1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Romanian
  4. >
  5. "I have a turtle."

"I have a turtle."

Translation:Eu am o broască țestoasă.

November 21, 2016



If "Eu am o țestoasă" is also a correct solution, what would "broască" ever be needed?


"Eu am o țestoastă" is perfectly correct.


Yes, I know. That's what it told me when I got it wrong. But I want to understand why turtles would be referred to as "broască țestoastă", if simply "țestoastă" is enough. It seems to indicate that broască literally translates to frog, so it's seems like saying "frog turtle", which makes no sense.


Broască țestoastă is literally "shelled frog"


So just saying țestoastă is like saying, "shelled" and that is enough to refer to a turtle without ambiguity?


Because "broască țestoasă" is the original, full name. "Țestoasă" is an adjective that became a noun for "turtle" in day-to-day speech, because it's shorter and unambiguous.


Hard to say, but when I hear the word „broască” I know it's either a frog or a turtle (although you usually refer to a frog when you just say „broască”). So „broască” has a broader meaning.


Is it common to just say "țestoasă" without the "broasca"?


I am more old school ;), I only know it as ”broască țestoasă”, but I would certainly understand the meaning of ”țestoasă” even if it would be used without ”broască”.

Learn Romanian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.