Because they're working inside the fields, no one said the they work on the fields
:) In ukrainian language we say on the field(s), because people are standing ON the ground, not inside the ground. Thanks anyway.
In English, "ground" and "fields" are not the same. We "stand on the ground" but we "work in the fields". Fields includes the ground plus whatever grows above the ground. So if the grass, corn, etc were tall enough, you would in a sense be working "inside" the fields. But we say "in" the fields.
In Czech (and probably all Slavic languages) you also work ON the field, ON the garden... and when you describe a picture in Czech, you say that something is ON the picture :)
In Russian you work IN the field and IN the garden. But you can be only ON the picture ;)
It's really interesting how different languages handle prepositions. In German we say “ON the field/ picture/ street/ island (like Mallorca/ Madagascar et al.) “ but “I am IN England/ Australia/ Italy/ Greenland“ etc., and although I'm a native speaker I couldn't explain when to use which.
І think it
s more logic to be IN the room (closed space), in the city, in the country (closed border), but On the air, on the field, on the planet (open space). Its just a difference of abstract thinking :). But sometimes we also say "in the fields" when we mean the field of somebody, or some concrete field (has border), also when somebody goes from the city or villages - In the field (from closed border to other space). It`s interesting, but no need to change somthing on DL.
so you guys are ALL saying that we commonly say, "the family WORK." ?????? THAT'S ABSURD!
no in North America, family is singular, so we say "the family works" not "the family work"
Yeah, and that's totally WRONG. It's an issue with North American English comprehension. You cannot have a group of ONE (1).
e.g. A Crowd
A Sports team
All of those are plural. Period. In a sentence, it should be properly stated as "My family ARE coming for dinner tonight." or "The crowd ARE going wild about the great play." or "Chicago ARE a great baseball team."
This confusion is further exasperated by sports commentators who will change from singular to plural, mid sentence.
e.g. "The Alabama defense is tough and they will make a goal-line stand."
Again, this is simply a misunderstanding of plural and singular. The Alabama defense is ALWAYS PLURAL since you cannot have a defense of 1 (on a team). it makes no sense.
It takes a long time to get people to see this error, but yes, it's an error. I'm an American (USA) and I started changing the way I state these sentences to mirror correct English... you know, from ENGLAND!
How about words like "the state", "the senate" or "the army". They are all words for groups of people. Would you still say "The senate are acting on legislation."?
Yes. They're still plural. "The state" would depend on what you're talking about though. If you're talking about the state of AZ, then it's singular, as there's only one Arizona. However, if you're talking about the state as in a governing body, then it's plural.
Basically, just change "the [ whatever ]" to "they" and if the sentence still makes sense for how you're using it, then you know it's correct.
As another example, there are sports team with "singular" mascots. For instance, the Miami Heat or Tampa Bay Lightning. They aren't all of a sudden singular just because there's no "s" at the end of their name.
If one can say "The Bears are going to win the Super Bowl" then surely "Chicago are going to win the Super Bowl" is the exact same thing. I've not actually changed the subject, it's still the same team (group). Why people can't seem to understand this is pretty strange.
Almighty science, this seems a big issue for you. I am not sure why. In the UK both singular and plural are frequently used. In Italy no. Family is a singular I am told. Following the posts on here it would seem entirely regional. No wrong or right. UK US and Canada. A minor point surely?
it's only a minor point if you are ok with plurals being singular. I got the correct answer to this question either way... but it's still incorrect to think a group is singular. You can't have a group of 1 anything. it makes no sense from the off...
In Canadian and American English, it's singular, but in British English, it's plural, I believe.
The real issue here is: does DL accept "The family work in the fields."? To be absolutely correct the 3rd person singular should be used, but in UK English both "The family work" and "The family works" are commonly used and as such the translation "The family work" is correct .
It doesn't, no, I've had this issue on later lessons. Technically, duo is correct, because family is singular, but it seems unfair!
Yes but for people in the UK, family is plural so 'work' is right in their case
family is a collective noun no matter if you're canadian, american or british... family is a singular collective noun... like group, class, family, ect...
Family is also plural, see for example http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/family
I am not a native English speaker and the fact makes me curious. Then I do research on it...: http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/3053-My-family-are-(or-is)
Yes, but this does not appear to be a "hard and fast" Duo rule. They frequently give "I am + gerund" as an alternative translation of the present tense. Or is there an exception involved that I'm not seeing?
English often use the "ing" form when it is the present tense. Not quite the same thing in Italian
"the family" is singular. It takes 3rd person singular conjugation of the verb, ie "works"
You may be right, but this is a test of Italian not English, I think that should be allowed
Do you mean the family is working in the fields? La famiglia sta lavorando?
Something like that. Can the Italian sentence mean that they usually work in the fields (i.e. that's their workplace), or does it mean that they are working there right now? If it's the latter, it should be possible to translate the Italian sentence as "The family is working in the fields". Compare to another sentence. "I work at the library" would mean that I'm employed by or usually work at the library, but "I'm working at the library" means I'm there right now.
Why isn't present continuous accepted here? As in "The family is working in the fields."
I think 'works' is probably more accurate since 'family' is singular but it seems a bit predantic to reject 'work'.
I am told by my italian teacher that although uk would say family is plural, in Italy it is singular
It could be, but if we were being pedantic, if they were in the process of doing it right now it would be Sta lavorando
Couldn't they get a woman who can speak properly to record this? She puts L's in where there are none and doesn't put them in where there are. Fizzzzz!
I too hope, Duolingo will invest in better audio. The Italian voice as of now (2013, October) is not a woman. It is a computer, a synthesized voice.
put a family is made up of multiple individuals so 'they work' the fields. Whether one family or many would it be not be lavorano? If work is a verb then should it be lavorare?
Nope, doesnt work like that in Italy although we use both in UK . In Italy THE family is singular, 3rd pers Lavora
I think that's fine myself, seems 99% same meaning as the other. It's just not in the list of accepted words for this question. I guess more context would help .. is it a modern family driving machinery, harvesting fruit etc, or is it an old-time family hand-cutting hay etc, which would definitely be more a "laboring" meaning.
Why not "nel i campi" or "nelli campi" and rather excluding the L to make it "nei"
This should be "la famiglia lavorano..." You cannot have a family of ONE. Family, and every other group of people, is PLURAL... Always!
Almighty science. If you are translating into Italian, family is singular. Whatever pedantics may be present in English. You cannot logically argue. It is just so. Accept and walk on
so WHY did you fault my "the family work in the fields" when you have precisely this sentence as one of the two correct answers that you yourself ordained?
This sentence has caused a lot of discussion about English interpretation, and everyone has a good point. However I do sometimes think we get too hung up about English translation when we actually should be focussing on how it would be said in Italian. The family is singular in Italian, no question, although it can be singular or plural in English. Quite probably In the fields is correct in Italian. although in English it could be on or in. These fine translations can waste our energy. Translations are frequently an elastic interpretation. Lets just try to say it like an Italian would. Sometimes I make translations that are clumsy in English, just to focus on the Italian format
Great reply beetle. Most people are missing the point .. what's important here is the Italian usage, which it seems is 99.9% singular for "famiglia". As for in vs. on, well, the briefest of Italian courses will tell you that prepositions are completely idiomatic for each language. The food can be "in" the plate, or "on" the plate, and you must just "do as the Romans do" !
bravo! well done. still, however, if that is the case, you and/or duolingo should not then mount the high horse and fault our English, si?
sorry to have given that impression, I have no intention of criticising anyone's English
Maybe it was the singular of work needed ie the family works. See other posts
I would say that means something different. Working in the country is just a vague location, worling on/in the fields is agricultural, the way I read it