Meter is the plural of Meter. :-)
It is not obvious in nominative case (Ein Meter ist hundert Zentimeter, einhundert Meter sind...), but in other cases it becomes apparent: (e.g. dative: Nach einem Meter geht mir die Luft aus, aber nach hundert Metern fühle ich mich wie ein junger Gott.)
In English you can say Metres for more than one Metre. Such as, the tree is fifteen metres away. However, there is a hundred Metre race that you would call 'a hundred Metre race.' Also, in the example given above, in English you would say 'One metre is a hundred centimetres' but the way the English works is not the same as how German works.
Yes and no. Rennen has the connotation of more speed than laufen, but laufen can be used for everything from walking to running.
So, if you just need to get to the bus stop, du laufst die Bushaltestelle. But if you see the bus pulling up and you are still a block away, dann mußt du zur Bushaltestelle rennen oder du wirst den Bus verpassen.
Okay I find this answer on this: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/268641/Er-hat-zwei-Milliarden-Euro
copy as below:
ordinal numbers lower than a million are not capitalized
if "Hundert" and "Tausend" refer to an undefined quantity (as in "several hundred") you can capitalize them if you want (but don't have to)
numbers greater than or equal to a million are capitalized
several other rules see here: http://is.gd/SD6isJ
Thanks for all help!
Well, you can't be too careful in checking. You'd be surprised at the number of forum posts that complain of their answer not being accepted, only to realize later they had actually put a subtle typo in their answer. Since you had typos in your comment, I think it's quite reasonable to cover all the bases and make sure.
But your actual problem here is that the German sentence used present tense "rennt," so "He runs / is running one hundred meters," not "ran" (which would be "rannte").
one hundred meters = 100 meters = 100 m
All of these should be accepted as correct, 100 m is currently marked as wrong.
PS. With the exception of degree, (°), minutes (´) and seconds ('') there should always be a space between the number and the unit.
Source: International Bureau of Weights and Measures, SI Brochure, §5.3.3
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "It's plural." What is plural?
I'm assuming you're referring to "meters," but correct me if I'm wrong. German units of measurement usually don't add a plural ending even when they're referring to multiple of them. So "hundert Meter," "zehn Kilo," "drei Liter," etc.
German grammar doesn't always match English grammar. "Hundert Meter" may not sound right to an English speaker, but it sounds totally fine to a German speaker. (And if a German speaker came to an English-speaking country, he might be inclined to say "a hundred meter," which would be wrong but might sound right to him.)
In general, spell out the numbers when answering auf Deutsch. In English (which you are presumed to already know) you may use digits as a shortcut.
I cannot recall ever seeing die Eule allow digits in a German answer; nor can I call ever having digits disallowed when answering in English.
It seems to have crept into today's 'English' that numerals are used within a written sentence. This is considered bad manners and lazy and has appeared through the use of social media to save space. If writing then write the numbers, but if doing an equation which uses numbers, then numbers are expected and not written numbers.
So the standard/formal English taught when I was in school (30+ years ago) was that the numbers one through ten must be spelled out, eleven through 20 were optional (although I'm pretty sure Mary Louise Thomas would be appalled that I mixed the two), and anything over twenty could be written using digits.
I find this quite sensible, as history texts are too-often boring enough without reading how in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred forty-five, Little Boy was dropped from an altitude of thirty-one thousand sixty feet, whereupon it was fifty-three seconds before it detonated one thousand nine hundred sixty-eight feet above Hiroshima. I'd much rather read that in 1945, Little Boy was dropped from 31,060 feet, fell for 53 seconds, and detonated 1,968 feet in the air.
It's easier to comprehend, for whatever reason.
Makes sense I agree. However, I note that Duo has a preference for writing numbers rather than using numerals. I guess it is more to do with ensuring you are learning the language rather than just racing through a question. That also makes sense to me. I don't seriously expect Duo to ask a question with numbers in the answer that will require a written answer like your Little Boy bomb example above.
What I've noticed is that, in general, if the challenge requires the answer to be written in English, digits are accepted. If the response is to be auf Deutsch, since the digits are identical between the two languages (comma vs. period difference aside), one must spell out the number in order to prove the ability to translate to German.
Yup, like I have commented elsewhere, when I see the American English way of spelling which differs from the English English way I will no longer comment. Like the way American English uses the letter 'Z' instead of the letter 'S' for very many spellings which are not English English. No worries.
I believe Duo generally doesn't accept writing numerals when translating into German (or whatever target language one is learning). Writing the numeral doesn't show Duo that you know how to spell or even pronounce the number, so simply translating with a numeral is not tremendously useful for learning purposes. In general, you should write out the number as a word (though if you're translating from your target language to the language you know, I believe it accepts numerals).
I'm pretty sure that you can read "100" as "hundred", "one hundred" or "a hundred" as per context. "100" by itself would be read as either "one hundred" or "a hundred" but "a 100" would be read as "a hundred" not "a one hundred"; you can't have a determiner and a numeral trying to take up the same semantic space in front of a noun and, in a great many languages (German being one of them) "a" and "one" are the same word.
The "a" in front of "100" forces the pronunciation of "a hundred" over "one hundred."
you can't have a determiner and a numeral trying to take up the same semantic space in front of a noun
This is why "a 100" is incorrect. In my opinion - but a search online for "a 100" (with quotes) only turns up code and class names, rather than any sort of use in a sentence with a plural.
I think the plural is the main reason why it sounds wrong (to me) here. You can have things like "a 100-year-old building", "a 100 metre dash" and "a 100 day challenge" because these are singular; while many people would shorten them to "a hundred-year-old building", "a one hundred year old building" is still fine (obviously I'm only referring to English, with its separate words for the article and the numeral).
If you're referring to the 100-metre dash event, sometimes called "the 100 meters" by Yanks, that's fine, as "100 metres" here is the name, so 100 is functioning as part of the noun.
Otherwise, "he is running the one hundred metres", in general, would still sound incorrect.
*He is a hundred years old
*He is one hundred years old
*He is 100 years old
are all fine.
*He is a one hundred years old
*He is a 100 years old
*He is one 100 years old
*He is the 100 years old
*He is the one hundred years old
*He is the a hundred years old
are all incorrect.
And I wasn't using Yank as a perjorative, but slipping into ad hominem attacks for your last two paragraphs there sure did add legitimacy to your argument. Really won me over there. Wow.
(I don't know if I'm replying to an ancient comment by now; I only just got the email notification, but the desktop website shows me how long ago something was posted maybe one time in a one 100 ;) )
He is a hundred years old. He is a 100 years old. The 'a hundred' directly qualifies 'years' You don't have to change the 100 years old into a nominal adjective to be allowed to use 'a' for 'a man'; "he is a 100-year-old man." The plurality of metres or years has nothing to do with the 'a' of 'a hundred' or 'a 100'. Even if it's a non-standard usage, it is a work-around to force the intended pronunciation of 'a' over 'one'.
Re: "If you're referring to the 100-metre dash event, sometimes called "the 100 meters" by Yanks ..."
No. I mean "the 100 kilometres that I cycled today went much easier than the 100 kilometres that I cycled yesterday." Just changed it to something more logical but metres and kilometres would be treated the same in the grammar.
Do you have to read "The one hundred kilometres ..." ? Or can you, as I do, read "The hundred kilometres ..."
P.S. I am neither a Yank nor an American unless we're speaking Spanish; then soy americano pero in English, I'm not American. By the way, were you intending---as you seem to have been doing---to use 'Yank' as a pejorative for me? If so, you missed.
Fair dinkum it's ridgy didge, mate ... oh wait ... did I miss which country you're from?