There is no correction, you basically said the same: https://www.gotquestions.org/good-God-alone.html And yes He did, (Luke 18 ), the Apostle Paul explains it in the book of Romans... that's the conclusion of proper understanding of the Law of God in light of the Holy Scripture and that's the experience of all holy people in the Bible, the Apostle Paul said "wretched man that I'm" (Romans 7), "the righteous" Job said "I'm vile" (Job 40) and one of the greatest prophets in the Bible, Isaiah said "I'm man of unclean lips, living among people with unclean lips"... (Isaiah 6)
I disagree. No one is not good and no one is not bad, but everyone is good and everyone is bad. Everyone has a little of each in them.
Say, did anyone notice that one of the hover hints for good was possession and another property. Did anyone try "No one is property." ? I doubt it would work, but I was just wondering. Wait, I found it! "Gut" would have had to be capitalized as a German noun to mean estate or property or possession. Good to know. Yes, it is accepted as capitalized in the Listen and type in German section of this lesson, because it sounds the same. "Güter" = "goods" http://en.pons.eu/translate?q=gut It won't let me get you there directly, so press the search button.
In English, ok does not equal good.
if I was sick and a friend asks about my family, I might reply "No one is ok." or "Everyone in my family is sick."
If a person asked me who to trust and they were all bad people, my answer is "No one is ok." Sort of a slang used without saying everyone is morally corrupt.
No one is good might mean:
None of the musicians can play music well.
I am not sure of your question. I find that no one and nobody are completely synonymous and interchangeable in English. So are you asking for a German synonym to niemand, or do you find a meaning difference between no one and nobody? There are other ways to express niemand in German like kein Mensch or even kein Teufel
Actually, no one is well would not be this sentence in German. To be well is a very unique concept in English. Gut is both an adjective and an adverb, so it is a good translation for both good and well, but not here. The English use of the adverb well in a place which is essentially for a predicate adjective, not an adverb, is unique, at least in my experience. Both the verb to be and sein are what are called linking verbs. They link the subject and the predicate, whether it is nouns or adjectives, as a sort of equal sign. But with the adverb well, and only that adverb, we let it in effect modify the verb to be to speak about health. But German doesn't allow that. In German, when gut means well, it is modifying another adverb, an adjective or a verb. The German way to say No one is well would be Niemand GEHT's gut. Here, gut modifies gehen. That is also, of course, how you respond to Wie geht's dir to say how you are. I am well is Mir geht's gut.
If "no one" was rejected for you, it was probably a Duo fluke. It is the answer written above this stream. I knew it would be only because I never type the word nobody except in dialog for the reason you mentioned of it being less formal. I knew I could never translate Niemand, nadie, nessuno or the appropriate word in any of my languages on Duo if they didn't accept no one.
You need to specify the last sentence. Exercise sets vary, so what your last exercise was is probably different from most of ours. If this were Spanish or one of the other languages that routinely use double negatives, I could guess the issue, but here I can't. Someone in German is generally jemand.
No. I have never even seen that. Where is "locally"? I've lived in and around Boston in the northeast and San Diego in Southern California. I know I would have noticed. I am forever trying to make no one one word if I am tired or not thinking. I have heard sentences like No one person can do it all, but that use is much rarer than no one meaning nobody. I can't really see how they would possibly be confused.
But that's still interesting. I am always interested in Language forms that only exist in writing. Language is built around the spoken form, and I am assuming that you don't say no hyphen one. Languages do sometimes adopt a written standard to represent some sort of distinction in words. German does it by capitalizing Sie. But obviously when speaking, neither the lack of the capital letter nor the lack of the hyphen prevent the message from being correctly received. And if that is true, obviously the orthographic difference is not required to differentiate meaning. It's just what you were taught. I am not saying that there's anything wrong with orthographic methods of distinguishing forms and uses. I'm just saying it isn't actually making a difference in the language.
There is a Grammarly lesson about this. Sadly for anyone wishing to use it, 'noone' seems 'illegal'. Grammarly advises that No-one is not technically incorrect but that its uses are 'more limited' than no one. On a completely separate note, the US English Y'all is rare here. It seems from Duo that it is a US wide expression? No-one is not technically incorrect may be a touch of Southern disdain? :-)
P.S. I am completely baffled by the font changes and vapourizing asterisks!
I actually have embrase y'all as a language learning tool for teaching the plural you. I am from the Northeast originally, and have never lived in the South. In fact, I know I participated in parodying it's use with quotes like from The Beverly Hillbillies. (Y'all come back now. Hear.). But it is something that is seen as one word that represents a plural you in English. All the other verbal representations of plurality for you involve a second word (you all, you guys, etc). I have seen many a student struggling with finding the "all" or the "guys" in the Spanish sentence. I don't know if there is a British equivalent, but it's the best English representation of a plural you which everyone knows, whether they would ever actually use it or not (because it is stereotypical). I doubt many people would even recognize "ye", the plural familiar you that disappeared five hundred years ago. So some example of an English speaking culture that is familiar helps with the concept.