💥 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.

Nie przegap okazji, by nauczyć się języka w zaciszu własnego domu. Przejrzyj naszą ofertę doświadczonych korepetytorów i zapisz się na pierwszą lekcję już teraz!