Translation:I eat the soup, even though I do not want it.
I disagree. "But" doesn't have the same intesity as "even though". Eating the soup but not wanting it implies that the two actions are unrelated, while eating the soup even though you don't want it implies that one action is in spite of or directly opposed to the other. I think DuoLingo is trying to teach us that "но" and "хотя (и)" have that same relationship.
I think that "He" maps to "Он", "She" to "Она", but English "It" does not always map to "оно", it only does so when talking about a neuter noun (ending in "е" or "о"). When talking about a feminine "it" (like a "тарелка"), English "it" becomes "она" and when talking about a masculine "it" (like a "стол"), English "it" becomes "он".
It would be great if a native speaker could confirm my understanding of Russian "it".
Native speaker here. You are correct in your understanding of Russian "it". Он/оно/она dichotomy (or should it be trichotomy?) is always a function of the gender of a noun it substitutes, regardless of whether it's animate or inanimate.
The only subtlety with using он/оно/она comes when you use it in constructions like "he/she is [desctiption]" vs "it is [description]". In these constructions, "he/she" becomes "он/она", while the first mentioning of "it" (the one that can be safely replaced by "this" in English) should be replaced by Russian "это" (regardless of the object's gender). Once the object has been defined, you fall back to the aforementioned "он/оно/она" usage. E.g.:
It's a table. It's made of wood. - Это стол. Он сделан из дерева.
Yeah, that's confusing. Especially because the hints only state 'his'.
Hints are often misleading. Его has several meanings. It can map into his (велосипед Ивана / его велосипед = Ivan's bike / his bike), its (ножка стола / его ножка = a leg of the table / its leg), her (нос корабля / его нос = the bow of the ship /her bow), but also into him, it or her as direct objects: я знаю Ивана/этот корабль/это окно - я знаю его (for all three) - I know Ivan (I know him), I know this ship (I know her) and I know this window (I know it). So его can replace any posessive agjective relating to an owner of masculine or neuter gender, as well as any object of masculine or neuter gender in the genitive or accusative case without prepositions (after prepositions the form него is used instead)
"Хотя и" and its colloquial substitute "хоть и" can modify a noun or adjective, in which case it may corresponds to "albeit", "although" or "though". Check this link http://context.reverso.net for examples. "Хотя и" is also used before the verb of a subordinate clause when it has the same subject as the main clause. In all other cases, "и" is optional and when it is used, и is always separated from хотя by the subject of the clause. E.g. Хотя я и не видел ее, я знал, что она находится рядом. (Although I couldn't see her, I knew she was nearby.)
г is pronounced like в in adjectival endings -его and -ого of the genitive/accusative singular forms, e.g белого, синего. We also find this pronunciation in words его, кого, чего, того, сего, этого and their derivatives including the words 'сегодня' and 'итого'. In some forms of the noun 'бог' (бога, богу) and in the interjections 'ага'(uh-huh), 'ого' (wow), 'угу' (yep) and 'эге' (wow), г is pronounced like the voiced 'h' (similar to the first 'h' in 'uh-huh'). In the final position and before 'т', г sounds like к (the words луг - meadow, миг - instance, рог - horn, and ногти - finger nails, sound like 'look', 'mick', 'rock' and 'noktsee', respectively). In words бог, мягкий, мягче, лёгкий and легче 'г' is pronounced like 'х'. Otherwise, the letter sounds like 'g' in 'get' or 'got'
In some forms of the noun 'бог' (бога, богу) and in the interjections 'ага'(uh-huh), 'ого' (wow), 'угу' (yep) and 'эге' (wow), г is pronounced like the voiced 'h' (similar to the first 'h' in 'uh-huh').
While I completely agree with you about 'ага, 'ого', 'угу' and 'эге', in all forms of the noun 'бог' "г" is pronounced like 'g' in 'get' or 'got', at least in St. Petersburg. This should be a fairly standard (if not the standard) dialect of Russian. Pronouncing it in the manner you have suggested would strike me as (very) provincial.
I agree that St.Petersburg pronunciation is fairly standard, but to say it is the standard would be an exaggeration. I know that lot's of people born in St.Peterburg before WWII pronounce the letter ч as ч in the words что, чтобы, конечно, скучно whereas most Russians pronounce ч as ш in those words. Only in St.Petersburg people use the words парадное and поребрик instead of подъезд and бордюр for an entrance to a block of apartments and a curb, respectively. As far as the word Бог is concerned, at least in the nominative singular it it pronounced as бох, not бок everywhere in Russia including St. Petersburg. In other forms of the word you can hear both 'g' as in God and 'h' as in German words, neither being any more standard than the other. The preferences are rooted in the family tradition and have nothing to do with geography.
As far as the word Бог is concerned, at least in the nominative singular it it pronounced as бох, not бок everywhere in Russia including St. Petersburg.
I stand corrected. "Бог" is indeed pronounced as бох in the nominative singular unless it is followed by a word beginning with a vowel. "Бог с тобой" is pronounced with the "x" sound while I would still use "г" if I were to say "бог услышал ..." In all other cases/forms I can think of "г" is naturally followed by a vowel, and pronouncing it as "x" in those instances would sound distinctly southern to my ear.
Only in St.Petersburg people use the words парадное and поребрик instead of подъезд and бордюр for an entrance to a block of apartments and a curb, respectively.
These are examples of differences in lexicon, not pronunciation. In addition, these are not specific only to St.Petersburg. E.g., it is certainly "поребрик" in Novosibirsk.
I agree that St.Petersburg pronunciation is fairly standard, but to say it is the standard would be an exaggeration.
The reason for my statement was not some form of St. Petersburg chauvinism but rather something I read a while ago (although I cannot find the reference right now). I read that the pronunciation of the radio & TV presenters back in the Soviet times was modeled on the St. Petersburg accent, which made it a de facto standard - a Russian analogue of BBC English. Naturally, being from St. Petersburg myself, I have no objections to this idea ;-)
P.S. It is still "скучно" & "булочная", at least among people from my generation (gen-X-ers), in all other words you have listed, ч has drifted to ш.
If I hear г instead of х in a phrase like "Бог услышал", it tells me that the speaker or his/her parents are likely to have grown up somewhere in Ukraine. I've never heard "г" in "бог" before a vowel from anybody who grew up in Moscow or anywhere on the Volga or in the central Russia. As for ч/ш in "что", "чтобы" and "конечно", Iossif Brodsky and Anna Akhmatova would say /ч/ in those words, following the 19th century norm of St. Petersburg pronunciation. These days, though, very few people speak like that, even in St. Petersburg, /ш/ being omnipresent.
«Хотя/хоть и» is mostly used to connect two clauses that share the same subject, e.g. «Она съела тарелку супа, хотя и не была голодной» (She ate a bowl of soup, even though she was not hungry). Not that the subject is dropped out from the second clause. «Хоть ... и» with и put immediately before the verb or predicative adjective (or before не when the negative form is used) may also occur at the beginning of a sentence, in which case it is equivalent to “although”, e.g. «Хоть он и работает а правительстве, от него мало что зависит» (“Although he works in the government, there is little he can do”). «Хоть»/«хотя» without и is rarely used at the beginning of a sentence, «Несмотря на то, что» being more preferable. Without “и” «хоть»/«хотя» means “in spite of the fact that”. When it starts a question, «Хотя» means “On the other hand”.