Translation:Hello, I believe we have not been introduced.
Hello, I think that they have not introduced us — This is as correct in English as Hello, I don't think they have introduced us — and should not be marked incorrect.
DL is too literal for that. "Creo que..." is the opposite of "I don't think..."
I thought that, too, at first but then it seemed that DL was going for the act of being introduced by someone else instead of introducing ourselves to each other. Using "hemos" would mean "we have not introduced ourselves" instead of "they have not introduced us".
so... wouldn't a better translation be "I believe we have not been introduced by them" ?
Literally, it would be "I believe they have not introduced us." but using the impersonal translation comes out "I believe we have not been introduced." If we replace "nos" with "se" we get "I believe they have not been introduced." The impersonal part is what is confusing as we are not being introduced by anyone particular. It is a bit idiomatic as we are including "been" in the translation. I, personally, like "Creo que no hemos sido presentado." but I am not a native speaker.
since the subject is not explicit i think if "hi i think that they have not introduced is correct" then "hi i think that you have not introduced us" is a correct translation as well. The subject could be be ustedes, there is nothing to indicate otherwise.
Hola, creo que nosotros no hemos sido presentados = Hello, i believe we have not been introduced. Hola, creo que no nos han presentado = Hello,I believe ( they or you ( ustedes)) have not introduced us.
Heh...I think this should go in their "flirting" lesson. It would fit right in.
"Hi, I don't think we've met" is probably the most informal and common expression. However, it seems like in this case it should be more like: "Hi, I don't believe that they have introduced us." These two expressions mean different things, I think the latter one is a more direct and correct translation than the former expression. Translating even more literally would be: "I believe that they haven't introduced us." This translation is probably the most direct and 'correct' one. But the second expression means the same thing.
What is the rule for placement of the word "no"? If the 'no' is in reference to their actions and not my belief, where would the "no" have appeared? Maybe, "Hola, creo que nos no han presentado".?
You cannot put the 'no' between the object pronoun and the conjugated verb. It has to come before the pronoun(s).
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the rules for Spanish participles, but shouldn't it be "presentados" since "nos" is plural?
when past participle is a part of present perfect construction it doesn't need to be agreed with a subject, it always stays the same
No, it would still be presentado. The way I think of it is presentado isn't describing or relating to any noun (nos, in this example), so it doesn't get altered to fit the noun's number and gender.
Btw, nos is the object not the subject
Where is the "been?" Is it just part of a figure of speech? "Hola, creo que no nos hemos sido presentados."
Hello, I believe that YOU (all) have not introduced us. Marked incorrect even though "han" is the Ustedes form and YOU would be the correct translation of that form...
Thank you for responding Tarumila. Although you are technically correct for the Castillian Spanish, in Latin America we do not use the vosotros tense. Therefore, yes I was referring to this sentence as using the Ustedes form of plural you (multiple people that I am speaking to). In the US, especially in the south, a common form of speaking to multiple people will include the word "y'all" (short for - you all). I understand that this is not grammatically correct but it is colloquial and often used in southern states. In fact, there are multiple instances while using DuoLingo where I have used the translation of you all for Ustedes and have been marked correct. I was pointing out that in this instance, I was marked incorrect and I feel, as some have pointed out that if you wanted to say "I believe that we have not been introduced" a more appropriate way of saying is perhaps "Creo que no hemos sido presentado"
I wrote, "hello, I believe that we haven't met." This was marked wrong, but it suggested, "hello, I don't believe that we have met." Same diff.
I am always torn between translating literally and translating into a comfortable turn of phrase in English, because very often the literal translation is not how it would be said in English. For this one, I put "Hello, I don't think we've been introduced", because a native English speaker would be unlikely to say "I believe we have not been introduced", even though this would have been a more accurate literal translation. On this occasion, DL accepted it.