"There is a road in the park."
Translation:공원에 길이 있습니다.
I'm a Japanese speaker, and I hear that Korean and Japanese are closest in terms of grammars. These two languages are often classified as "agglutinative languages." This means that, unlike many Western languages that use prepositions such as "in" and "at" in front of nouns, Koreans and Japanese use "postpositions" that are "stuck" at the end of nouns. In this example, "에" and "이" are such postpositions; "X에" and "Y이" mean "at X" and "Y is the subject", respectively. I think that if you master these sticky postpositions, it will help a lot.
In Duolingo Tips, they are very well summarized:
I'm confused. For "The room is in the house" the accepted translation is "room (item), in house (location), there is." But for "road in the park" it seems the opposite and only accepts "in the park (location), road (item), there is." Is one of those incorrect, or are the item and location actually interchangeable?
I think (location)-(item) is more natural in general speaking situation. But the order can be changed because the markers(조사, like '이', '에', etc...) help us distinguish the roles of words even when the grammar order is totally messed. When (item) comes before (location), it sounds like the (location) is emphasized
For the sentence "방이 집에 있습니다/The room is in the house," you are describing the room in this context. For the sentence "영원에 길이 있습니다/There is a road in the park," you are describing the park in this context. "There is a road in the park" is different from "The road is in the park." This is my understanding, at least, so take it with a grain of salt.
Yes, I agree (though at my level, I shouldn't be allowed to), but at this level both should be accepted, but with the reversed order have a comment similar to when one has a typo. I got the same erroneous (I would presume) error when translating the other way; my reply of ‘길이 공완에 있습니다.’ was deemed incorrect due to word order – supposedly ‘There is a road in the park.’ should have been translated by me as ‘공원에 길이 있습니다.’ Edit: I didn’t notice the difference until now; my error in this case was writing ‘완’ instead of ‘원’. The difference between 어 and 아 is very hard to learn, so this should probably be considered a typo, or?
the emphasis is on the park in this sentence hence in the park... (there is a road) so i guess that's why that comes first. notice how 길이 remains the subject of the sentence though. it is very confusing and frustrating so i suggest learning the grammar basics from somewhere else first
both are correct. The first one is "the road in the park there is" and the second is "in the park, the road there is." they both roughly translate to the road is in the park. I asked my mom who knows more korean than i do ( i mean im trying to learn) and she said they are the same. Its confusing but good luck :)
Try Coursera. They have "first step Korean" it teaches the basics so well. Don't know what I would have done without it