"The ball is outside the park."

Translation: 공이 공원 밖에 있어요.

[jeonbeahr]

Why is "있습니다" not accepted? I don't know if it's just me, but I keep running into this problem--when I think it's 있어요, it marks it wrong and tells me it's 있습니다, and vice versa. I'm not sure if this is an error on Duolingo's part or my part, but it's getting a bit irritating. Couldn't 있습니다 also be accepted in this case(if we ignore formality.) It means the same thing, right? It's just a different formality level..

[oee16]

It could be either of those:
1. 있어 (informal)
2. 있어요 (casual, polite)
3. 있는다 (neutral)
4. 있습니다 (formal, polite)
depending on context and circumstances.

I just follow the option in DLG's dropdown list. But I agree it's pretty confusing to beginners (like me!).

[josueetcom]

Report it!

[frimi58]

I totally agree. I don't understand why it's not accepted.

[Alfalfa91]

I have a hard time understanding the subject/topic particle. In this example we use 이 after ball but in a similar one (The dog sits next to the child) it was 는 after dog. Is it because both should be accepted or is there a rule I don't understand?

[Rebecca895090]

이/가 and 은/는 are a little tricky to learn at first and hard to explain (for me). Here is a video on the subject that really helped me when I was figuring that out. https://youtu.be/6JSJ9yEWy1I

[oee16]

This is how I understand those particle markers.

1) Description of fact

공이 공원 밖에 있어요 -
There is a ball outside the park / A (or the) ball is outside the park

2) Speaking of a specific subject

<h1>theball.</h1>

(그) 공은 공원 밖에 있어요 -
The (/that) ball is outside the park / Speaking of the ball, it is outside the park

<h1>outsidethepark.</h1>

공원밖에는 공이 있어요 -
Speaking of what is outside the park, there is a ball (amongst other things)

[dipagssi]

Yes, and in such examples the context is not implied. For this example, I formed a question as "Where is the ball?" the answer to which makes the ball the topic. Hence I wrote 공은 but was marked wrong. 10/06/2020.

[oee16]

I just wish there is a clear convention on how to interpret topic vs subject markers.

공이 공원 밖에 있습니다 = A ball is outside the park

=> The (indicated) ball/ The ball there.

공은 공원 밖에 있습니다 = The ball, it is outside the park

=> The (aforementioned)/That ball.

[Marijoski]

Can someone explain why
"공원 공이 밖에 있어요." is incorrect? I can never figure out the right order of nouns.

[oee16]

Just try to read the sentence in reverse order (minus the subject), i.e.

"is outside the park"

-> the park outside is [reverse order]

-> 공원 (the park) 밖에 (outside) 있어요 (is) = 공원 밖에 있어요

Add 공, the ball as subject;

(공이) + (공원 밖에 있어요)

-> 공이 공원 밖에 있어요

and there it is your Korean sentence.

[pinkyeon]

Why is 있습니다 wrong????? FIX THIS