This exercise is a good example of the recurring ugly problems with the Korean course once you get past the first two levels.
I first wrote "still living man" - that was rejected because Duo wants a relative clause. The next time I wrote "a man who is still living" - that was rejected because Duo wants "alive" instead of living. Then I wrote "a man who is still alive" - that was rejected because Duo wants "the man"
It's ridiculous. I've lost count of how many times I've had an answer rejected because I put the "wrong" article when there aren't any articles in Korean in the first place and any noun can be plural even without the 들 marker.
This "a" and "the" has been a continuing frustration point for me as well.
100$ to the person who got this right the first time.
My tries; man still living, the man yet alive, a man that is living still, still alive man, a man still living life, man that is living. Good luck everyone!
How would you literally translate "살아있는"? I still have problems with the -있는 particle...
있다 is 'to have' or 'to be in a location' 살다 is 'to live' combined as 살아있다 they're 'to be alive' or 'to be living' The 는 particle in this case shows that the verb is describing the man. 살아있어요 = '[I'm] living' 남자는 살아있어요 = 'The man is living' 살아있는 남자 = 'the living man' This one is not a complete sentence and would be followed by another verb. (eg. 살아있는 남자는 밥을 먹어요 = The living man eats a meal')
어/아 있다 is attached to passive verbs to indicate the completion and continued state of something.
사람들이 다 앉아 있다 the people are all sitting
모든 제품이 팔려 있다 all the products are sold
창문이 닫혀 있다 the window is closed
literally 살아있다 is "alive, continually" living.
Is "still living man" a poor translation of this, or is it a problem with the beta?
I answered "The man is still alive." The correct answer is "The man who's still alive." Someone tell me where the word "who's" came from and why it is even needed.
Check out Unicornmon3's previous answer about using V+는 to modify a noun.