"There must be a basement."
Translation:Ein Keller muss da sein.
Your version means something different -- it split up the "verb" da sein (to exist) and so it means not "There must be a basement" but instead "There must be a basement there", i.e. the da now means "there" and refers to a location.
But the English sentence "There must be a basement" does not refer to a location.
Hi Mizinamo I have always taken "da" and "dort" to be interchangeable: but let me test my understanding:- Are you saying that is correct except when "da" is used in "da sein": in which case " da sein" = es gibt = "there is/there are/there exists": and, furthermore, if "da" and "sein" are separated, they lose this meaning?
That's what I wrote and got marked wrong. I think this one is an error. The given "correct" answers mean, I think, "a basement must be there", like you're pointing at a map or blueprint and working out where the basement would be. The given English phrase "There must be a basement" means more "I am sure a basement must exist", which translates better to "Ein Keller muss da sein", in my opinion.
Interesting, I would have expected a translation like "Es muss einen Keller geben". Ein Keller muss da sein sounds unnatural, and usually "there is" in the sense of "it exists" is translated with "es gibt". "Da sein" is also possible, but sounds pretty stupid to me in this example. If you actually want to refer to a position with "there", you'd better say "Da muss ein Keller sein". (I see a door, there must be a basement)
mizinamo already answered above: ‘da sein’ is seen as a unit, if you split the two components the sentence's meaning shifts to ‘a basement must be there’ (as opposed to the original ‘there must be a basement’), that is, ‘da’ becomes an indication of location rather than mere existence.
As general advice: please read the other comments (especially in comment sections as short as this one) before posting a question, the answer can often be found there.
"Ein Keller muss da sein" klingt sehr holprig. "Da muss (doch) ein Keller sein" wäre schon deutlich natürlicher. Die Übersetzung "There must be a basement there" kann man zwar nachvollziehen, ist aber doch stark an den Haaren herbeigezogen
"Ein Keller muss da sein" sounds very bumpy. "Da muss (doch) ein Keller sein" would be much more natural. One can understand the translation "There must be a basement there", but that is far-fetched
I wrote, "Es muss ein Keller sein" but it was rejected. Why?
Because that means "It has to be a cellar" and not "There has to be a cellar".
Your sentence talks about an "it" and states that that "it" is a cellar. It doesn't talk about the mere existence of a cellar.
es ist ... can only describe the existence of something if you specify a location, e.g. es ist ein Buch auf dem Tisch "there is a book on the table".
But if someone is asking you what you see and you say, "Well, there's a book", you can't say es ist ein Buch (without a location). You'd have to say something like es gibt ein Buch or es ist ein Buch dort (there is a book there).
"Da muss ein Keller sein" sounds a bit odd. Sounds to me as if something could just sit in a corner of the room and just "be". Weird as that. The same structure can be used if it was another verb. For example; "Es gibt Zeiten, da muss ein Mann kämpfen" (a quote from the internet). Depends on the verb. One just can't "only be". That's why it's odd.