Translation:The children are sitting at the table and eating.
I wrote "The children are sitting and eating at the table" as a translation, and it corrected me with the above sentence. But I'm not sure whether to report this, because even though the two sentences seem equivalent, I'm wondering if my phrasing isn't as good, or natural sounding. If I get responses saying that my translation is OK, I'll report it, but I wanted to check here first. Thanks.
May I get an expert opinion please? Is there some subtlety that eludes me in the Hungarian sentence that indicates ülnek must be actioned first, then esznek? I took it as the actions being equal thinking that the whole purpose of the children sitting at the table was because it was lunchtime. My answer, "The children are sitting and eating at the table." was accepted, but I'm curious why it would be interpreted as a two-part action. What am I missing? I'm still earnestly trying to think like a Hungarian - but obviously not smart enough yet!
Thanks RyagonIV for your comment, but Bastette54 thank you, is correct. I was querying why would you would say "sitting at the table and eating" rather than both actions being sequential but equal, as "sitting and eating at the table." Hard to explain in English, could never manage to do so in Hungarian.
The above sentence could also translate as "The children at the table ...", depending on your emphasis of the sentence. But you can also do it with such a relative clause:
- A gyerekek, amelyek az asztalnál vannak, ülnek és esznek.
- Azok az gyerekek ülnek és esznek, amelyek az asztalnál vannak.
- The children that are at the table are sitting and eating.
Don't forget that you need a verb in the relative clause. It sounds a bit odd, though, identifying the children as "being at the table" first, and then saying that they are sitting. Better would be:
- Azok a gyerekek esznek, amelyek ülnek az asztalnál. - The children that are sitting at the table are eating.