I wrote 'you mustn't go right away' and it was accepted as correct, but the DL answer doesn't mean the same at all. So this leaves me a little confused, but further research suggests that I was wrong, and that the sentence denies that there is any obligation to leave, rather than saying that there is an obligation not to leave. (Though apparently some native speakers are sloppy about this.)
An Americanism I suspect. Despite their attempts to correct things like US spelling they do slip up on colloquial or ordinary usage in other parts of the English speaking world. The lack of a way to report errors like this is one of the more irritating features of an otherwise excellent way to learn.
That's hilarious. I use both, probably "go" more than "leave", but if I had to guess I would have put money on "go" being more common in the States and "leave" being more common in the Commonwealth. But I'm Canadian, so we get a very unhealthy mix of "UK English" and "American English" which can cause some confusion at times.
I didn't call her comment hilarious. What I thought was funny was that I would have thought the opposite of what helen said was true, as I indicated:
...if I had to guess I would have put money on "go" being more common in the States and "leave" being more common in the Commonwealth.
But thanks for your input.
Here "Sie müssen" can be "They have to" AND "You (formal!) have to" as well.
It can't be "She has to", because that'd be "Sie muss".
Without context or "Sie" being not the first word of the sentence you can't say if it is meant to be "they" or (formal) "you".
Only sentences like "Ich denke, dass sie nicht sofort gehen müssen." or "Ich denke, dass Sie nicht sofort gehen müssen." are unambigous.
Actually, neither of those sentences is correct English. What is your native language?
I was referring to the expression "moderately correct". The word "correct" is boolean. Oh, and just so that you know, one doesn't object against :-) I have German guests in my holiday home at the moment. I was looking forward to a bit of practice, but it turns out they speak better English than I do and have been away from Germany for so many years, they no longer have the confidence to speak German. Funny old world.
Duo is right in this case, even if they may not have explained this. So don't be frustrated, but rather take this as a learning opportunity. This is how languages are learned; you try new things, make mistakes, get corrected, and learn from these corrections. In my opinion, if you never get anything wrong, then you're not doing it right.
As for this sentence, müssen is often thought of by English speakers as being "must". However, this is not true. It is a false friend and means "to have to". Since "must" and "have to" mean the same thing in affirmative sentences, this often goes unnoticed, but when we get to negative sentences, "must not" and "not have to" definitely do not mean the same thing. So this would be "you do not have to go immediately". For "must not", you would need to actually say "may not", which is "nicht dürfen".