"The bird eats fish."
Translation:새는 물고기를 먹습니다.
Looks good to me. I think Duo is translating 'fish' only as the animal and not the food. I'm still a bit blurry on the exact distinction ... I think a living animal is only 물고기, but a whole dead fish could be either depending on whether it is floating belly-up in the Han (물고기) or stacked in a grocery cooler (생선). And the stuff in your sushi is only 생선. Anybody want to elaborate?
Water meat...lol Sounds funny.
Well, it certainly is, in a sense, since a lot of people eat fish and it is a form of meat when consumed. This proves that fish is considered a meat when vegetarians/vegans order food at certain Asian restaurants and the servers do not classify fish as a form of meat. I never understood that. It certainly isn't vegan or vegetarian. Pescetarian, indeed, though.
(1) Noun + 은/는 --> Speaking of + Noun
새는 --> Speaking of that bird, it [...]
(2) Noun + 이/가 --> It is N which / Noun is the one
새가 --> That bird is the one which [...]
(3) Noun + 을/를: action (determined by the verb) is directed at Noun.
물고기를 먹다 --> Action: 먹다 (to eat) directed at 물고기 (fish) = eat fish.
새는 물고기를 먹습니다 = Speaking of that bird, it eats fish. --> That bird eats fish.
새가 물고기를 먹습니다 = That bird is the one which eats fish --> That bird eats fish.
My impression is:
(1) 새는 = that bird previously mentioned/known, that kind of birds
• 는 topic tag is used for characterization. The covert implication here is: The bird (mentioned earlier) / that kind of birds eats fish ["but the other kinds have different eating behaviors".]
Note: There are a dozen types of birds with different eating habits, so 새는 cannot be translated to the generic "Birds".
(2) 새가 = that particular bird
• 가, subject marker is used for identification. A bird is singled out as the one that eats fish.