Translation:I don't take taxis.
には would be nice to have a more in depth lesson on. Does duolingo do grammar lessons?
To understand には it helps to first consider what function に and は have on their own.
は sets the topic or scope of discussion. Xは... is sort of like "As for X..." or "When it comes to X..." - you should imagine a sort of more general context and we're zooming in on X. It can sometimes have a mildly contrastive effect, putting emphasis on the fact that X is what we're discussing and not something else.
に sets the target location of an action (either in space or time). It's like "at" or "in" or "on". When you throw a ball to そこ, it's そこにボールを投げる, whereas if you're standing at そこ when you throw, it'd be そこでボールを投げる.
If we combine these, we're placing the focus of discussion on the target location where things are happening.
Here, we're putting emphasis on "taxi" as being what we're talking about, at the same time as making it the target of 乗りません that is, the thing we're not taking. Probably in English we'd express this emphasis just with a bit of intonation - some extra stress on the word "taxis". A sentence like "As for taxis, I don't take them." gives the right idea too though.
Basically right and good explanation. There are two things to add: - は can be combined with any article. But in case of が and を, the original particle will be replaced by は, any other particle will still be used before the は - As you mentioned in the first explanation, は sets the topic or scope. But at the end you write emphasis. That's not what I would say. The topic is the thing/person/animal/plant you are talking about in general, not the new or important information that you provide. Therefore, the use of は can often have the opposite effect of an emphasis (see all the explanations of the difference between using は and が when the topic is in the role of the subject). Furthermore, the topic is so unimportant that after it is made clear once, you can just leave it out in the following sentences, similiar to how we use pronouns instead of using the same word again in western languages. That's why we have all there sentences where we do not know the subject or object - because the topic is omitted because in a real conversation it would be (hopefully) clear from the context or because it was previously mentioned. Therefore, the focus of the conversation is often the part that is not the topic. A possible reply could be 私が乗ります。 - I take "them"/the taxis. (With a stress on I - and the topic "them'" is still the one marked in the previous sentence, since there is no new topic provided. The stress would be on "I" here.) This is just my understanding, correct me if I misunderstood something.
This is how I understood it
タクシーは乗りません means "I do not ride taxis"
while タクシーには乗りません means "I do not ride in taxis"
Hope it helps you
I think you've hit on something. I suspect a large part of this seemingly odd double marker is the fact that noru is only used as an intransitive so it makes the に compulsory for taxis, and as others have mentioned, Taxis is the topic marker so it gets the は as well!
In that case "I don't ride IN taxis." Would be the better translation to understand both particles being there.
Could you please expand the kanji terms in hiragana. It would make it much easier. Thanks
Gonna copy-paste my answer for a similar question here.
the other comments are not wrong but here's a more straightforward answer: typically you add は after に if the verb (in this case "ride") is in its negative form. (e.g. "I do not ride taxis" - "タクシーにはのりません") You usually don't add は after に otherwise, unless you specifically want to mark "takushii ni" as the topic, although I can't think of a case where it would make sense to do so.
Duolingo doesn't really do a good job of explaining verb negation or just particles in general. Here's a pretty good explanation of how you can use particles in negative form: https://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/japanese-particles-change.html
They typically have some kind of grammar lesson for each skill on the web version. Kind of like a short write-up of important things to note before you take the lesson. They have yet to do something like that for iOS and Android, though.
Is タクシーに乗りません the same thing? Does the use of は after the に make the statement more general? Like, "I generally do not take taxis" as opposed to "i am not taking the taxi (later)"?
タクシーには乗りません marked wrong even though 乗りません would be the normal way of writing it.
I made a mistake indeed by saying "don't get in the taxi", but "get in" should be accepted, don't you think ?
I wonder this as well. Duo accepted this translation for the affirmative "I get in the taxi" but then wrong for the negative, as in this example.
I'm wondering if のり sometimes means 'get on' as it is given in the hint, because I wrote 'I don't get on a taxi' and it marked me wrong
If you were talking about a train or bus or ship, "get on" would be a more natural translation. In English, usually we say "get in" for taxis (or cars).
oh you're right, now that I think about, 'get in a taxi' sounds better than 'get on'
Probably because getting on is used for trains ... for cars or taxis, getting in is considered more appropriate. English is not my mother tongue, but that's what I understood.
To help remember this verb, I think of somebody climbing on a sheet of "nori" and flying away as if it were a majic carpet (norimasu - to get on/in, to board)
I wrote " タクシーには乗りません” and it told me it was incorrect? and the only reports I could do on it were for incorrect Japense, it didn't have the 'My answer should have been right" option. I don't think I was supposed to type the English, right?
Wait, "take" is appropriate here? I mean, I guess I understand it, but I thought it was translated into "ride." "Take" implies a specific destination, while "ride" doesn't. Like, "I'll take a car (to go to the hospital)" as opposed to "I'll ride a car" which isn't shortened English and just means what it means. The purpose isn't implied in the latter sentence. Maybe the person needs to go somewhere, but maybe he just wants to go for a ride. Admittedly, though, "take" can be short for "take out for intended use," too. I think this may come from wondering which route to "take," so it implies making a choice on how to go about achieving something specific (such as arriving at a particular destination.) So it answers "how will you do it?" rather than just "will you do it?"
This may seem like English semantics, but that's because I'm more interested in understanding the thoughts behind the words than 1:1 translations (not that the latter isn't also important. I just think that if you understand the reason behind the sentence construction, and the idea behind what a person's saying, then it sets you up for learning the rote stuff more easily and you have a deeper understanding altogether. So, I don't what to just know "what" but "how" and (most importantly) "why." After all, all sentences start as ideas/thoughts that want to be expressed. The sentences that are formed from them are just a way of achieving that expression.)
I do not take taxies is incorrect even though don't isn't formal English o.o
"catch" is exactly synonymous to "take" when speaking of riding in taxis, should definitely be accepted