Ne felejtsük el, hogy a magyarban sem mindegy a szórend. Ha felcseréljük, mást fog jelenteni a mondat. "Vannak autóim. (Ezért el tudom szállíttatni mind a húsz embert.)" "Autóim vannak. (Nem autóbuszom van. Ezért nem tud együtt utazni az egész csapat.)" Még ha el is fogadja a Duolingo a nem teljesen találó fordítást, (és akár, még ha azt is próbálja alapértelmezett fordításnak beállítani,) akkor is van egy jó és egy (vagy több) kevésbé jó megoldás. Bizonyosan meg lehet fogalmazni angolul is ezeket az árnyalatnyi (néha lényeges) különbségeket. Jó lenne, ha egy jó angolos, néha írna néhány egyszerű példát az ilyenekre.
Apologies it's beyond my abilities to reply in Hungarian.
In speech, English can emphasize different parts of a sentence by adding stress to a specific word. Any of the words in this sentence could be emphasized via pronunciation.
With stress on "I," it would emphasize than I am a person who has cars. There might be other people who also have cars, but I am among the class of people that have cars.
With stress on "have," it would emphasize that I now have cars, but might not have in the past, or might not in the future.
With stress on "cars," it would emphasize that it's cars than I have and am talking about, not something else.
In explaining that last version, I actually used another method English has to deal with these varying emphases: splitting the sentence (the technical term is "cleft construction"). The example is: "It's cars that I have."
The cleft construction for emphasis on "I" would be either "It is I that have cars" or "It's me that has cars." The former is very formal.
Of course, very often English would just make these distinctions by explaining the contrast being made: "I have cars, not trucks"; "I have cars now; I didn't have any before." For the have now vs. past or future case, I think this is the only option available in formal writing. In casual writing, the "have" could be set out apart visually some way: all caps, italics, asterisks.