Translation:There is already a plate on this table.
"On this table there is already a plate" was not accepted... Kind of unfair to ask for the clauses to be reversed
While I do agree that it should be accepted, since it is technically correct, this kind of a sentence is odd and unusual in English. As such, it should be fairly obvious that a reversing of the clauses is needed to make the sentence sound natural (and therefore, should be automatically done when translating). No one in their right mind would actually say it like this. Simultaneously, it is good to learn that Russian and English have different norms in their respective sentence structures. In any case, it is best to just report these cases when they come up, so that they can be fixed.
This is not odd or unusual in English and should be an accepted answer. I think you've gone a wee bit overboard saying that "no one in their right mind would actually say it like this".
Eeh, probably. I have a bad habit of exaggerating. Let's say then that most fully fluent people wouldn't place 'on this table' at the front. Emphasizing that particular phrase does still sound at least a bit odd.
Basic points remain though:
1) You should always default to starting with "there is" unless you have a very good reason.
2) Starting with "on this table" is still grammatically correct and should be accepted here.
I don't think it's a question of fluency but of what you're trying to say. If you are merely pointing out the existence of a plate on the table than "there is already a plate on this table" would be preferable. But if you are looking at a series of tables and you wanted to point out that on this particular table, as compared to the others, a plate is already there, than "on this table there is already a plate" would be perfectly correct.
I have to agree with greg_php_freak and hlnscott59 on this; ryandward's sentence should have been accepted. There's nothing wrong with it. We change word order in English all the time to emphasis a particular element of a sentence, especially when it's a whole clause, like in Ryan's sentence. It's less common, but it's not wrong.
I agree with you, but I think it would make more sense is you used a coma, like: "On this table, there is already a plate" and it sounds even more like the context you mentioned if you use "on this table, there is one plate already!" (just like a waiter yelling at another waiter before everything is ready to receive people)
That is probably the best example of a situation where one would emphasize "on this table". Then again, emphasizing by stressing the word seems way more common to me, in contrast to changing word order.
I think it depends more on context than if someone is fully fluent or not. I would agree that in most situations you would place "on this table" at the end.
Well yes, but meant merely that a fully fluent person is more likely to recognize such a context.
I can't really agree with your second statement. Starting with "on the table" isn't how English is spoken. Each clause may be grammatically correct, but there's also word order in speaking a language correctly.
I agree. It has to be reversed to be a proper translation. A native speaker would not say this in English, though if you did, you would likely be understood.
Would you agree no one in their right mind would use this sentence? Why would anyone care if there is one plate on a table? It's like saying "there's an apple on this apple tree." Did you expect a pear? Or maybe we expect a bear on the table? Let me state the obvious and prove I'm an idiot.
Oh great, now they put unexplained grammar. Where the hell did этом come from?
"Этом" is Prepositional of "этот" and you should use this case with в and на if there's no motion required (otherwise use Accusative). "На этом столе уже есть тарелка" is "There is already a plate on this table" (no motion) and "Я кладу тарелку на этот стол* is "I lay the plate on this table" (motion).
I also think that it's quite surprising here as there has not been any exercise about this for me here. Thanks for your explanation though ;)
I too am really annoyed that they asked me to hear words that I haven't been introduced to yet!
Why there is "есть" in this sentence.
Would it be wrong like this? "На этом столе уже тарелка."
This question blows my brain :)
So, you CAN say this in special situation. For example, if you had been asked about small table "Поставь на стол миску". And you answer "На этом столе уже тарелка [поэтому нет места для миски]".
But using verbs is grammatically correct for most cases.
One correct response was "There is already a plate on this table." I entered "The plate is already on the table." These seem contextually equivalent to me. :-|
I still don't understand why "The plate is already on the table" is not accepted?
Yes, you should be able to. I wonder how finely tuned native Russian-speaking ears are tuned to hearing the presence and absence of the soft-sign ь at the end of the infinitive - when the verb ectb is conjugated, the soft-sign isn't used and it only appears as е́ст in Он/Она/Они е́ст. The rest of the conjugated forms are very clearly not е́ст/е́сть.
I had this as a listening exercise. Oh dear! How can something written as "stole" possibly sound like "steria", or "est'" as "yet"? I am finding the pronunciation so very difficult - it seems to vary all the time, according to the ending
"There already is a plate on this table" wasn't accepted... since I don't speak english natively, I don't know whether my phrase technically was wrong, or the phrase was unknown to the program
That is perfectly good English. Did you copy and paste your answer here, to make sure there was not some other error present?
If you did, then it should be reported. If I come back to this sentence, I will try your version and report it if it is still marked wrong.
How should I write the word "этом"? I mean I write using Latin letters (Na etom stole udhe est' tarelka). Is there an explanation how should I write which letter? Thanks in advance.
This seems to be the system that Duolingo uses:
Aa = Aa,
Бб = Bb,
Вв = Vv,
Гг = Gg,
Дд = Dd,
Ее = Ee,
Ёё = Ee (although main pronounciation is ~ yo),
Жж = ZHzh,
Зз = Zz,
Ии = Ii,
Йй = Ii (although main pronounciation ~ iy),
Кк = Kk,
Лл = Ll,
Мм = Mm,
Нн = Nn,
Оо = Oo,
Пп = Pp,
Рр = Rr,
Сс = Ss,
Тт = Tt,
Уу = Uu,
Фф = Ff,
Хх = KHkh,
Цц = TSts,
Чч = CHch,
Шш = SHsh,
Щщ = SHCHshch,
Ъъ = ??? (I haven't come across this one yet),
Ыы = Yy,
Ьь = '
Ээ = Ee,
Юю = YUyu,
Яя = YAya
So apart from ж, which is zh not dh, your approximation seems correct to me. Oh, and someone correct me if I messed up somewhere.
Apologies in advance for my being blunt here.
I would urge you to install one of the Russian keyboards and learn to use it. The only time you would use the English-equivalent alphabet is here at Duo, so you would be gaining a skill useless everywhere else in the world.
Also, I am unwilling to learn the English-letter equivalent of the Cyrillic alphabet in order to accommodate other users. I already have enough to learn. So, if you post a question, I'm just going to ignore it.
Is it correct to say "тарелки уже есть столе" for "the plates are on the table". Going to friends for dinner and I want to try out my Russian.
I do not think so. тарелка уже на этом столе is what google translate says is correct for that.
I agree with google because, from what I've learned so far, there is no active-voiced present tense of "to be" in Russian. You just don't say [something] is [something/somewhere] in a literal word-for-word translation.
есть is used in these circumstances in a passive way, and seems to be more like "exists/is located" than "is". (Thinking of it this way helps me keep it separate from the idea to "to be" or "to have".)
So, literally, the exercise sentence "На этом столе уже есть тарелка" means something like "On this table exists/is located a/the plate."
Is it my imagination or she adding a vowel to the edd of Этом? It sounds like Этому. On further review it's only on slow motion.
It is annoying that, in addition to learning another language, I need to memorise the exact phrase that duolingo wants as an answer here.
I believe because it matches no other cases, and defaults to nominative case word form.
How would I say, "there is already a plate on the table"? Is it "На столе уже есть тарелка"?
I am also wondering why There is already a plate on the table is not acceptable. Contextually they are definitely equivalent in most cases.
To Harry Hulme2, I also hear the в in the sentence when slowed down. Now I know it was not my imagination.
Would is be more correct to say "There is a plate on the table already. This avoids the adverb "already" separating the subject, "plate" from its verb "is".
There is a plate already on the table should be accepted same meaning and used with equal freq.
I answered: there is a plate on the table already. Why is this incorrect?
I answered: the plate is already on the table. Why is this not correct
"This table already has a plate on it." was not accepted even though it's word-for-word, carries the same meaning, and is common in English.
Why is there an "o" sound after the 《 л 》in 《 тарелка 》? Is it just me?
"This table already has a plate"????
is not accepted, doesn't make sense