Translation:Sorry, we do not have soup but we do have rice and bread.
I support allowing "excuse me" in this sentence. Both "sorry" and "excuse me" are used for the two cases you mentioned (apologizing for the inconvenience you are about to cause and asking a person to forgive you for something you have just done).
For instance, if you accidentally bump into someone, you can say either "sorry" or "excuse me". And if you are about to tell a customer that you have no soup, you can begin your sentence with either "excuse me" or "sorry".
In both of these cases, the two ("excuse me" and "sorry") work as a polite way to soften whatever will follow.
In this sentence, I agree that the waiter might want to say "sorry" if the customer has already ordered the soup and it turns out that there isn't any, though "excuse me" would still be appropriate (and I've often heard waiters use it in exactly this context).
In fact, "excuse me" would be preferable if the people at the table are talking and the waiter has to interrupt them to deliver the bad news. To interrupt a conversation with "sorry" could seem a bit impolite.
If the waiter is approaching the table to take the order, then "excuse me" would make more sense. He's just alerting them that there is no soup, and just blurting out "sorry" before he says anything else could also seem somewhat abrupt.
To simply say "We don't have soup" is a bit abrupt in either example I just gave, so we need something to precede it. In English, either one works, and in this sentence, we do not have enough context here to decide if one would be slightly more appropriate than the other. (I'm a native speaker of US English, by the way; it may be different in the UK.)
It's poor English but looks like a fair transliteration of the Russian.
"Sorry, we don't have soup but have rice and bread" would be closer.
I would say "Sorry we have no soup but do have rice and bread". However I'm an American. Maybe English English is said differently?
There's a problem with just using "got" in the second clause. In that usage, the parallel construction of the two clauses is "we do not have", "(we do have) got", which is incredibly awkward and terrible English - so bad that it should not be allowed. Using "have" in the second clause instead makes the parallel construction valid: "We do not have", "(we do) have".
Not to mention the fact that Duo's frequent use of "got" is vulgar English and should be avoided by everyone, except in emphatic expressions, like "You have go to be kidding me!" or "I've got to leave now!"
Why is this app so narrow-minded? I translated this sentence as "Excuse me, we don't have soup, but we have rice and bread." which seemed perfectly fine. That "do" emphasis isn't particularly useful and I thought the only adequate way to translate "Извините" was "Excuse me". I am both confused and infuriated. But it is a free service, I guess.