Translation:My family has been pretty good recently.
Now August and the same problem. On other questions "not bad" is an accepted translation but not here. In any case, "not bad: or "pretty good" don't correspond to modern usage. One would probably say "OK" or "fine". Also the use of "recently" in this context is very formal English. "These days" or "lately" would be better.
Yes. We "do" well. The current accepted translation is "been pretty good", and that is 100% correct. The verb "to be" is a linking verb in English and so the rules are slightly different. This article describes it well. https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/good-versus-well
In most issues grammarians have yielded to the populace about what is said, as opposed to what they would claim is the "right" way. In this instance they still try to force it, but the majority of people don't say well because most people don't mean well... well doesn't convey good... it conveys meh. This out dated useage should be done away with and is not the way most persons express themselves in English today...
"Recently my family has been well" should be considered for acceptance.
There are three things with a couple of different translations of this sentence. Firstly, "is" refers to present tense, while "recently" refers to past tense; you should not use more than one tense in a single phrase. Secondly, "good" is a colloquialism, whereas "well" is a better translation of a person's health. Thirdly, could the grammerarians out there tell me whether "family" is singular (and uses "is/has") or plural (and uses "are/have"); my answer "my family have been good recently" was given wrong and the 'correct translation' was "my family has been good recently."
Found on Google "While family refers to a group of people, it refers to the group of people as a single unit, or collection. Nouns like this are called collective nouns, and in American English, collective nouns take singular verbs. (In British English, many collective nouns can also take plural verbs.)" My conclusion: Duolingo should accept both the singular and the plural.
You are touching on what I believe is an issue between England native speakers and american so called english. These courses would have (should have?) been offered as chinese for english speakers and separately offer chinese for american speakers. As it is the american grammar and spelling dominates as well as the major problem of syntax (order of words to affect meaning). This is not going to be corrected ad I am quite sure that the translators the chinese guys in this case all know american, NOT native english. We just have to be careful when we are in acsituation of a chinese person speaking to us while we are still learning and we cant understand them because the american translation is in our heads. Because of this may I recommend making up your oen fladh cards where you can put the native english translation to them or else there is a danger that we can be taught chinese well, but at the expense of being taught terrible english too!
Seriously, I don't think the English can claim credit for speaking correct English and anyone else is wrong! English borrows from so many languages, and evolves as do most, with usage. I am Australian and not willing to throw insults because someone uses the language differently to me. The point is we get the meaning of the Chinese. We are learning and it is enjoyable.
No one is throwing insults. I'm studying Portuguese and I don't expect the Brazilian version to be the same. I also study Chinese offered here but don't expect to use it in those areas where cantonese dominates as is the case for the variations in spanish I'm concurrently studying to be same in Mexico as Spain. So by your comment, do you English is the same around the world? Of course not. American differs from English enormously. In Duo here, it is a great app but so much of the confusion has been with the "English" translations not the target language for learning, and particularly for native English speakers (of England) we especially need to be on guard against being de-briefed of our own language while learning the target language. This is about doing our best in what is double translation from the target language to American, and then to English to get the sense so it's a problem we often have difficulty with when we are marked wrongly for good English grammar and can only move through the course by typing in or selecting word files that only allow American grammar to be accepted. Like the portuguese comparisons I made earlier, the differences are such that brazilian Portuguese courses are out there as a separate language to learn yet we don't see the same recognition between the different English spoken.
I prefer to learn the English as most spoken by Mandarin speakers who speak English. English language evolved in contact with Chinese languages. So called American English, spoken version, has an efficiency that is born of the experience of communicating with people of varied backgrounds. Through contact with stereotypical language users like French in Paris and Mandarin in Beijing, I've come to notice how flexible English speakers like myself are. When people speak to me in English -- often as a second language, where I live in multicultural California and in foreign countries I visit, I am happy to accept any form of English they use as long as I can understand them. Moreover, I even adjust my English to make myself better understood to them. In India for instance, I speak fluent Punjabi and Hindi, but if someone wants to speak in English I don't go bolting forward with my home American dialect; I compromise to a form of English that they understand more easily. None of this in anyway precludes my ability to use an idealized form of English in my written communication and formal speech. So, when I am learning a foreign language I also take note of a sort of auxiliary language -- the English of speakers of that foreign language -- which I then use as a support on my journey towards functioning in that foreign language. For example, I go to China and I try to say something ideally in Mandarin, but when that fails I fall back on Chinese-English. Sometimes these auxiliary languages more resemble UK English, sometimes more American, and sometimes they involve quirky things that are literal translations from the foreign language. The point is to notice them, not correct them. I have noticed native Mandarin speakers saying "pretty good," so when I speak English to them I'm going to say "pretty good" rather than potentially confuse them with "quite well"!
Long ago, I was employed to teach English to native Spanish speakers. I had to use a British English textbook. It was making me teach phrases like "What have you got?" which was so bizarre because as an American I would say "What do you have?" The Spanish speakers understand, 'What do you eat? What do you drink? What do you do?," but then they get to the verb "have" and suddenly this weirdness, "What have you got?" I like Chinese Pidgin: "You have what?" Simple, ha!
Some correct American English phrases include: "My health is good." "My family life is good." Etc. And, I do not expect British English to correctly say, "My family life is well." As to the point at issue, 'We are doing good' versus 'We are doing well,' I would say that both are correct and have a subtle difference of meaning: 'We are doing good' is a judgment about the current state of the group being good, whereas 'We are doing well,' means that the group's efforts have been successful.
As pointed out above, British English uses notional plurality, whereby if the speaker is thinking of the noun as a number of people rather than a single entity, the plural verb is used. So you could say "Manchester United is tye best team" but "Manchester United are playing badly today."
Although in strict usage "good" is an adjective ("My family is good") and "well" (as used here) is an adverb ("My family is doing well", with "well" modifying the verb), these words are interchangeable in everyday speech in the US. People say "I'm doing good," "I'm doing well," "I'm doing fine," "I'm good," "I'm well," "I'm fine" ... no distinction between any of these in everyday usage.
However, the given translation "My family IS good RECENTLY" sounds awkward to my ears -- I think the past tense is much more natural, as : "My family has been pretty good lately," "My family's been good recently."
I agree there is a problem using the present tense with the adverb "recently" which refers to the past. The tense we use for things in the past that extend to the present is the present perfect tense (my family has been well). However I think it would be best to just say "my family is pretty well" and leave out the conflict between is/recently by dropping the "recently" altogether as this is implied in dialogue like this. However this is not accepted. We just need to learn to use the grammatically incorrect "correct" answer given. Nevertheless I have reported it.
You highlight the major problem here. US speak american and people of England speak english. These languages are different from each other here. The american language speakers are catered for here, not english speakers. Its not just spelling, punctutation and pronunciation but also the syntax where the american word order is quite often contrary to proper english. This is why there is so much contention here. Its a language course for americans only, for most of whom will not be a problem. But true native english speakers have to 'alter the translations accordingly, but frustrate when confronted with being forced to type appallingly poor english to get through the course. Let's hope Duolingo get their (still very good) translators to include our proper english alternatives.
Duolingo uses the American flag as the icon for courses with English. That should make it clear that the US version of English is being taught.
If you are going to make multiple complaints about what is or isn't "proper English", then you should know that "American" is not a language.
The point I'm making is that American is not English. English is not American. They are two different languages. American syntax different enormously from that of English. It's this aspect particularly which is creating the vast majority of the posts across the five languages I am studying concurrently. I am not making multiple complaints but making multiple explanations of this because their is so much confusion. If I was complaining I wouldn't be studying Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, Indonesian and Spanish and doing well (doing good (American)). It does require native (if England ) speakers to work harder of course because they have often have to carry out a 'double' translation from their target language to English, then to American in order to progress. American is so different, that it could be taught as a language to learn for native English speakers! Please note DidiWeidmann comment below here. He is a non native English speaker whose comment is exactly what I'm talking about.
English is not American. They are two different languages.
UK and US English are not different languages: they are two very-slightly-different forms of the same language.
There are grammatically-lazy speakers of UK English who say 'good' instead of 'well'...
If I was complaining I wouldn't be studying Japanese
...just as there are grammatically-lazy people in the UK who say 'was' instead of 'were'.
It is NOT a complaint . I speak about recognising the difference between English and American language. I differ with you on the difference being much, much more than slight. Languages can't be "lazy" but they are different. I learn Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian, Portuguese and Spanish currently because I LOVE languages and I would assume most here do too or surely they would not be here. So, as a lover of languages I recognise the differences of languages and that applies to American and English. The most important difference in the American language structure which leads to most of the confusion is the syntax where either word order is different from native English and actually alters meaning, or, where they switch subject and object of a sentence. When learning a foreign language it is very important that good English grammar is used for native English speakers and good American grammar for Americans. What we see here is a mix of both and then exacerbated by going overboard with idiomatic slang On the last point in England different idiomatic phrases can be very different just a hundred miles away so only the judicious use should be applied. It's likely you have foreign friends who have on occasion said something in English but with the wrong word order and the meaning even embarrassingly wrong. I.e. Successful language learning, if it is going to be put to use relies heavily on the a good grammatically 'core'. I think Duo Lingo is excellent. I mean I love using it but that doesn't mean it is without some shortcomings the like of which has been highlighted here by hundreds of people across the languages I am studying. Regards.
"is" + "recently" is really strange: Would be no problem, if the semantical correct answers would also be accepted, but now only semantical strange answers are accepted. I have some times the impression, that the maker of this Chinese course do not really master English - this is the reason of serveral very unusual translations as correct answers. Already for native English speakers this is difficult, and for persons like me who try to learn as a not native English speaker with the English course, the learning process so becomes really difficuilt. It would be very helpful if (and is of course necessary that) all the English translations are revised by a qualified English native! As correct answer the most common and not the most colloquial or most exotic answer shoud be given first! If there are short forms (can't/cannot) always both the short and the complete form shoud be accepted, in the case of synonyms, all synonyms should be accepted etc. Thanks
On the contrary, I think the strange constructions add insight into the Chinese syntax, intentional or no. When ever I get lost with word order I think about some of the more strerotypical mistakes in English that people who speak Chinese as a first language make, and then the sentences feel logical. I would say that many of the over-anglicized interpretive syntax translations that they DO have obfuscate more than they assist in clarity, especially if we are supposed to be learning how to think in a certain mode of sentence construction. Occasionally it helps to have the context of how formal a phrase is in usage, but from what I've seen in comments from experienced speakers makes me feel like some of the formality and intensity levels of the Chinese phrases don't fit those of the English translations that Duo gives. It's important to remember that there aren't going to be exact translations for many common concepts and situations in any language, let alone ones as different as Chinese and English are.
Certainly agree with you. You have my admiration for learning a foreign language with the translation language, English not your native language either. I wish you very well in your endeavour. So many languages are offered using English as the medium for translation, but once I have finished the five languages I currently study I too will look for an alternative translation language to learn other languages not currently not available for English speakers. Regards.
The only problem I have with this is that it's inconsistent with the same phrase in the lesson that goes:
Translation: We have not been bad recently.
Either both should be "pretty good", both should be "not bad", or both "pretty good" and "not bad" should be accepted as correct answers for both.
A verb is not required when a condition or state is the 'result'. Remember "你好吗?" That's just like saying "You well?" No need to say "Are you well?" or "You are well?" Chinese allows omitting words that are not strictly necessary. Your answer could be just "好". No need to include "I am". Watch for this and you might be able to talk fast too! ;)
And in formal American English the adverbial phrase should come first, too. "Recently, my family has been well/pretty good/not bad." The verb here, as someone asked earlier, is "has been/is". (Have been/are for British English.) Duo's English translations in this case are trying to be flexibly idiomatic, but as some others have pointed out, the tense of "recently," and where it's placed in the sentence, is causing problems for idiomatic and colloquial translations.
My grandfather would agree with you, but I don't. Good can be what you are being. You can be happy. You can be cold. You can be orange. It doesn't have to be an adverb if it is what you are being and not how you are being. Also, "good" doesn't just have a moral connotation. You can have good health. A car can be in good condition. You can get a good price for your car.
Why does Duolingo say that "My family has not been bad recently" is the incorrect translation here, while for "我们最近不错。" it says that "We have been pretty good recently" is incorrect and "We have not been bad recently" is correct.
Obviously the literal translation in both cases is "not bad" but I can't tell if this is just a mistake or inconsistency, or if there is some subtlety I'm missing here.
"Recently" can mean including the present, for instance, I might say "I've been exercising a lot recently". but it seems clumsy and formal in this context. More usual when talking about health one would use "lately" or "these days". Of course, one would not say "has been pretty good". A better translation is "My family is going fine/well these days."
I see a lot of people complaining about the word "good" on this thread. I think it's misguided. But just to be sure, I just checked the Oxford English Dictionary, and "good" absolutely can mean in good health. Sorry you got caned in school for saying "good" instead of "well." It really was for nothing.
There is no "pretty". The Chinese literally says "not bad" ("not wrong").
However, some people think that "not bad" and "pretty good" basically mean the same thing in English. "How do you like the your meal?" -- "It's not bad!" "It's pretty good!" Same thing.
In this particular sentence, it sounds bad in English to use "not bad" -- "My family has been not bad recently"? That's weird. So they chose "My family has been pretty good recently."
It is interesting that sometimes I learn more about English than about Chinese. The Chinese sentence is not hard to understand, but there are apparently so many possible English translations (my own was "my family has not been bad recently"), and almost all of them rejected. Duolingo should be a bit more generous.
From time to time the male voice and the female pronounce words differently, I don't know why, but, I presume this is due to some regional differences. This lesson has, to my ears, given about four different pronunciations of 最 with the most noticeable differences being when the word is by itself versus being within a sentence. IF anyone else has witnessed this and can explain it to me, I would be very grateful.
No, it's not the correct solution. You are right, the combination of "is" and "recently" doesn't make sense. But using the past tense would imply that though they were doing well not long ago, they are not doing well right now. When you talk about situations or actions continuing up to the present, you should use the present perfect rather than the past tense: "The family has been (doing) well recently".
There is a better way to translate 最近 - it means recently, these days, of late. So the sentence would be best translated as - My family is pretty good these days.
I do struggle to make sense of the statement has been pretty good. To native english speakers to say "my family has been good recently" (with or without 'pretty') commutes the sense that the family has behaved well recently which implies their behaviour is usually bad. 'Pretty' used in this way is definitely american, not native english.
Also i can translate whit: My family is advancing well. Why not???
As a native speaker, I would never put "recently" in the middle where you put it here. You're right about being able to be put in the beginning. As a general rule English wants time-related phrases to be either the first or last thing in a sentence. :)
You could say 'my family has recently been good', which doesn't sound too bad. '...is recently good' (or 'has been recently good') sounds somewhat unnatural to me, although the latter is technically correct.
There is more of a problem with 'is' and 'recently', which feels like a tense mismatch. I don't think any native English speaker would put 'recently' next to 'is' rather than 'has'.