English translation is not good. It should be 'at the end of the corridor' not 'in the end'
"At the end" can refer to either space or time, but "in the end" usually only refers to time, or conclusions.
This should sentence should read "there is a door at the end of the hallway." Using in instead of at is not correct
Why the sentence contains есть? Is it possible to use just В конце коридора дверь or В конце коридора находиться дверь?
yep, "есть" can be just skipped because it is implied (what else would a door be doing at the end of the corridor other than "being there"), but can be used as well.
Also in spoken language when someone explains the way to you you could get future tense (as in "there is gonna be a door at the end of the corridor") в конце коридора будет дверь.
Thank you. I guess that same is in past tense "There was a door at the end of the corridor" В конце коридора был дверь. For me is weird to use word есть in present perfect because I use to skip that word when it means "is". For example "She is a beautiful girl" is Она красивая девочка. and not Она есть красивая девочка. Do you have any explanation why it is possible word есть there?
былА дверь, its a feminine. Not a language expert, but the way I know it we used to have mandatory "is" in sentences a long time ago (think centuries, like in fairy tales "ой ты гой еси добрый молодец" , еси is an old form of is), then it became optional, then rare, but can still be used sometimes. I suppose it allows for a change of pace - makes sentence slower, maybe put some emphasis. It's a style thing, so if you don't feel it yet - skip it -more likely not to need it.
I'd argue that here it is necessary. Есть here means "There is" not "is", similar to " у нас есть" literally "there is at us" - "we have." So while it is frequently dropped in spoken language, here it is still needed to prevent confusion. В конце коридора дверь has no verb even an implied one provided by costructed language norms but the sentence still needs one. What's that door doing? You don't know, because в конце коридора isn't the predicate of the sentence. It's a prepositional phrase. To drop есть you need either an accepted construct ("у нас" shortened from "у нас есть") or a noun/short form adjective that describes the state/condition of the door.
Not only that but due to the way the sentence is constructed it's needed. Russian puts emphasis on the last thing in the sentence, it is the unknown. The known is placed at the beginning. "в конце коридора" is known. What is unknown is what's there. "Есть дверь"- "There is a door." Есть is here because it underscores that emphasis.
To read more about this see: http://blogs.transparent.com/russian/word-order-and-logical-emphasis/
genitive because it answers the question "of what/of whom" . I suppose it can be seen that door is a part of a corridor... and corridor thus can be considered it's parent? It gets weird(er) when you say "there is NO door at the end of a corridor" (в конце коридора нет двери) and both words would end up as genitive
What about, "At the end of the corridor is a door." Must it be translated as "the door"?