Translation:Those people who are rich are flying over the mountains.
Isn't emberek people rather than men? Also, my wife says that amelyek should be used for inanimate objects and that akik would be more appropriate.
Yes, "people" would be a better translation. And yes again, "akik" should be used here.
I can never tell what translation they want for amelyik. It's either "which", "that", or "who", and no matter what I pick I'm always wrong.
Because that's sort of the opposite of what the Hungarian sentence says.
Your sentence talks about people who are rich. (Who is rich? The men who are flying over the mountains.)
But Duo's sentence talks about people who are flying over the mountains. (And who is flying there? Those who are rich.)
It's like the difference between "I eat what I see" and "I see what I eat".
What you say makes sense but the translation,I think, is a problem and the above guy's version should have been accepted - "those are rich men who are flying over the mountains" - and you all can submit your optional transitions for review
I agree with mizinamo. The Hungarian sentence has 'repülnek' in the main clause and 'gazdagok' in the subordinate clause. As it's not unnatural to keep this the same way in English, I see no reason to accept it the other way around. If anything, it could cause confusion by not defining clearly how the Hungarian sentence is built. And while the difference in meaning is subtle in this case, often it's not so, so it does matter what you put in each clause, you can't just mix them up (see mizinamo's example).
But yes, everyone can report what they feel to be correct and let the contributors decide. They have the final say in it anyway.
I translated it like that a few weeks ago but what's wtong with a simpler translation ( the rich people fly over the mountains) since often you translate azok as the?
"The PEOPLE who are rich are flying above the mountains" Nope only "The MEN" accepted here. I'm sure the énekesnők és művésznők will have something to say about that!
Those people fly above the mountains, who are rich.
Above is one of the suggested translations, but that doesn't seem like correct English to me.
"Those people who are rich are flying over the mountains."
Ennek a helyes fordítása szerintem az, hogy: Azok az emberek gazdagok, akik a hegyek fölött repülnek.
These nitpicky sentences are so annoying. I don't see anyone gaining anything from them. As a native speaker I find the nuance the creator is trying to point out arbitrary and subjective.
The correct solution does not sound natural in English. We would not say those, but rather the. Also, it is important to remember that although word order is very important in Hungarian, it is NOT in English. So, it totally means the same thing to say, "The people who are flying over the mountains are rich."
The correction you give is wrong: the people zre rich,not the mountains!
Who is saying the mountains are rich?? My sentence in no way says the mountains are rich!! If you think my sentence implies the mountains are rich, you don't have a good grasp of the English language.
It is pretty rude to say ami, amely, amelyik when we talk to/about a person or to/about people in Hungarian. I never said "ami" or "amely" to anyone, not even to my dog. People are not objects. You should always use WHO, aki (singular) or akik (plural).
Where do you see a "not"? I don't see "not rich" in either of the two versions at the top of this comment page.
Which sentence did you see?
what i wrote was wrong and in the solution it said the correct version was "..the men who are not rich..". but i just saw that the other correct solution is without "not", so its a mistake in one of those 2 i guess.
I wrote Those men who are flying over the mountains are rich. So many times it is marking my English sentences as wrong when I don't see anything wrong with it. I thought that instead of reporting a problem this time, I would check to see if this is indeed wrong. I am often just a little different in phrase order. Very frustrating section to get through, as I am communicating the ideas with very small differences and I'm wrong soooo often.