"A magas fához izraeli diákok ülnek."

Translation: Israeli students sit at the tall tree.

[kowalsky2]

In the case of the verb "sit", I think it would be enough to differentiate between the suffixes -hoz, -hez, -höz, and -nál, -nél by using "sit down" instead of just "sit".

The makers of this course seem to force everywhere the preposition "to", but as several people have noted, it just doesn't fit certain verbs in English, like stand or sit, which can't contain any movement apart from the change in one's position if accompanied with up or down.

My English is far from perfect, but Hungarian is my native language, and as the translation of "we sit down by the tree" I don't feel any difference in meaning between the constructions "a fához ülünk", "leülünk a fához", or even "leülünk a fánál". "We sit by the tree" (without "down"), would be "a fánál ülünk" (without the prefix "le-"). And in this case I would certainly use "leülünk" instead of just "ülünk", it sounds more natural.

[Kathy979841]

Again the same problem about moving to translating in english. Three in a row. Please review the whole exercise duolingo

[mizinamo]

Again a report about a mistaken sentence in the wrong place (sentence discussion, rather than using the "Report a problem" button or the flag icon in an app). Three in a row. If you want to reach the developers, please use the proper channels fabianpanzio

[Takaaritamo]

As you can see, despite your comment from two years ago, this mistake still exists. I am a native Hungarian (just in case a language teacher, who wants to help develop a more flexible Hungarian module) and I report every such case. Sometimes there is an immediate reaction (I receive an e-mail message, that my suggestion is accepted), but in many cases a long time passed by without any reaction from the developers. That is why I also started writing comments in the forum.

[ljikontic]

Thanks for comment.After two years it seems a little bit not so angry but what can we do.Thanks also for your aim to make some kind of ''takaritas'' in these sentences

[NikolaiBezdomny]

In sentences like this, saying "sitting to the tall tree" makes no sense in English. The correct translation is "sitting against the tall tree"

[mizinamo]

I disagree; I think a better translation is "go and sit down at the tall tree" -- indicating that there is movement which terminates in sitting.

[Arpad737071]

A magas fához izraeli diákok ülnek. -> Israeli students are sitting down at/to (?) the tall tree.
A magas fánál izraeli diákok ülnek. -> Israeli students sit at the tall tree. or Israeli students are sitting by the tall tree.

[Jason460177]

I agree. In addition to what has already been said, use of "at" accompanying the verb "sit" is only appropriate in limited situations like sitting at a table. Even putting aside the issue of "sit" not implying motion already discussed, I can't imagine anyone ever sitting"at" a tree. "By" would be much more common, or "next to" or "under". And in those cases I would probably lean towards "a fánál" or "a fa mellett" in Hungarian. I'm not a native speaker, but "a fához ülni" seems akward and doesn't carry much meaning to me.

[ain15412]

I wonder if using a "-hoz" suffix is correct here? After all, the students are not moving, they are stationary. Wouldn't then "a diakok a fanal ülnek" or "a diákok a fa mellét ülnek" be a more adequate translation?

[kowalsky2]

It is correct. A diákok a fánál ülnek does not imply any change whatsoever, it just means the students sit by the tree (not as in sit down). Mellét is spelled wrong. If you meant to say A diákok a fa mellett ülnek, that would be similar to the former translation. A diákok a fa mellé ülnek would be interchangeable with the -hoz version.

I wonder if the source of your confusion is the verb sit, which can mean both being in the position and getting into the position. If you interpreted the English sentence with the former meaning, then you're right that the Hungarian sentence doesn't match. Perhaps it would be better if they used the unambiguous sit down instead.

IIRC, the main translation used to be Israeli students sit to the tall tree, but it was later changed due to the complaints that the usage of the preposition was unnatural. This new translation (Israeli students sit at the tall tree) might have presented a different problem :)

[ain15412]

Thanks for clarification. You have pointed out the source of my confusion correctly - it is the verb " to sit (down)". so you are right - "Perhaps it would be better if they used the unambiguous sit down instead"

[Takaaritamo]

This translation (without "down") rather means: A magas fánál (általában, not now) israeli diákok ülnek/szoktak ülni.

[ErdemYlmaz17]

As i understand, is there a movement ? We are in a movement to sit next of the tree. An if we have sat, that means az fanal ülnek ? i am right ?

[Andrew838127]

So let me get this straight. Duo asked me to translate " I go and stand at the mirror." I said "A tükörhöz megyek és állok." I was marked wrong. It wanted "A tükörhöz állok." Now, when I am asked to translate this sentence, I say "Israeli students go and sit at the tall tree." Marked wrong. Is there actually a fundamental difference between the relationship between ülni + -h_z and állni + -h_z? Or what?

[JBHayven]

What about "Israeli students sit next to the tall tree"?

[AUcn9]

1. A magyar mondat furcsán hangzik.
2. "Another correct solution" "Israeli students are sitting at the tall tree" actually does not sound correct. afaik a fánál ülnek - are sitting by the tree leülnek a fához - sit down by the tree odaülnek a fához - go sit by the three

[GregWood15]

Looking back at the Hungarian from the point of view of topic focus verb, it seems that this sentence is: Now, talking about the tall tree, you know there are Israeli students are sitting by it. It would be far more likely the the Israeli students would be the topic. Most of us struggle with word order and it certainly doesn't help to receive such mixed messages as this.

[JereArmen]

Why is "fához" preferable to "fánál"?

[GregWood15]

I tend to have a problem with such translations myself, but the argument goes that that the English "sit" (rather than "are sitting") describes the action of getting into the sitting position rather than being in it. In this case, that action involves movement towards the tree and hence "-hoz". Had they already been standing by the tree, when deciding to sit, then, in all likelihood, the tree would not have been mentioned.