Translation:I saw that they were wearing ties and suits.
Technically yes, but the words for ties and suits were rearranged. With duo you need to follow the order of the given nouns.
This inconsistency bugs me too, Ilkeston.
To justify the 'go and come'/'come and go' situation, Sitesurf once said, "The natural order in English is 'come and go". In French, it's "aller et venir".'
Sitesurf is absolutely right of course, so why does this rule also not apply to 'des cravates et des costumes'?
What I'm wondering is if "des cravates et des costumes" is a set phrase such as "suits and ties" in English, or if one could just as well say "des costumes et des cravates"?
I gave "I saw that they wore ties and suits." DL: "Non", "I saw that they were wearing ties and suits."
"wore" and "were wearing" seem pretty similar to me.
In countless other exercises, they have accepted and sometimes even preferred the English full past tense as a correct translation of the French imperfect tense. But here it is ruled unacceptable.
I left out the "that" in English which has been accepted in numerous other lessons and examples. So why suddenly is that not acceptable? This is another example of the frustrating inconsistencies in the course that encourage people to quit, as many people I know have. One doesn't even get credit for what they've taught you, as any time it could be reversed in a subsequent lesson.
Sounds like "j'ai vu *tee...." to me. I got it right through mere guesswork.
I hear qu'ils when French Alice at Natural Voices says the same thing though.
I also wonder why Duo accepts this for other questions but not for this one. Both sound very alike
Since we have no context, couldn't this also be translated to "I saw that they were carrying ties and suits"?
Rien ne dit que la phrase à l'oral est au pluriel donc j'ai vu qu'il portait des cravates et des costumes devrait être acceptée.
But would it really make sense that one person would be wearing multiple suits and ties? (or ties and suits?)