Translation:I will put a table in the room.
You'll find most children's books are written entirely in kana, so this is a perfect medium to get used to it. Give しろくまちゃんのほっとけーき a shot. If you can go through that without having to look for the kanji for a word, you've nailed it. Meantime, this is still in beta, so keep practicing your kanji then you'll be amazing at your progress when DL finally does extend to Kanken level 1.
There is a verb that means “to put”:
This isn’t the same verb as “to wake up”:
In the “ます” form they end up looking alike in hirigana (I think). As some people have discussed above this is one of the limitations of using only kana and not kanji. That discussion is well covered above in other comments if you’re interested.
My dude, my entire comment was towards learners who wouldn't have this knowledge. The two are ordinarily written differently in kanji, so anyone versed enough wouldn't get confused anyway.
This is a language learning site, you know. The dictionary hints weren't using the right translation.
"Okiru" (to wake up) is intransitive and does not take an object marked by "wo."
"Oku" (to place or put) is transitive and logically requires an object. There is, consequently, no ambiguity about the meaning of this sentence. "Oku" the consonant stem verb (kagyo henkaku) and "okiru" the vowel stem verb (kami ichidan) happen to be homonyms in the polite, non-past "masu" form. Most languages seem to have homonyms.
It is true that without being able to read kanji you can't read much that is written in Japanese. So, anyone who wants to be literate in Japanese has to learn kanji. It is also true that kanji is orthography which has little to do with grammar or syntax, is not a factor in conversation, has few, if any, benefits to learning conversation beyond differentiating homonyms (which is esentially what this conversation hinges on), and doesn't help much in talking to strangers. That being said, anyone who thinks he can really learn Japanese without learning some kanji is kidding hismelf. The question is not whether kanji has to be learned, but when to burden beginners with the extremely labor intensive task of learning it.
There is a long tradition, going back at least to the pre-WW II American linguists, of teaching conversation from Romaji. Having been taught by that method, I'm aware of its weaknesses and have always been slightly in awe of the Chinese linguists who learn kanji with vocabulary. I think that kanji should be introduced early and tend to favor the gradual build up you find in readers and children's books, but I'm not doctrinaire about this.
I do think grammar and conversation can be learned without kanji and that too rapid an insistance ơn kanji in a course like this would reduce the number of students very quickly.
Is there a way to report an accepted answer as wrong? Lol. I can't find one in the report menu.
I misread the sentence as《へやにテーブルをおきました》so I answered, "I put a table in the room" (past-tense). However, I don't think that this English translation should be accepted; as the Japanese sentence isn't past-tense, and the English one can't be future/present-tense, correct?
Yes, I agree.
English tends to use (to be) + present participle, e.g. "I am putting", for present tense and "I put" for present continuous (ongoing actions, actions in progress) or habitual actions. "Put" is weird because the past form is the same as the present; we don't add "ed" or anything. So a sentence like "I put the table in the room" is ambiguous without context.
I don't know at what point Duolingo gets to it, but for those interested in how Japanese explicitly marks ongoing or habitual actions, here's a link: