
> 
> 
> *But how would you say 'she didn't had neither panties neither bra'?
> 
> Please correct me*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cevabı bekliyorum


Anyone can answer?


----------



## rupertbrooke

[/B]Onun ne külotu ne sütyen vardi[/B] not yoktu. Please read my former note. Your question should have been:-
[/B]She had neither panties nor bra.


----------



## FlyingBird

Onun ne külodu ne de sutyen vardı=she didn't had neither panties nor bra
Onun ne külodu ne de sutyen yoktu=There was no neither her/his panties nor her/his bra

Please someone confirm if text above and translation is correct?

So if it's correct then difference between those two sentences is only in one word.But they are both of totally different meaning cause of 'vardı' and 'yoktu' right?


----------



## FlyingBird

*She don't have money=?
His/her money is no here=?
*
İ wanna comapare something

Any native speaker can please translate this?


----------



## stonerain

Well the first sentence is "She doesn't have money" = O'nun parası yok(tur).
I didn't understand what the second sentence means...

Cheers!


----------



## rupertbrooke

The trouble is that in this instance FlyingBird's English is obscure, not to say unintelligible. Does s/he mean 
 onun parası bur(a)da değil?


----------



## FlyingBird

*Something like text below:

His money does not exist*.He lied that he is rich.
_*His money is not in this house*_.He hided it somwhere else.


How would you translate those two in bold?


teşekkür ediyorum


----------



## Reverence

"His money does not exist" is the literal translation of "parası yok", though I guess a native speaker would prefer something like "he has no money".

"His money is not in this house" can be translated as "Parası bu evde değil".


----------



## rupertbrooke

Thanks, Reverence. I knew that I was on the right track. Just a point for FlyingBird:- 'hided' should be 'hid' & 'somewhere' is the correct spelling though 'somwhere' probably was a typo. Past tenses even for many fluent in English are a nightmare!


----------



## Reverence

You're welcome as always. Maybe it's not quite obvious in this particular example, but you can never be too pedantic when it comes to Turkish. Just when you figure "yok" is enough to cover both variants, suddenly it turns out there's a world of difference between "iç çamaşırları kayıp" and "iç çamaşırları eksik", both of which can very well be translated into English as "her underwear is missing" with the context being the sole clue as to which is more appropriate. Splitting hairs doesn't even begin to describe it.


----------

