"It is not a port, it is a farm."

Translation: To nie jest port, to jest farma.

[nerguy_pablo]

Is the second 'to' really needed?

[Jellei]

Yes, it is. Unless you decide to go with 'tylko', which is something similar to 'but', but it's more like... you're correcting someone's claim.

[MikeSpice]

You could also say "To nie jest port, tylko farma". Literally, "it is not a port, rather a farm."

[Jellei]

And it is an option worth adding. Which I did.

[Elenaverano]

Can I say something like: To jest nie port, ale farma ?

[Emwue]

Literally that would be: "It is not a port but a farm", but it is 1)way more likely to be spoken by a native and 2)close enough in meaning; so I think you should report it next time as "my answer should be accepted".

[Elenaverano]

Thank you! :)

[Yola448704]

It is not a port/harbor, it is a farm - To nie jest port, to (jest) gospodarstwo/
To nie port, to gospodarstwo / To nie port, ale/lecz/tylko gospodarstwo

[Jellei]

I added "lecz", everything else was already accepted.

[Yola448704]

:D

[Valerie261225]

I don't understand why it is not correct to write "to nie jest portem to jest farmą"

[Jellei]

Let's focus just on the second part: "It is a farm". You cannot use Instrumental in such a sentence. It would be as treating "it" as some kind of a noun, but it's a dummy pronoun. It's a "This is Y" sentence and such sentences use Nominative. Same applies to the first clause, it's just negated.

More info here: https://www.duolingo.com/comment/16373167

[Arnoldpitt]

Why is to required at all? one so often omits the subject pronoun but here , for some reason , it seems to be required

[Jellei]

Not when the subject is the dummy pronoun "to" (reminder: a dummy pronoun is used when all of "[this/that/it]" or "[these/those]" (sometimes "they") make sense in English.

[Arnoldpitt]

I think I understand.