'A football ball' should definitely be an acceptable answer as well, since the word 'football' is ambiguous.
Agree. Only American use the word "soccer", the rest of the world only know "football"
"A football ball" sounds absurd. no one ever says that in English in any dialect. If you're speaking American or Australian say "soccer ball", in British English it's just "football"
I got it wrong for "football ball" as well, I almost chose "football" only but felt duolingo wouldn't take it. I'm not a native english speaker, but i think it's irrelevant, we're learning russian here, not english, so if it's clear we got the russian part right it should be accepted.
It's accepted now. It's the same issue in Dutch. Everyone calls it a "voetbal", not a "voetbal bal".
As redundant as it sounds, it really isn't that absurd and definitely not ungrammatical. There are many instances, where 'a football ball' or 'a baseball ball' etc. are used and can be used in order to make a distinction between the sport and the ball itself. I don't think absurdity or uncommon usage should affect the answer key.
There are many instances where it's used? I've never heard anyone say that and I've been playing football for years. If I'm talking about the ball, I say "a football" or "the football". The sport is just "football". There's no ambiguity there.
Since you apparently deleted your comment, I'll add it for you :-) https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22a+football+ball%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1
The first one: "he keeps calling it a 'football ball' for some reason, like he's never even watched a game on television"... but there's enough there to make a decent case that "a football ball" should be accepted as well.
I deleted it because I don't see a point in debating this any further. It is grammatically acceptable and correct, of that I am certain. Whether or not it is applicable in everyday usage is irrelevant here, as the goal of these courses is understanding and translating the given text.
Saying 'a football ball' or simply 'a football' doesn't really change the meaning of the sentence - you're still saying the same thing. The second case simply emphasizes, albeit awkwardly, that the football is indeed a ball.
But of course I could be wrong, so I'll just leave it at that. Have a good one.
Well, I think it was worth adding because it demonstrated pretty clearly that you were right :-)
I agree. And considering duolingo often accepts nouns without an article, which in this case would be "football" and would not be a correct translation, I should think we should be forgiven for being more specific here.
Well, in Argentina we just call it "ball" you only make it specific if it isn't a football one. Still, I still get anoyed by this "soccer" thing.
"A football ball" sounds a bit redundant, though. "A football" was accepted however.
Футбольный ? What sort of an adjective is it? Is теннисьный мяч correct too?
Is '-ьный' productive? At least to the point that if I used it to make an adjective out of a noun I would be understood if not correct?
Why is the russian word for football футбол and not ногий мяч or somethinf like that?
We have it in Polish, we can say: futbol or piłka nożna, where 1st is just a Polish spelling for football, 2nd means foot ball (piłka is a ball, nożna is adjective of foot). In Russian (as far as I know) they only use tge word: футбол
Same happens in Spanish. We can say Balon pie (balon (ball) pie (feet) or Fútbol, which is the Spanish way to write football.. Im happy that many words between Spanish and Russian are similar and the similarities in the grammar rules as well. It make it easy to remember
I also was wrong with "football ball". Now I wander if "futbol ball" aka "soccer ball" would be accepted? What about a "ball to play football"? I am not a native speaker, hence never fully accepted the word "soccer".