"차는 방에 있습니다."
Translation:The tea is in the room.
I think they should use a different word instead of tea because this word also means car.
It also means tea. Its certainly confusing to use both in the same lesson, but its not wrong.
Yes, but you have to look at the rest of the sentence. Why would a car be in the room? Lol. I still get confused because Korean is not as specific as english, which is a good thing but its also very frustrating too because of the punctuation, rules and so on lol
It could be a toy car or a model car or maybe the room is a garage. It accepts both tea and car in the room.
I understand why it would consider it wrong I guess, but I put There is tea in the room. Would that be a different sentence?
Yes, 에 represents location. Use 에 for anything that exists or will exist 'at' a location.
저는 공원에 있습니다
I am at the park
저는 공원에 갑니다
I am going to the park
Use 에서 for any action that takes place at a location or is 'from' a location
저는 미국에서 사는 HuntingHawk입니다
I am HuntingHawk and I live in America
저 고양이가 길에서 와서 길고양이라고요
That cat came from the street, so it is called an alley cat
Yes, they both derive ultimately from Chinese, as do the words for tea in nearly all languages. (Depending on the path, though, some are less obvious, like "tea")
Why 는/은 instead of 가/이 ? I understand that it is subject vs topic but in the sentence "the room is in the house" we were taught to use 이
Both are fine. I would mark this as an issue so they put the additional translation in. But if you wanna be super technical, whenever starting a sentence with a subject not previously mentioned or in comparison to the previous conversation, it's more typical to use 은/는. That being said, it REALLY doesn't matter here ^^
I think the reason they still don't accept "there is tea in the room" is because of the use of 는 after 차. So its basically saying "as for the tea, its in the room"
I put the right awser but it said it was wrong when it shier me the rigjt answer theu were the same
I don't understand the difference between something being somewhere and someone having something
That's because 있다 is quite a versatile word in comparison to English's many interpretations.
First, the most important thing to note is 있다 simply means "to exist." It means this and nothing else. From here, it'll start to make more sense:
Let's take this sentence: 저는 강아지 두마리 있다
This would translate as "I have two dogs." But the literal translation would be "As for me, two dogs exist." Utilizing a subject in this sentence implies possession of whatever "exists," and in English we say it a little differently, using "to have (something)."
Next let's take this sentence: 저는 병원에 있다
This one translates as "I'm at a hospital." And once again the literal translation is a bit different; "I exist at a hospital." The key player here is the ~에 at the end of 병원 which is designated as the "location particle," usually translated as "in" or "at." In English, we also have a slightly different way to express existence in/at a location: "to be (somewhere)."
I hope this brief explanation helps. Once you learn there's only one technical meaning to the word 있다 is only "to exist," many parts of the language start to make a lot more sense where it comes into play.