Translation:I don't have a pet.
I could be wrong but i dont think its that simple. From my understanding, が in this instance is emphasizing that there are no pets. Like if someone said "what do you not have?". ぺっとがいません。Versus は would be used if you had already been discussing pets and you wanted to add on that there are/you have no pets. If im wrong someone please correct me
sorry to reply so late, but if you use a negative verb aren't you supposed to use wa after the object (like described here https://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/japanese-particles-change.html )? In that case, wouldn't you use 'ペットはいません'for 'I have no pets' when 'I' is the implied subject?
Wa denotes the topic. In this cause the topic is pets. When the wa is omitted and ga is used in it's place it could mean one of two things. Either it imply the speaker is the topic, i.e if they were to have said watashi wa before whatever they said. If the sentence was a question then it imply the person being spoken to is the topic, i.e if they were to have said anata wa before whatever they said.
In this sentence though, wa is not omitted and is used on pet meaning the sentence is about pet/s.
If you think about it, not having purals doesn't really matter and it actually makes a language easier to learn because there are less words you need to remember - are/is, aren't/isn't, does/do and so on - when talking about either the singular or plurals. Also remembering that getting this right is still you are marked against in high school.
Regardless, if someone said there are pets, although you know there are more than 1, you still don't know exactly how many. So really saying there is a pet is no different from saying there is 1 pet.
Japanese doesn't have plurals so for the sentence to have translated to "there is not a pet" instead of pets in general, the quantity 1 would have been used.
It is similar to the sentence "shigeru desu" which translates it to "I am shigeru" rather than "I am called shigeru". In that the translation shouldn't be more explicit than the original sentence.
With English there are almost always exceptions, but English uses 'a' and 'an' before a singular noun to imply there is only 1 of something. You use 'a' if the noun starts with a consonant, and "an" if it starts with a vowel. For instance "I don't have a car", or "I don't have an egg". So "I don't have pet" sounds broken to a native English speaker. Annoyingly though, you can leave off the "a" or "an" if the singular thing is also group of things. For instance, "I don't have fish" is perfectly correct but it means you don't have a group of fish - although most people will probably say "I don't have any fish" instead. "I don't have a fish" is also correct, but it means you're only talking about a single fish, and not a group of fish. Similarly "I don't have geese", "I don't have any geese" and "I don't have a goose" mean essentially the same thing, but you can't say "I don't have goose", because there is only one goose, so you need the 'a' in there. So you can either make "pet" plural and say "I don't have pets" or leave it singular and say "I don't have a pet".
It's not strange. The japanese sentence consists out of the words "Pet" and "not exist". "There are no pets" is an appropriate translation.
"I have no pets" as Duo suggests, takes the "I" from the assumption that you'd most likely make such a statement when talking about things you own, and it is also correct because pronouns can and often are omitted in japanese.
The way my Japanese teacher explained it was in words, sometimes a small tsu is put in there which makes you need to add more deffinition to the next letter. In "ペット" to type it out on a keyboard you have to type it as "petto". The small tsu doubles the consonant that comes after it. Without the tsu it would just be peto. It makes it more defined.
Japanese doesn't have plural and singular forms of nouns and verbs. They differentiate plural and singular by saying how many with a counter word when they think it matters or isn't obvious. So if I want to say people are going to eat but think how many will be eating is obvious or don't think it's relevant how many people will be eating, it's just 人がたベます (you could also potentially use は instead of が if you're not already on the topic). But if I want to specify that it's three people eating it's 人が三人たべます and if I want you to know it's just one person it's 人が一人たべます. It's just a different way of thinking... In most conversation, plural and singular are obvious from context and when they're not, then you specify
What happened to the では? Every exercise for the past 2 years included では. ie ...ではありません.
Why is this one written as
Is this a mistake? It suddenly appeared after a supposed "course update".
If it's not a mistake, why is it missing the で?
DuoLingo, when you changed the material, can you please send out a notice explaining the changes and why.
I'm so confused now. Everything I thought I'd actually learned, in how questioning.
If it's a mistake, Omar correct it ASAP.
は is NOT part of いません, は is a topic particle, indicating that pets are what we are talking about.
います and いません are verbs that are used in "There are/is" and "There aren't/isn't" cases, from what I know. But います and いません are used for living things. あります and ありません are used for the same definition, but for NONLIVING things (objects)