"There are dogs and cats."
"Arimasu" is used for things. Book, tree etc. "Imasu" is used for living things. Human beings and animals etc .
"Orimasu" - for youself, a family member, who's close to you, Formal.
"Imasu"- for anyone, you, your friends, animals too, informal.
"Arimasu" - animate objects, things, not living.
"Irasshaimasu" - Way formal, for someone you should pay respect to; president, king, boss etc.
Yes, "いる/います" is not used for tree. 木がある。 or 木が生えている (生える/はえる)
Still trying to understand the particles. Why is this "ga" and not "ha"? The dogs and cats are not the subjects?
So first of all bless you for bringing this sheet into my life. But i still don't understand how we could tell what duolingo wanted? Does the use of "ga" here emphasize /what/ is existing over the fact that it /is/ existing?
Great. But nothing here indicates that either ga OR wa is the only correct translating.
Even DuoLingo TIPS instructions explicitly starts that while the meaning is slightly different when using one vs the other, NEITHER are inherently wrong.
It states that they can be interchangeable (sorry of), and DONUT STRESS OVER USING ONE OR THE OTHER.
YET MARKS US WRONG for using one vs the other.
Without context, is impossible to KNOW that a specific emphasis IS deemed TO BE engendered to THIS sentence. And an intended(subtle) emphasis is the only difference between using one vs the other. As a direct non-contextual translation, either we technically correct.
Correct. Japanese doesn't distinguish between singular and plurals* so "there is a dog and a cat" would be exactly as valid.
(*pedantic people will point out たち but while it guarantees a plural, it's not exactly that)
Why is が used here? Is it because there are multiple thinga being talked about?
The verb いる (iru; conjugated in this sentence as います/ imasu) can be translated as "there is" or "there are". (you might also see it as "to be")
そこ (soko) means "there", but in a location sense ("it's over there, go look there, etc).
If you wanted to say, "There are dogs and cats there," meaning a place where there are dogs and cats, you could add そこ to the... start of the sentence, I think. It would likely need a particle after it though.
If I'm not wrong, soko is referring to the position "over there" so if the question asked there are dogs and cats over there I don't think it would be wrong. Secondly, positions are always written firstly unfortunately I can't tell you why either it's just a pattern I observed
Duo's been using kanji for 犬 but ねこ is always in hiragana。Is there no kanji for the cat?
why do plural and flural holds the same translation? how'd you know the difference?
is there any gramatical difference between "there is a dog and a cat" and "there are dogs and cats", or does it rely on context?
There's no difference, Japanese doesn't really distinguish between singular and plurals.
I know this is neutral in indicating whether it is a singular cat and dog or multiples of each, but is there a way to specifically indicate that there is only one of each? Would one use a counter?
I'm confused about the proximity of the dogs and cats in question. I know これ means this, and それ means that, and あれ means that over there, but when it makes these generic statements like "there are dogs and cats" under what circumstances would one use such a statement? "We are staying at Maria's house, I hope you aren't allergic, there are dogs and cats." ?