Not quite. The stress in "Анна" falls on the initial syllable, whereas the stress in "она" is on the second syllable. This may seem like a trivial difference, but differences in stress can be quite significant in Russian, and it's important to distinguish between similar sounding words with different stresses.
That will become easier as you become more comfortable listening to Russian. The users learning English also complain that they cannot hear a thing because of the atrocious TTS. In reality, they cannot distinguish between similar words because they are beginners (similar words include "eat" and "it", "man" and "men", "its" and "it", "radio" and "redial", "duck" and "dog").
Yor feelings are understandable: I still occasionally fail to understand some lines spoken in TV shows in English without listening one or two more times. However, «Анна» is pronounced correctly in this sentence, so your feedback is actually about the difficulty of listening to the foreign language rather than about a particular Text-to-Speech solution (which does make mistakes and has a lot of glitches, but not here).
rofl. wait a second. let me explain once again slower, m.b. you will understand:
there was a question with robot saying something;
my task was: understand what it said and write in russian what i'd heard;
it's not a problem for 34 y.o. native speaker, right?
wrong. my answer was: "она подоила быка и была очень рада результату" вместо "Анна подоила быка ..." вывод? this exercise just sucks. it's misleading and "Анна" must be removed.
if native speaker can't answer correctly, what could you expect from learners? эта херня только сбивает всех с толку. или не всех. без разницы
Well, I can't say what your personal speaking style is but I would be very surprised despite what you believe, that you have never said in answer to questions or in response to statements .....I'm here now, I am stuck in traffic now but I will be there soon, the president is Duluth now but is supposed to leave for New York tonight, the band just got here now, there is no security at the park now, there is no sign of it/him now, the lake is polluted now, there is no way to find out now......
But an English speaker actually would normally say Anna is in the park now if that is what they intended to say. They would include now as a means of emphasizing the immediacy and significance of her presence in the park. In fact, including now is the most common way of doing that.
I have no idea if it is the same for Russian usage.
Sorry for replying to my own post. The reply nesting must be at it's maximum level.
Thanks for the replies.
northernguy, that is interesting. I suppose that too much personal bias was included when forming my argument. I must admit that I've never postfixed any sentence with "now" when relating an individual to a place in the present tense.
Shady_arc I'll hold off from making the suggestion.
Well, the new tree version is not going to be here in a while. Right now "сейчас" is in the skill for places, so, I guess, users will complain about off-topic sentences about anything but "Alice is in the restaurant now"-type sentences.
In principle, sentences like "It is 5 o'clock", "It is morning" and "It is late" are all possible to teach you "now"—though, none of them normally use "now" in English.
May we hypothesise about the purpose of й after е — or alternatively е before й?
I mean, they sound just the same. As far as I understand, е is like и but palatalizes the previous sound. So in this case it should be like a longer е but to me it sounds like сечас.
сейча́с (sejčás) [sʲɪˈt͡ɕas, ɕːas] "now; at once; just now": Univerbation of сей (sej, "this; this here") + час (čas), ”this hour”, ”this time” (note: “сей” is dated, bookish or stilted (unlike “э́тот”), “час” in the sense of “time” is dated or poetic). Hour and clock are both said ceas in Romanian, of the same origin as час.