I have a suspicion that most of these phrases should be translated merely "hello," "good morning," etc. A number of languages have greetings for various times of day or various degrees of respect, but to translate them literally into English would be ludicrous. I understand the worry that the student will try to use the greeting in the wrong context, but that lack of context is simply the great weakness of Duolingo. It has many strengths, especially for those of us whose only interest in most languages is reading and the pure joy of the language itself, but for those who want to learn to speak properly in context, Duolingo could only be a starting point.
Except that my simple sentence is part of Duolingo, which is crowdsourced at every point (if I understand that word properly). I find that the original program is very good at exercise and most of the time not very good with elucidation, though the Swahili has very good Tips and Notes to begin with here. In a sense, it is a bit like immersion, except that the sentences have no context, so one cannot rely on context clues. I find, though, that when I need a particular form explained to me, these discussion boards do quite nicely. The Welsh and Vietnamese programs, for instance, have very few Tips and Notes, but there are always native speakers on the discussion boards enthusiastic about explaining any nuance of their language.
I couldn't disagree more. While I understand that there are a lot of people who feel like you do (maybe even the majority of people), not all of us see it this way. I understand and appreciate the value of a "human translation", where one translates the spirit of the message rather than what's being said (like translating all of these phrases as "hello", "good morning", etc.). You're certainly not wrong.
But some of us (myself included) also find great value in the literal translation. From this perspective, we're not translating English phrases in our minds. We're instead first telling ourselves, "okay, this English phrase is arranged 'this' way in X language", and then we translate 'this' into the target language.
Whether you're dissecting the literal translations and remembering what they're used for (which can be a mnemonic device in and of itself—it's almost comparable to method acting, in a way; trying to 'get into the headspace' of someone who speaks the language natively as much as we can), or remembering the human translations and thinking about them as just alternative versions of the same set phrases, I don't think it's important. I think what's important is that you're doing what works for you. I think that both methods have merit.
As such, I've always held to the idea that—especially due to the lack of situational context inherent in the nature of this platform—Duolingo should allow both human and literal translations. I also think it would be an improvement if, upon correct translation of a sentence, it would specifically tell you if your translation was literal or not. And, if literal, it could also tell you what a valid human translation could have been. Then everyone would finally be able to put this argument to rest and just approach it whichever way they want to approach it.
But that's just like, my opinion, man.
I really would appreciate if a native speaking person could finally explain the real meaning of this phrase. As others before me I do not understand the exclamation mark at the end of the english translation. It probably is a very common statement. I would like to use it well - and I am not even an english native speaker …