Why not "Lew nie jest psem?"
That's also a correct and even starred answer.
Alright. I had chosen 1 answer but it was supposed to be 2 answers
Yes, gotta be careful with those exercises.
Why can nie not come before to in this sentence?
to is not a verb, there is a "hidden jest". It is "to nie (jest)".
Why can't the answer be "lew nie to psem?"
It's to pies, or jest psem, can't explain why, maybe someone else can
"Pies" is not "dog" but "feet"
That is preposterous...
I think it's a joke (or confusion) - it is "feet" in Spanish ;)
Please explain the difference between the two correct answers
In most cases, those constructions ("Lew to nie pies" and "Lew nie jest psem") are equally fine.
Then why was i marked wrong?
I said "lew nie to pies" and it's wrong. If "to" means the same as "jest" and if we're supposed to put "nie" before "jest". Why do we then not put "nie" before "to"?
Because to and jest are not the same thing. The negation precedes verbs (to is not a verb) and less commonly pronouns or nouns.
I usually say that you can imagine there's an invisible 'jest' in the sentence, because actually "Lew to nie jest pies" is also correct, just rare. And then you can just think about negation as negating this invisible 'jest'.
Very useful explanation, thanks
I love pies. Especially cherry.