Is there a good reason why the only option for this sentence is one that changes the structure? It seems like there are multiple ways to express this sentiment: "(some)one rings the doorbell," "(some)one rings at the door," "we ring at the door/ring the doorbell"(considering how often "on" is used for "we"). None of these are accepted. And it only seems to accept "there is a ring at the door," which is passive. Is there something I'm missing?
See, I thought about the direct translation "someone is ringing at the door" and I thought nobody would be stupid enough to use that as a translation so I wrote "someone is ringing the doorbell" (note not "knocking at the door" because that would be different......) So what did I get as my corrected translation.......? "Someone is ringing at the door" Clearly somebody WOULD be that stupid
"Someone is at the door" is at best ambiguous in English. "Someone is ringing the doorbell" is much closer to the French sentence if I understand it correctly. We know that someone is at the door because they are ringing the doorbell. I think that the answer in English should reflect that. Otherwise we may have seen them walking up the steps, through the window, barking dog, etc.