Translation:Yesterday, I put my cell phone next to the bed.
Be aware, that 起きる (おきる, to get up, to wake up) and 置く (おく, to put, to place) share the same long-form conjugation, namely おきます, which is doubly troublesome since this sentence involves a bed.
@gyJe7QcR: okimasu 起きる vs 置く
(1) 起きる is intransitive; 置く, transitive.
(2) 起きる is a vowel-stem verb; 置く, a consonant-stem one.
(3) Although 起きる has a flip-flopping 中高 pitch pattern and 置く, the more common 平板 one, the -maꜜsu forms coincide because the affix forces a downstep [ꜜ].
Mobile phone is a more international term then cell phone, no? It should probably be an acceptable translation.
Mobile phone was accepted for me, so guess they must have updated it if it didn't accept it before.
I disagree. To me, "left" would imply that it was placed there then abandoned in some way. "Put" wouldn't carry any further implication about what happened next.
What is the difference between tonari and yoko? Is tonari for people and animals only?
となり can actually be used for anything as long as they're in the same category. If you're talking about two houses, apples, dogs, textbooks, etc., you use となり, but if you're talking about a house next to a dog or textbook, you use よこ
I realise that nowadays, 'phone' usually refers to a cellphone, but in the context of learning, it's better to avoid ambiguity and use unambiguous terms like 'cellphone' to show your understanding of the sentence. Otherwise I could just say that you didn't really understand what 'けいたい電話' means.
If you only use "mobile", that should work, but "phone" alone is not the complete translation even though that's how most people would say it probably.
I gave the same answer and it was incorrect. Apparently, it's "the phone" and "my bed"
One problem with this is that it accepts "my cell phone" but not "my bed."
I wrote beside rather than next to. It means the same thing to me in English.
"Yesterday, I put the phone next to the bed" should really be an acceptable answer :/ it's perfectly ordinary to refer to a mobile phone as just a phone
In the previous lesson "harimasu" was used to mean "to put". What's the difference between it and "okimasu"?
張ります (harimasu) means "to stick; to paste; to affix". 置きます (okimasu) means "to put; to place".
My translation was : "Yesterday I put a cellphone next to the bed." Why do I need the "my", how would be the Japanese sentence in my case?
My brain automatically identified おきました as 起きました and not paying much attention I translated this as "Yesterday, I woke up next to my cell phone in bed"....... 寝た方がいいですね・・・ >__>
Using Chrome on Mac OS, Duolingo is asking me to enter the answer in Japanese. Using the japanese character entering feature of Mac OS, I do that but the answer is never recognized as correct, even when it is perfectly matched to the feedback given by Duolingo.
Next time this happens, cut and past both your answer and the "correct" answer into a discussion page and we'll help to analyze it to see if there are any differences you didn't notice.
The English sentence is not very natural is you use 'put'. It makes so much more sense to be 'left'. Bad Duolingo.
Don't feel bad. I said "beside" instead of "next to" and it said WRONG!
I typed "handphone", which is the equilavent to cell phone and my answer was rejected. T_T
Never heard of that term before. Can you show me usage from a native English source?
I've only heard it in foreigner English in Korea and Singapore. Most people in those places don't realise native English speakers never use the term.
Yes Germans think Handy is English (still last time I was there in 2012) and Koreans and Singaporeans think handphone is English. Maybe Malaysians too?
Depending how good their English is of course.
The Japanese sentence does not include any reference to the posession of the phone. So the translation should be "the cell phone" not "my cell phone".
You are posting the same comment under half the phrases. Perhaps you're just wrong?
Or maybe the person writing this sentences made the same mistake each time and I am trying to help clarify the incorrect translation everywhere I see it?
In Japanese, possessive pronouns can be assumed from context unlike in English. Objects will often pick up possession status from whatever/whoever the topic is. The times you can be sure its a definate or indefinate are when it's obvious from context. Otherwise it could be either. Therefore it's perfectly correct for them to use "my" for all of these examples.
Even though it's correct, the direct and default translation should not include the possessive if it's not explicitly mentioned in the Japanese sentence.
If the Japanese does not explicitly include a possessive, an indefinite article, a definite article, a demonstrative, or a plural and is translated literally to English it becomes broken English: "Yesterday, I put cell phone next to bed."
Probably both should be accepted. Certainly the one which doesn't imply ownership should. Similarly with the bed.
You either imply ownership or imply definiteness, neither of which are in the Japanese, or you imply something else. Both should be accepted. Neither is better than the other.
that's why it uses "my", it's implicit in the sentence who is the owner of the cell phone
It's not really implied, it's assumed. To translate to English you need an article, possessive, demonstrative, or plural. The Japanese does not include any of these and cannot include several of them. "A phone", "my phone", "phones", and "the phone" are all grammatically correct but only "my phone" and "the phone" also sound semantically natural. Those two should be equally acceptable.
My is not implicit. There is nothing in the sentence to indicate who the cell phone belongs to. What if the preceding sentence in this conversation is "Have you seen my cell phone?" and this answer would be "Yesterday I put THE cell phone next to the bed." Or it could even be "your cell phone" or "his or her" cell phone. The sentence by itself contains no indication or context for possession so I think that "the" cell phone is the most appropriate translation.