"Your wife is a professor, Carrie."
Translation:زَوْجَتِك أُسْتاذة يا كَري.
20 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
1989
Yo no me aclaro, ¿Carrie es un hombre o una mujer? No hay problema si es una pareja de Lesbianas pero es un poco complicado para poder aclararse con los posesivos.
Carrie es una mujer. Y puedes saber porque dijeron زَوْجَتِك si hubieron hablando con un hombre dirían زَوْجَََتَك
Zawajatik a una mujer y Zawajatak a un hombre. Entonces la diferencia es en el parte final. Espero que es un poco mas claro ahora.
Can anyone explain to me why in previous lesson أستاذة was ma'am and now it means professor? Is it the same word or not?
- 1279
It is the same word. I had only heard it in the context of "professor" until this course. I come from six years of grad school research in Morocco, speaking Arabic. Perhaps it is a regional use.
I am learning Arabic because i am interested in the culture of arab speaking world, not because i am trying to import western culture into socially conservative muslim communities. Lgbtq is not necessary to learn family adjectives and, in fact, makes it more confusing. I switched off facetagram onto duolingo in order to stay away from this bs, and i wouldn't have gotten this far in the course if they put this stuff in the beginning of the course. But they (intentionally, creators know what they're doing) put it in at a point where I'm already invested in the course. At this rate, I'll be banned off these comment boards as well.
Also, it is spelled Kerry or Carey in masculine forms. Both, counties in Ireland.
There's a sentence I would never be able to use in any Muslim country. And it's confusing WRT possessives.
What if those lesbians moved out of their Arab countries in order to be able to marry?
Keep your agenda to yourselves. Arabic is the language of Quran and we do not adhere by this ideology.
It may be Duolingo's policy of inclusion that requires students to learn and understand these odd and confusing phrases this early on in their learning. I think if the research was more closely examined they would find that they have favor inclusion over a pedagogically sound approach. I would suggest that, though LGBTQ etc. people and relationships do indeed exist, they occur much more rarely than these lessons might suggest and perhaps a more appropriate approach would be to create a specialized section for alternative sexual orientations.
Inclusion and pedagogy are not in conflict here. You (and others) dislike this sentence (and/or are confused by it), and you respond - but your brain does not turn off in the process. It is still paying attention, and learning. If you believe that research shows otherwise, you should include a citation of a peer-reviewed paper (you might try e.g. PubMed or Google Scholar to start).
Creating a separate section of LGBTQ topics would not be equally inclusive; it would send the message that LGBTQ people should only be discussed in explicitly LGBTQ contexts. Including topics about LGBTQ people more generally reflects the message that LGBTQ people are just people, and can (should) be treated like any other people.
Regarding proportionality, it's far from obvious to me that the incidence of LGBTQ content on Duolingo exceeds the incidence of LGBTQ people in the world. If you truly want to make this argument, perhaps begin by calculating the frequency of such sentences in this course. I do not expect that it will exceed or even approach (e.g.) 5%, using a recent US figure (https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx).