24 Comments
"To whom are we going for lunch?" is very awkward, I don't think anyone would realistically every use this sentence. Where I am from nobody uses "to whom" or "with whom." This seems like very formal old English if anything. Whenever I approach this question I feel like it's just trying to confuse me. Personally I think a more accurate translation would be something like: "Whose place are we going to for lunch?" I just have a problem with the word "whom" because it's really only found in books imo. English is much more casual than it used to be.
Well, that's still the closest equivalent and it's correct, even if not that common. Sure, I can add your answer, we can be more lenient with accepted translations if the sentence doesn't translate that easily.
I have no issue with "to whom" or "for whom". The problem with this English sentence is that you don't go to a person (whom), you go to a place. That's where I agree with Monica from above: "Whose place are we going to for lunch?" Duolingo's translation is bad English. You need a possessive + a location.
Maybe this sentence would make sense in British English but as an American i don't get it. Is this like "who are we going to lunch with?" Or "who's house are we going to eat lunch at?" Or "where are we going for lunch?"
Yuk.
The official answer is a bit formal, but certainly correct, and preferable to this one.
"Whose place/house are we going to for lunch?" is much better.
"Where are we going for lunch?" would maybe be the most likely thing to say, but of course that's not a translation for this polish sentence.
As you point out below, some sentences just don't translate easily. :-)
Nobody in England says this in all seriousness, although you might say it as a kind of humorous affectation.
In which case is "obiad"? I thought nouns following the preposition "na" were in the Locative case and therefore "obiad" would have an "e" at the end.
But it's not like something is literally on the lunch, right?
Eating something for some meal needs the meal to be in Accusative. I mean "na + Acc."
(Locative of "obiad" is "obiedzie", by the way).
That's a little bit too much, it assumes that they live in a house and not an apartment, right?
Have to agree that no native english speaker would ever utter this sentence, except an English teacher as a joke. I put "whose house are we having lunch at" and was marked incorrect. Yes, there is a distinction between house and apartment, but this is the most likely to be used.
Why is lunch not acceptable as a translation for obiad in this exercise?
761
I hate to pile on, but this sentence makes absolutely no sense in English. It may make sense in Polish, and I am sure it does, but NOT in English.
Yes. "To whom" sounds like you are probably going to someone's home, so you would be going "for dinner".
The only scenario I can think of where you might say "the dinner" is if you are talking about a specific dinner, like a Christmas dinner, an Awards dinner, a Farewell dinner, something like that. Then you might say "Where will the dinner be held?"
Looking at this discussion it seems weird that I got everything right apart from "going to lunch" instead of "going for lunch". However I'm pretty sure "going to lunch" should be ok too.
You do not go to a person; you go to a place. The English translation is not correct. To indicate the person, you must use the possessive "whose" + a noun to indicate the location.
