"The human needs other people."
Translation:Der Mensch braucht andere Menschen.
has an English speaker checked these translations?
The sentences and the accepted translations in this course have been added by various people at various points in time -- and those people have varying degrees of competence in English and German. So you will find inconsistencies along the way.
Also, different groups of contributors have adopted different policies about what they will accept and what not; in "my day", the rule was not to accept Knaben or Buben as a translation for "boys", for example, as those were considered regionalism, but now you can find some sentences accepting them (that were touched by new contributors) while others (from back then) do not.
The course could really do with some quality control and consistency -- but that would require paying someone (well, several someones) to do this full-time and decide on what to accept and what not and then checking all the thousands of sentences to make sure they're uniform, rather than relying on the free time of volunteer contributors.
Mizinamo, I believe it is now self evident that Duo needs some salaried Course Stewards. Its seems to have outgrown its near auto-pilot course management. There also seems to be a very small % of 'rogue' material. It is quite striking. If simply for commercial reasons alone, Duo needs to clean up its courses. Programs are great but to give one the common sense of a four year old is a mammoth task, more suited to NASA etc. 'Bridged' thinking is another deficit. A team of salaried course stewards is surely the answer. There is another aspect worth considering. Germany is a post war success story but mishaps with some phrases could give a distorted impression, - if they were not so obviously whacky. This is also evident in the French course and almost certainly others. Duo used to be whacky in a disciplined way to assist learning. There is a noticable 'pollution' of this. Duolingo deserves to have more teacher investment to keep on track. Particularly skilled moderators (to be salaried) are easily identified from the courses and are surely ideal candidates.
There is no definite article before it, so it needs strong inflection, not weak inflection.
The strong ending for plural accusative is -e: andere Menschen
"the other people" (with definite article) would be die anderen Menschen, with the weak ending for plural accusative -en after the definite article.
What doe weak inflection vs strong inflection mean?
Strong inflection means that the adjective ending matches the gender, number, and case of the following noun. The last letter will be the same* as the last letter of the appropriate form of the definite article -- for example, -r for masculine nominative (like der), -e for feminine nominative (like die), -m for neuter dative (like dem), etc.
The adjective "does all the work" of showing the gender, number, and case: it's strong.
(* Exception: masculine/neuter genitive has -n for the adjective ending, not -s as in des. That's possibly influence from the weak endings or because masculine/neuter nouns usually have an -s in the genitive already and thus clearly show their case without the adjective having to do so.)
When there is a determiner before the adjective that shows the gender, number, and case of the noun -- for example, the definite article or a demonstrative such as dieser --, then the adjective takes weak inflection. The ending is a "generic" -e or -en. The adjective "doesn't do any work" in showing gender/number/case; it's weak. (It doesn't have to because the determiner already does this.)
The weak ending is -e in the nominative singular (and also for feminine/neuter accusative, since those always look like the nominatives), and -en everywhere else (masculine accusative, singular genitive/dative, all cases in the plural).
There is also mixed inflection, which is a combination of strong and weak -- basically, strong inflection where the determiner has no ending (so the adjective needs one) and weak inflection where the determiner has a gender/number/case ending (so the adjective doesn't need to have one as well). This is used after ein, kein, mein, dein, sein, ihr, unser, euer. For example, ein guter Mensch (mixed=strong since ein has no ending) but einem guten Menschen (mixed=weak since einem has an ending).
does it mean he should change the people he has around him because, maybe, they are not good people?
It could theoretically mean that -- "people who are not those people".
But I would interpret it as "people who are not himself", i.e. humans don't want to be alone but want to have "other people" around them.
I think eineFrau400587 isn't saying the human is always ungrammatical, just that it's ungrammatical in this particular generic usage, that is, this case in which the human is meant to refer to people generally. I'm not sure it is ungrammatical, but it's certainly not the typical way to do this. Any of these would convey the same meaning and sound less odd: a human needs other humans, humans need other humans, any human needs other humans, every human needs other humans, etc. You can say the duck is an aquatic bird, but the human is a bipedal primate sounds ... off.
Why not "Die person" in place of "der mensch"?
There are no German words person or mensch -- the correct spelling is Person and Mensch with a capital letter at the beginning.
die Person = the person. But the English sentence says "the human", not "the person", so der Mensch is a better translation.