"I buy a table."
In a previous example は was used in a negative version of a very similar sentence (I do not buy chairs, いすはかいません)--why is it different in a positive sentence/are both just equally acceptable? I know を is used to indicate the object of the sentence and は is used to indicate the topic...
From what I've learned from others' comments along the way, the difference is only that は is used to emphasize the negative.
I've also noticed this pattern. In others' explanations of negative sentencing they often cite how it's phrased in Japanese. Negative sentences get read "as for the_, I do not (verb)." this phrasing makes it a subject and not a thing on the receiving end of an action.
Someone correct me if this is wrong.
"wa" isn't being replaced by "o" here. The full sentence is "watashi wa teeburu o kaimasu". The reason that "watashi wa" is ommited is because it can be implied from context that it is "I/me" who is buying the table.
This is the same structure as the question that translates to "I buy tables" but this one is "I buy table" so why is that one plural and this one is not? I think the plural or singular, neither were implied.
Same question. In an earlier example, the singular was not accepted as a response but now it gives the same sentence for singular too?
Edit: It didn't accept the singular form because I didn't write "Ill buy a table" but wrote "Ill buy table"