"길이 한국에 없습니다."
Translation:The road is not in Korea.
"There are no roads in [South] Korea." should also be a possible answer. Korean allows for this ambiguity.
"There are no roads in Korea." is now accepted. Korean has a separate word for South Korea, 남한.
I think it's the difference between the marker "이 and 은" If you want the sentence to be "There are no roads in Korea" then you can use the 은 marker.
Correct me if i'm wrong.
No, the topic and subject particles do not alter the meaning that way. "There is/are ~" isn't a Korean structure, but that English meaning can be inferred from the target sentence. Duolingo's translation is only correct if the sentence were something like 그 길이 한국에 없습니다 which is more like "That road is not in Korea." Korean also doesn't have definite or indefinite articles so they could go a step further and say "The/A road(s) are not in Korea."
Would the first two words being switched lend more credence to the "there are no roads in korea" translation?
If the two constructions "There are no roads in Korea" and "The road is not in Korea" in English emphasized "road" or "Korea" more you'd have a point, but where you place both words has less to do with untranslatable "there is/are ~" constructions. Generally, word order in Korean emphasizes what the speaker thinks is more important since word order is way more fluid than in English. So
길이 한국에 없습니다
한국에 길이 없습니다
both mean the same thing in Korean except in what the speaker is emphasizing. "There are no roads in Korea" and "The road is not in Korea" don't convey this difference.
Well it couldn't be about North Korea so... Plays Captain Obvious music Yeah...
How do you differ between saying "there is" and "there is not" its a dumb question but i cant figure it
있습니다 is to have / to exist (there is) 없습니다 is to not have / to not exist (there isn't)
(the beginning of the verb is different by one letter)
Ah I don't know why it marked me wrong the first and right the second though I gave this same ans both times
And the suggested answer was "there is no route in korea" does route use the same words? I don't think i saw any discussion on "route"
I wrote "there is no road in Korea" and it said I was wrong, can someone elaborate on that?
Cela n'est d'aucune aide de proposer de fausses réponses. Le verbe avoir au lieu du verbe être ?????