"공원에 사람이 없습니다."
Translation:There is nobody in the park.
에 is a location marker. It makes the park the location in this sentence.
I guessed "The people are not in the park" for this, and got it wrong. Could anyone show me how to say that properly, so I can see the difference?
(그) 사람들은 공원에 없습니다. For animated nouns, use the suffix -들 unless its plurality is implied otherwise. "The person is not in the park." is accepted.
the sentence 'the people are not in the park' is a weird sounding sentence in English, or at best, incomplete. one usually says 'there is no one/nobody in the park' or 'there are no people in the park'. so that's why they didn't factor in this specific word order as a correct translation.
the translation you provided sounds strange because the noun 'people' has two meanings:
the first coincides with the meaning intended for the sentence here, as in 'persons', and has no singular form:
People are walking down the street: multiple, random individuals are walking down the street. AND The people who play instruments are not in the park: The group of individuals who play instruments are not in the park
here, 'the people' implies that I know which group of people I'm referring to, and I must express that ( those people that I know, who play instruments, and not other people), otherwise my sentence is incomplete, and will be followed by the question: Which people?
the second meaning is actually a singular form: 'a people', and has a plural form, 'peoples', and is used with the definite article 'the' like in your translation. in this case, 'the people' means 'the nation', 'the citizens as a whole', etc.
Apparently the word order makes a difference:
> 공원에 사람이 없십니다
> There is nobody in the park
> 사람이 공원에 없십니다
> The people are in the park.
Maybe "사람은 공원에 없습니다"? Im just a beginner, adapted that answer from the "I am not in Korea" answer
"You can't find humans in parks." or "The person (as opposed to a different animal) is not in the park."
은 can make a general statement or a comparison.
I said, "No one is in the park." The correction was "Nobody is in the park." There is no difference in those two sentences. My version should be added to the correct answers.
The translation isn't too good.
It should be "there aren't people in the park".
In Korean, "There is nobody in the park" would be " 공원에 아무도 없습니다."
Literally, yes, but "There aren't people in the park." is ungrammatical in English.
The contraction is perfectly grammatical in English, but its use here is certainly unusual. We would be more likely to say “There are no people in the park.” To say “There aren’t people in the park.”, someone would have had to say incorrectly “There are people in the park.” and I would be refuting that statement; otherwise, I would say “There aren’t any people in the park.” which is the same as “There are no people in the park.” https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/325/which-is-correct-there-are-not-any-employees-or-there-is-not-any-employee
I don't understand where is the negation can someone explain? I thought that it said "there is a person in the park" but I wasn't able to find a person so I put in nobody and checked
i write 'the person is not at the park' as an answer which was incorrect. Can anyone explain to me why this is an incorrect translation? 공원에 can mean at the park, right? and 사람이 could mean the person? thought the verb part confuses me... i know it's a negative...
I think you're confused with the subject (park) and object (people) of the sentence. "The person is not at the park" should be written as 사람marker 고원marker 옶습니다.
Park is not the subject. It is the location. In English it is the object of a preposition. "There is no one in the park." is different in English from "The people are not at the park.", but Korean does not use "the" so the specific versus random is lost in translation. I would say that "People are not at the park." and "There is no one in the park." would give the same meaning in English. The different prepositions could give different meanings though. If you said "She is at the park.", she could be in her car waiting for you to arrive so that you could go in the park together. Since there is no one there though, that would not matter.
I said "the park does not have people" and it said I was wrong, with the correct answer being "the park has no people". That bugged me a bit.
Did you try reporting it? Although, it really should be “The park does not have any people.” to mean the same thing. These are also not as common as “There are no people in the park.”
You put 에 after the location you are talking about. I think alternative forms of this answer need to be added because there are a lot of was to say this in english.
We casually say that, but since people is plural, it should be "There are no people in the park."
So nobody just stands for no person right? Because i dont think sarami is actually person AND nobody
I wrote ‘There are no persons in the park.’, which was wrong; I got the suggested answer ‘There is no person in the park.’ Isn’t the plural marker in this context not necessary in Korean, and shouldn’t my answer be a better translation to English than ‘… is no person …’, which – frankly – sounds rather odd.
I speak spanish and still learning english so i think in the sentences in pasive form for understand the meaning better
In "남자가 한국에 있습니디" the suffix after "Korea" is 에, why in this case it is 이? Because it's a negative sentence?
The suffix after park is also "에". This is the particle that indicates a place.
"이" is the particle which indicates the subject "no one" or "no person" or "no people" The negative is indicated in the verb. Use an internet browser to see the tips and notes: https://www.duolingo.com/skill/ko/basics-2
How is "at a park are no people" better than "there are no people at the park"?
there is a person, there are people
there is no person, there are no people
Did you miss the verb at the end? The place marker after the park relates it to the rest of the sentence much like the preposition “in” or “at”. Person or people is marked with the Subject marker. The negative form of the verb is used.
So [In/at the park, person/people, no/not is/are (exists/exist)] becomes “There are no people in the park.” or “There is no one in the park.”
I put there is no person in the park... And it was correct for duolingo... It's correct?
It answered the "correct answer" as 'There is no 1 in the park'
I put there are no people in the park