Why does 나무 have 도 after it?
"There are no trees in the park" should be accepted.
There's a different nuance here though. Your sentence would be:
공원에 나무 없어 - There are no trees in the park.
Whereas this sentence is - There aren't ANY trees in the park.
They both mean the same thing, but the translations have different nuances.
I don't think 'In the park there aren't any trees' has a different nuance and this was just marked wrong! Flagged Aug 21.
It is now.
And yet "There are no trees at the park" is not. I will have to report it.
You can find the explanations for the particle 도 here:
CAREFUL. Clicking this link will exit the lesson!!!
"There are not any trees at the park" should be accepted
8/15/2020 still not accepted
"There is not any tree in the park" is also not expected (as of Jan 4th '21)
accepted* (sorry, am really tired rn ㅠㅠ)
"The park doesn't have any trees" should be accepted.
This is not grammatically equivalent, in your sentence, "the park" is the subject of the sentence. The original Korean sentence uses the locative particle 에 as in 공원에, not the subject particle 이 as in공원이.
what's wrong with There isn't any tree in the park?
Oh no! How horrifying!
It says 아무 in stead of 나무
There are no any trees in the park