Translation:You run over into the tall, blue building, you go up to the fourth floor, and you go into the ninth room.
The more natural way to say this in English would be:
"You run over into the tall, blue building, go up to the fourth floor, and go into the ninth room."
Adding "you" in each clause in English makes it sound like each clause is addressing a different "you".
Is the "over" necessary? I thought El denotes completion. So "you run into the tall blue building...." should be accepted?
Again, very pernickety. The word "over" is unnecessary in English. If you run into the building, the direction of travel is indicated by the whereabouts of the building. Moreover, we would never have this repetition of you. It's unnecessary. Once again, it's a case of seeing the model answer, memorizing it for the second attempt and firing it back.
When does 'el' translate as over and when does it translate as away? Having a hard time determining which translation to use with these sentences.
It's not the "el" on the verb that will tell you that. It's the suffix on the location (épületbe) that will tell you that. The "el" will generally tell you that this is not a progressing action, but rather a completed one. Direction of travel is indicated by declining the associated noun. "-be" tells you that the subject is moving into the target. If the sentence had been written instead as:
"Elfutsz a magas, kék épületből" it would have told you that you have run out of the tall blue building.
Like many other commentators here i can't agree with using "you" three times - one is enough
I don't think it is fair that words have been left out of the choices that are essential to a sentence. 12-04-2019
You have to think. If your name was "George Gershwin" and not Big Wayne, you may have been a different person. This is the last time I respond to your message because I have to learn a lot!!!!