Those mean two different things, and so "it's" will not be accepted.
"it" refers back to something you have mentioned before.
"that" can point to something entirely new that you are introducing to a conversation.
das in German is "that" (the introducing-something-new pronoun), not "it" (the referring-to-something-previous pronoun).
I realize the German sentence and the use of sondern is quite usual, but as a native English speaker, I doubt I would ever say "That is not a bed, but a couch." I'm sure I would say "That's not a bed. It's a couch." The German sentence construction to me is perfectly fine in German, but doesn't transfer nicely to English if one insists on a wortwörtlich translation.
i've put 'that is not bed, but rather a sofa', i guess saying 'that's bed' or 'that's not bed' (without the bed/a bed/my bed/etc.) is a colloquialism rather than correct English grammar. Anyway, it marked it as wrong and said it should be 'that's no bed'. Seems to be splitting hairs over nothing really
Yes, couch, pants, I cannot recall- either tub or bathtub was also a huge issue. Some of us are failing to recognize and acknowledge that there are MANY English speaking areas of the world. Just because others may use a variation of the word, does not mean it is not CORRECT ENGLISH...We have wasted so many hours reading redundant posts about how to say things in Britain. I hope we can get away from this.
Simply said: "sondern" = "but instead" and "aber" = "but" But actually the "sondern" is used in these three contexts:
1) not A but B instead.
2) not A but rather B.
3) not only A but also B.
More information here: http://yourdailygerman.com/tag/difference-between-sondern-and-aber/
It may have to do with "Bett" ending in two T's. When I said "Bett" just now, and listened closely, I also detected an S-like sound at the end. This wasn't because I meant to include an S, but rather because if you say T like a German does... and hold that sound (rather than ending it sharply)... you can't help but make an S sound as well.
Good luck! I'm finding DL to be very frustrating due to inconsistencies in the program; and, no, it (DL) doesn't just use American English for its translations. Sofa is just as common in Am Eng as Couch, Settee, Divan, or Chaise. DL appears to use whatever the H_ _ l it wants to, but it does use far too much slang!
yes but technically verbs can be used to create nouns, for example essen (to eat) and das Essen (meal). So I guess erebus53 wanted to write: es ist nicht Springen
On the other hand I am not sure if this is correct nor if in German does every verb can be used to create noun or maybe there are limited number of verbs that act this way
Vineeetsing9, German-English Dictionary definition of "kein": "no," "none", "not one," "not a", not one", "not any". Which expression one uses depends on context. When there is no context--as in the example--you pick the one which sounds best. "Kein" already contains within it the sense of "not a", therefore you don't have to add "eine." Indeed, to do so, is grammatically wrong.
Yes, and if the noun is feminine, the same concept applies? Which is basically what I said in the first place. The question was regarding the "hidden" article. So whether it is masculine, or feminine, the same concept would apply... Are you native German? Just curious..
DL marked up "sofa" in English and suggested that "couch" was correct instead. Don't worry about it I just thought it a bit strange. "Couch" (from USA TV) is rarely used in the UK. No one in the UK would use the terms "Davenport", "recliner" or Lazyboy" for a sofa. Another UK English word that would be acceptable is "Settee"
DL, accept sofa. It specifically asks for an ENGLISH translation, not an AMERICAN translation, in all my life as an ENGLISH person I have NEVER and will NEVER refer to a sofa as a couch, WTF kind of language is that? It's a sofa, if you want an American translation then ask for that specific language when you request a translation and stop bastardising my mother tongue. Thank you.
As I am sure you are aware, Kungfu, English is spoken in many different countries throughout the world. With that, different usages have certainly evolved. If you have traveled, for example to Australia, or New Zealand, they use different words for common everyday items. I find it rather endearing, and interesting. I would not say that any one country's word usage is right or wrong, it is just different.
If you don't like American, why do you come to an American website? Pittsburgh, it's still in the U.S. isn't it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duolingo Couch doesn't look like it's an Americanism. It's from the 14th century. They use it in Australia as well. http://www.etymonline.com/word/couch Sounds like it's a lack of conservationism on your part. Like "Fall" vs "Autumn". "Fall" being the authentic old fashioned English and "Autumn" being the "bastardising" (your word not mine) I think it's cute when you say "Autumn" myself. Doesn't it accept "sofa"? Anyway keep a stiff upper lip. Keep calm and duoLingo on!
Perhaps you'd be interesting in forming a Anglish club? Regressive purism stuff. Forming strong verbs (shave -> shove, blink -> blunk), irregularizing plurals (hice instead of houses following mouse/mice, louse/lice) and the like. It's great fun! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIo-17SIkws
"That is not a bed, but a sofa." is one of the accepted answers, so I don't know what might have happened in your case.
If this happens again, it would be helpful if you could make a screenshot, upload it somewhere, and post a link to it here.
First, though, please check that it was not a "type what you hear" exercise.
I present to you Graham Nash using the word "couch" and as an added bonus he also utters the phrase "like me and David and Stephen" in the same clip. With a name like Graham you know he's as English as apple pie! So, none of this "He's been corrupted by his time in America!
To my mind, the most natural way to express this in English wouldn't include 'but' at all. It would be 'It isn't A, it's B', e.g. 'It isn't a bed, it's a sofa.' I keyed that automatically, but it isn't allowed. 'Calquing' the German structure, i.e. repeating it, merely creates unnatural English.
What was your complete translation? Sometimes you can have an error somewhere. As such. Maybe your translation was: "That is a bed, but a sofa." Notice the "not" is left out. Then it'll show the correct translation: "That is not a bed, but a couch." and it'll look like the sofa/couch was the issue when in truth it was the "not" left out.
I rendered this sentence "That's a sofa, not a bed." DL marked it wrong. It shouldn't have. If I were speaking colloquial Am. English (I'm American), I'd articulate the sentence the way I have here. All the nit-picking and pseudo-pontificating (71 comments!). And, of them all, the only one that came even remotely close to winkling out the REAL concept behind the construction is "pavel.hancar". He'd have been 100% on the money if he'd added a fourth possibility, i.e., "B, not A."
I think Summerjasmine has something here. "That is not a bed, rather a couch." is a rather unnatural sentence. Fairly stilted. I think you'd see that construction in literature or a more formal setting. In everyday English "That is not a bed. It's a couch." would be better. To my American ear. "That is not a bed, rather a couch." sounds more like a college professor talking (and a stuffy one mind you). Food for thought for the English learners on this site.