"Er isst natürlich seinen Reis."

Translation:He is eating his rice, naturally.

December 17, 2013



Does anyone else want to see how he eats unnaturally?


I think this is naturally in the sense of "of course"


Yes but to avoid the ambiguity in meaning, it should be at the front of the sentence. You really need that comma otherwise and you don't hear the comma in some of the questions.


totally agree if we are talking of English language, but german structure is a totally different story.. quite confusing and interesting at the same time


Naturally= of course

In this context


I wouldn't mind honestly


Mit einer Gabel, unnatürlich.


Why "Er ist ... Reis" is accepted?! (ist instead of isst)... It reminds a horror movie :-)


Yeah that sounded weird, going to report it.


he will of course eat his rice. why is this wrong?


Isn't the word order a bit funny? "Of course he will eat his rice" should be fine.

Well, it is possible that the owl has some difficulty with the German present tense, which can very well talk about future things.

"Morgen gehen wir los. Gleich nach Sonnenaufgang brechen wir auf. Um Mittag sind wir am Hafen, und dann suchen wir uns ein Schiff nach Italien! "

(All future events. All in present tense. All perfect good German.)


It's in the future tense. The sentence is in the present tense.


Could be future just as well.


I thought that too. :S


What is wrong with obviously?


    Offensichtlich, apparently. Different word, different meaning.


    In english, one might structure this so:

    He eats, of course, his rice. Would there be a case in german, where punctuation is used in this way?


    I get this sentence as I'm actually eating a bowl of rice myself o_O are you watching me, Duo?


    Does anybody think that this could as well be "Er ist natuerlich seinen Reis"? He *is" naturally his rice. You know what they say... You are what you eat Jokes apart, is there any way of distinguishing between ist and isst?


    There is no explicit way to tell the difference between "ist" and "isst", but usually it's very obvious whether you're talking about someone eating something or being something.

    And if it's ambiguous, like someone is dressing up as food for a play, you would just use different wording to be clear.


    I also think that "obviously" could be used here. Any reason why not?


    It depends how much you're willing to paraphrase. "Natürlich" doesn't quite connote that something is "obvious". But unless you have to stick strictly to the source (or avoid any possible misunderstanding of sarcasm with the use of "obviously") I would say it's close enough to be acceptable.


    Because he is asian, naturally


    Is my though process correct?...

    Reis is masculine and is in the accusative case. However, there is no article revealing the gender, therefore strong inflection is needed, which is why sein- has an -en ending.


    No, it is mixed inflection. Sein is a possessive pronoun and takes the inflection of the indefinite article.


    Some of these sentences are so strange


    Is that phrase correct? I mean, the verb "isst" will require a complement in the accusative case! But, in this case, we have the verb "sein" ("Er ist") that doesn't require an accusative case! I'm going to report it! Can anyone clarify this for me, please?


    I think the confusion here is you're mistaking "seinen" for the verb when it's the possessive pronoun for "his" in this sentence. Seinen here is the part that is in the accusative because of "isst".


    No, I'm not confusing that! Let me show what I wanted to say in a better way:

    The Verb is "essen" (to eat): Er isst seinen Reis.

    The verb is "sein" (to be): Er ist sein Reis.

    You see that the verb "sein" doesn't require an accusative case. But in the answer that Duo gave to us, the verb "sein" requires an accusative case. I think there is a mistake on it, but I'm not sure. Can someone help, please?


    I've reported it! The original phrase was "Er ist seinen Reis!". But now is in the form it should be: "Er isst seinen Reis!". Thanks for the help!!


    I see. So you saw a sentence that said "Er ist seinen Reis!" and didn't like it because it put seinen in the accusatory instead of nominative. I guess I was a little confused because the sentence I see says "Er isst natürlich seinen Reis." At first glance I assumed you were under the impression that there were 2 verbs in use. My mistake!


    No problem!! Thanks for the help!!


    No one says this phrase in English because we never say he eats his rice naturally or of course unless someone says. Did he eat his rice, yes, of course he ate his rice! However im trying to learn conversational German so why would i say this,.Er isst naturlich seinen reis?


    You've learned how to say "Naturally, blah blah blah". You've learned how to say "He eats blah blah blah". And you've learned how to say "blah blah blah his rice".

    You shouldn't be expecting to learn conversational German by rote memorization of sentences. What you should expect to learn are the pieces of the sentence and the deeper understanding that allow you to compose new sentences you've never heard before.


    This didn't not help me Jack!


    I don't know what to tell you. That's the strategy of Duolingo lessons. If it's not helpful on its own, maybe it will help to supplement lessons here with other resources.


    Thanks Jack I'm doing just that. I do not have anyone to speak with, however I have to travel to Germany next year and I want to be prepared with things I know I will need to say. I am using whatever I can. I'm 72 and I've been doing Duolingo straight for 1043 days. It's better when a person responds kindly to me than telling me what I shouldn't do, but what I can do that will help me. It's true that I will not use this phrase He eats his rice naturally because I never say things like that....I'm studying things that I know I will say to people that I will come in contact within my field. I practice each and every day. Thank you for your response the second time. Sounded so much more friendly.


    A great example of what's wrong with Duolingo. It's out of context, totally meaningless, and totally useless to a beginner.

    Someone with a knowledge of language teaching and learning and acquisition should go through these exercises and trash a LOT of the sentences!


    Prime example: Warum ist mein Bruder unsichtbar? Although it is understandable to have a bit of humor here and there, and I suppose it was an easy way to introduce (un)sichtbar.


    I think normally should be an acceptable alternative.. Ich denke "normally" soll akzeptiert sein


    "Natürlich" means "of course," not "normally."


    In this context, "naturally" and "natürlich" are using the second definition which is "as may be expected; of course". You wouldn't be necessarily wrong in a different context, but in this context "normally" doesn't quite fit.


    How would you say He eats his natural rice? Er isst seinen natürlichen Reis?


      Yes, that's correct.


      Duo needs an option for reporting wrong answers that have been marked correct. This was marked correct: "Er ist natürlich seinen Reis"


      Since "isst" and "ist" are pronounced exactly the same way Duo always accepts either as correct. It isn't so much an error as it is an allowance for two words that are nearly identical and are pronounced the same.


      "Duo always accepts either as correct" <- this is an incorrect statement. If it expects "isst" and gets "ist," it typically accepts it. If it expects "ist" and gets "isst," it will mark it incorrect.


      Apparently I don't know what I am talking about.

      Every sentence I tested this with putting the wrong word in was marked as "You used the wrong word". Whether I used "ist" for "isst" or used "isst" for "ist" using the wrong one generated an error.

      Learn German in just 5 minutes a day. For free.