I wholeheartedly disagree. We in North America use the word "light" for that which gives off light, as in "turn on the light, please". So easily, it could follow "wow, that's a colourful light". Please fix it. Lampe = light when light refers to the object itself. I've given you a lingot up front to make this happen. Cool? Cool.
Indeed, many people in the U.S. (it may be a regional thing) use "light" to refer to both a fixture/device and the illumination that such a device produces. Like: "there is a light next to the door" could refer to a sconce attached to a wall near the door. Or, "feel around, the light should be on the end table," could refer to someone being directed to find a lamp on a table.
That's a bit like "I'm watching television" when you are looking at the actual device through which you receive the service "television" -- when you want light, I can indeed tell someone to "switch on the light" and presume that they will know that they have to activate a lamp (device) in order to receive light ("service").
So Machen Sie bitte das Licht an is fine, but that's not using Licht for the actual lamp, at least in my mind.
For example, I wouldn't use Das Licht ist heruntergefallen to express that "The lamp fell down.", because there, you really are talking about the object, irrelevantly of the fact that it can produce light.
Thanks, got caught by the English bright which can mean colourful as well as shining. "That's a bright shirt you're wearing". One would say that of a colourful shirt. I can see the ambiguity with shining. I guess bunt always has to be colourful, but bright doesn't, so yeah, colourful is a better fit.
My question is: does every adjective can be used in such manner?
Nearly every adjective, yes.
(Some can only be used predicatively, not attributively, e.g. you can say Die Tür ist zu und das ist schade but you can't talk about die zue Tür, die schade Situation.)
Can we say f.e. Das ist ein schnelles Auto?
Yes; that's perfectly fine.
what about I'm seeing a colourful lamp...? How come Duolingo doesn't automatically accept the German present to be translated by either the present simple and present continuous?
Because we don't use the present continuous form of verbs such as "see" in English for their literal meanings.
- I see your daughter. (with my eyes)
- I am seeing your daughter. (= I regularly go out with her on dates.)
- I have a dog. (I own one)
- I am having a dog. (I am eating a dog)
So Duo is right to reject "I am seeing a colourful lamp", because the German ich sehe does not refer to dating.
Unfortunately that's not true. It works in the example you're using but the use of the present continuous for " to see" exist to express something else than to say "to date"
- am I seeing this clearly
- what do you see? I am seeing a lamp (I believe)
the continuous tense has endless use and the beauty of it is that it can allow the person to convey a wide range of emotions such as doubts, subjectivity, action etc...