Translation:I met my mother in the park.
見る/見ました (みる/みました) and 会う/会いました (あう/あいました) aren't synonyms in Japanese too. 見る is to see, to view, to examine, etc. while 会う is to meet, to encounter. They're not interchangeable. Like, you cannot 会いました a movie but you can 見ました a movie. It's possible to 会いました with a friend and you can also 見ました a friend; however, if you 見ました a friend, it doesn't mean you have met face-to-face with that friend. It can mean that you just saw that friend from a far distance.
Absolutely, in general, but even now, they are only synonymous in certain contexts. If you say "I saw Jennie yesterday," for instance, it could mean that you sat down and had coffee with her, but also that you saw her from a distance and she did not even know you were there, whereas "I met Jennie yesterday" only means some substantial contact. In the specific sentence here "I saw my mother at the park" would indicate to me that you simply physically saw her, but did not meet up with her, while "I met my mother at the park" would indicate to me that you two made some sort of social contact.
This is true, but in English I've often said "I saw so-and-so" somewhere and meant that I met up with them, but likely by happenstance. I would even say "I'm going to see so-and-so" and mean that I'm going to meet up with that person. So, translating 会い to mean "saw" as in "meet" is correct. We aren't supposed to be just learning what the literal translations are, but also the realistic translation.
My guess is that 'saw' in this context is used in replacement of 'met' - even though they both aren't always synonymous in English - because perhaps a direct translation of '会いました' (met) might imply that a meeting for the first time is taking place, or perhaps that it sounds formal. If that were the case, 'saw' has more of a casual translation, despite the fact it can be interpreted literally as having physically witnessed someone.
I'll assume 会う can be translated into English as either to have met up with (or seen), but a direct translation back into Japanese wouldn't potentially be as accurate?
I'm still learning Japanese too though, and would love to have this nuance explained by someone. :)
In japanese 会います & 見ます are not interchangeable. The correct word to use in this situation is "met". I wish they would teach the actual meanings behind kanji instead of just suddenly throwing them in, because it helps with vocabulary a lot. The kanji for 会います is put together by the radicals for two (ニ) and private (ム), which together mean "a meeting". In English both "saw" & "met" would be correct, but not in Japanese.
I think it should be "meet" in this sense, not saw. Because then it can confuse a person on the use of 会います。For example it says the correct answer is "I saw my mother in the park" but this could mean either you saw her but did not approach her, as in from a distance OR saw as in you met with her, but the word 会います only means met NOT saw from a distance. :) just thought I'd add this
Yes, you have to memorize which particles go with which verbs, to some extent.
You can in fact と会います someone. As I understand it, use と if both parties set out to meet each other at some location; use に if only the subject travels, or if they meet by chance (which is presumably the case in this example).
You can't が会います someone. が marks subjects, not objects. (Although sometimes the object of a transitive verb in English will correspond to the subject of an intransitive verb or an adjective in Japanese.)
JamesmanX and Krista 298101, you can submit an error report and it might be added to the database. If it's not, I would say it's because 母 (haha) is a very formal and polite word that's better translated as "mother", though we don't have the same rigid kind of formality in English that Japanese has, so we might sometimes use "mum/mom" in a situation where a Japanese person has used 母.
I don't think of 母 as mother at all - I consider お母さん to be mother. Like English you can use お母さん to address or talk about your own or someone else's mother as a show of respect and politeness. However it's less likely that you would address someone else's mother as mum/mom so I feel mum/mom is a more accurate translation for 母. I will admit though that whereas in Japanese you would strictly use 母 only for your own mother in English you can use mum/mom when talking about someone else's mother - eg. How is your mum? so it's not a perfect equivalent.
I see what you're saying, but maybe our use of English and Japanese differs, because I call my own mother and my friend's mothers "mom", and I would use お母さん in the same situations in Japan. I would only use the word "mother" when I'm being super polite or formal, and I would only use 母 in Japanese when I'm in a formal situation.
IsolaCiao - I also call other friends' mothers mum (although only VERY close friends' mothers - there's only two friends' mothers that I call Mum) and I also call my mother-in-law mum. You may note that I was careful to say that it is "less likely" that you would "address" someone else's mother as mum/mom - less likely, not never : ) And I also pointed out that it's totally acceptable to use mum/mom when talking about someone else's mother in English, unlike Japanese. As for 母 you would use this in all situations whether they were formal or informal when addressing and/or talking about your own mother, but I would only use お母さん if I was being super polite to my mum (this wouldn't happen because my mum doesn't speak Japanese and is never going to learn it) and never when talking about her.
Sorry, I wasn't trying to imply that you hadn't said that, I was just trying to underline the situations where I use mom vs. mother. I think we use the English the same, but we differ on the Japanese. I have Japanese friends who use 母、母親、母上、 and お母さん when talking about their mothers to me. I also find that most people I know call their mother お母さん when talking to her in everyday situations.
This reminds me of how hard it is to learn proper selection or even use of particles in general as well as verb conjugation. I know certain verbs use certain particles. I have a basic understanding of verb tenses not including regular verbs. I think immersion has its place, but instead of 20 or so lessons per topic forcing phrases, they could use a short vocab section. I think there might be less questions asked if they taught you: particle, (particle)verb, verb conjugation, noun, adjective, etc.