Translation:I live in Tokyo.
Ikr!!! I really wish they had a button to toggle on as much kanji as possible
Why no は after に in this one? Translating similar sentences the other way around would fail me if I didn't include the 'ha' after 'ni'.
It was used in the negated sentence as a contrast particle to the place you really live at.
As the statement in the other example sentence here is probably just a statement, where you live, which does not need to be contrasted, there is no は there.
From what I understand, には would be used in a negative sentence such as いいえ、とうきょうにはすんでいません。 I'm still new at this though so I'm sorry if that's not right
Aki-kun is right. According to Nihonshock¹, "in Japanese, topics (は) are often used to illustrate contrast". And it gives an example:
"Watashi wa chikoku shita : I was late. (used when some other relevant person was not late, or it is not known if they were late)"
So Aki-kun has an excellent example.
I've never seen WA used after NI in these circumstances. It doesn't seem necessary?
I think in this sentence you omit "わたしは" therefore you already have a は in the sentence and you can't have two.
は would be used to introduce the topic of tokyo, but in most situations if you are saying this sentence it doesn't seem especially necessary to do so.
Tokyo is not the subject of the sentence, though, and は is for subjects. It's not what is carrying out the action. Tokyo is not the "who?" or "what?" that lives. It's the object of place that received the action. It answers (I) live "where?". (I) is the subject.
は is for topics AND subjects; so is が. The only difference is that が is used for when just introducing something.
Ilyakamens is technically right, although が can be for object too. Check out this link: http://www.guidetojapanese.org/blog/2007/09/03/repeat-after-me-there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-subject/
Beyond what ilyakamens has already mentioned, I would like to add that "Tokyo" in this sentence is not an "object of place", it is an adverbial of place. It does not "receive the action" (if it did, there would be no "in" in the English sentence), it is merely the place where the action happens.
LordOfTheAndain, you are partially right. There's no object in this sentence. However, simply "Tokyo" is not an adverbial of place. According to the British Council, though, "in Tokyo" can be considered the adverbial of place¹. Note that there is a "ni" after "Tokyo" in Japanese.
As a beginner, it seems right to me (i.e., progressive tense), but I was marked wrong for it.
"I am living in Tokyo"- typo in your comment but they didn't accept that for me either.
In English it is correct, but it's more natural for native English speakers to say "I live in Tokyo" as "I am living" would indicate a silent "right now" after the sentence, as if to say "I am living in Tokyo right now, but may move out later" and that isn't the answer here.
"Wa" is sometimes used as a contrast in Japanese. Check out Aki-kun's and mine answers above.
It's 住んでいます (すんでいます) from 住む (すむ), ultimately. It is construction that equates to "... ing" in English; the sentence actually translates to "I am living in Tokyo", but a more natural English translation is "I live in Tokyo".
Tokyo in living I am (wastashi is understood). Polite masu form is sumimasu = to live.
Can I use MASU instead of DEYIMASU? How do we know when to use MASU and DEYIMASU?
Duolingo checks the exercise right no matter if i type "I live" or "you live". So which is actually right?
They are both correct, in this sentence the subject is omitted so you would say it this way if it was obvious to whom you are referring
住んで is the て form of the verb 住む. to make simple, the て form is used here with the verb いる (います is its formal conjugaison) to indicate a continuous or progressive sense (the progressive be -ing).
東京に (in Tokyo) 住んでいます (be living).
It's kind of impossible to explain it in a general sense, but an oversimplication would be to call it "participle". For example, this sentence could be translated as "I have lived in Tokyo" (meaning you still lives). But it has a wide-range usage. Check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugation#te_form
Why does it sound like
Tokyo WA ni sundaimas?
There is no WA, but the audio sure sounds like they added on in - and it's in a weird location.
Because it doesn't get a separate syllable. If you write it " とうきよ" it becomes tou-ki-yo instead of tou-kyo
When it's smaller it means that the character makes a different sound. Usually き is 'ki' but combined with よ 'yo' it would be kyo (きょ). The yo being smaller makes it easier to identify this. きよ (kiyo), きょ (kyo).
@Colin, the smaller 'yo' indicates it forms a contraction with the previous syllable rather than a full syllable on its own. For example, it turns "ki+yo" into "kyo", or "ri+yo" into "ryo".
I learn that ”I am living in Tokyo”.(incorrect)
This sentence include a move possible
Why is "I live in..." marked with a に while "I don't live in..." is marked with a には？
the compound particle it's used to emphasize contrast in a sentence, In the case of "I don't live in..." It's kinda like emphasizing in correcting the mistake of the person assuming you are living there, if that makes sense.
From reading comments above, I guess the ha is kinda like a "not" in English, even though the -sen ending is the negative here. I'm not really sure though.