💥 Which one sounds better or more natural?

1) The farmers lived a subsistence existence.

2) The farmer lived/survived on a bare minimum of resources.

Question

💥 Which one sounds better or more natural?

1) The farmers lived a subsistence existence.

2) The farmer lived/survived on a bare minimum of resources.

Answer

Neither are terrible but they don’t have the same meaning. The second is vague.

Natural are ‘subsistence farming’ and ‘subsistence agriculture’.

Examples:
They/he engaged in subsistence farming.
They/he practiced subsistence farming. 
Society there advanced beyond subsistence agriculture 3000 years ago.

Answer

Number (2) sounds more natural in my opinion.

"Subsistence" is a noun that means supporting oneself at the minimum level, so "subsistence existence" sounds a little awkward. "Subsistence" can be used in other contexts and sound natural. Some examples:
- "The farmer was a subsistence worker." -> The farmer is self-employed and produces his own food for himself; he is self-sufficient.
- "The farmer farmed for subsistence." -> The farmer farmed to support himself/survive.

Verpassen Sie nicht die Gelegenheit, bequem von zu Hause aus eine Sprache zu lernen. Stöbern Sie in unserer Auswahl an erfahrenen Sprachlehrern und melden Sie sich jetzt zu Ihrer ersten Unterrichtsstunde an!