I agree actually. "multicoloured" isn’t a very widely used word in English though and the cultural emphasis in its meaning is a bit different. We're having similar issues with violetti, which technically is "violet" in English but we translate it as "purple", because that's what English speakers answer when you ask them what you get when you mix blue and red. The Finnish purppura on the other hand is used rarely. We look at the world from a slightly different perspective. :)
Right. Unlike violet and purple, värikäs and kirjava have two different meanings, though. You can be värikäs in just one or a few colors. Btw, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a French native speaker to whom multicolore would be the most natural word to use and pourpre means deep red, unlike violet (red and blue). Funny how words travel.
The Finnish word värikäs is a bit stronger than the English "colourful". In everyday language it usually has the undertone of the colour(s) being very bright and eye-catching or even garish. The English word is much more neutral in tone.
I think the whole purple/violet/lilac/red/blue debacle might have something to do with concept of the "royal purple". While technically that shade is the same in every place, what the actual royalty wore/wear may have influenced how we view the colour in various corners of Europe. Different countries imported their most expensive dyes from different places. I admit that this is only speculation for my part. :)
Thanks Zzzz..., It's reassuring that dl-finnish approaches finnish from a finnish point of view. Though, I'm still tempted to tip my hat in admiration to those intrepid tourists seeking out their favorite burger/fries/cola in the congo or sahara, "Dr.RonaldMcDonald I presume?".
I believe not, Finnish does not seem to have a specific verb for "to have", rather possession (not ownership) is expressed by the structure. On the other hand, there is the verb "omistaa," meaning "to own," perhaps it has a different flavor in Finnish and could be used? I don't know... So we could say "En halua omistaa kirjavaa kravattia," again meaning "I do not want to own a colorful tie."
Please, fill us in someone more knowledgeable :)
That's not true. "I do not want a colorful tie" is accepted and has been for a while.
If it was you reporting "I do not want colorful tie" around the time you posted this comment, note that that's not a correct English sentence because of the missing a (or, alternatively, the).
The way the system works is that a wrong answer does not (yet) lead to feedback about what was wrong. Instead, the above suggested answer is shown. That doesn't mean the answer wasn't almost right or that no other answers are accepted.
I know I have been going around and around with this for the entire course, but is there any way to imply a more definite article for this situation? "I do not want the colorful tie"? As if the speaker were choosing among several options, one of them colorful? And if not, that's fine, I'll try and get over it, but it seems like there ought to be some way to distinguish one option from among several available.
I am not blaming any language for anything, which would not make a lot of sense. I'm saying that, pedagogically, it is counterproductive to add this form that does not get translated into Finnish, especially since the pair of sentences are used both ways. Just my two cents. And yes, the sentence is perfectly valid in English.
Thanks annika_a, Time is nigh if not overdue, for that "sun to set", whence it "waived the rules". Perhaps this is yet another front, on which I'd applaud dl's formidable task ahead, to tilt our heavily anglified smorgasbord canon, and show us how for millennia, more disciplined diction and grammar systems may have prevailed and even happily lived together.
I used to get a bit frustrated when I made an honest typo because Duo would count me wrong and I'd have to re-do the whole sentence, sometimes typing on a tiny keyboard.
Then there was a sweet spot when he would admonish me, "You have a typo." And I would rejoice because actually I hadn't done the partitive right, but I'd get it right the next time.
Now Duo is going overboard. He has become one of those progressive teachers who are afraid to raise my affective filter by telling me I've made a mistake. He says nothing at all.
Now I no longer trust him. So please dear reader, can you tell me if "En halua kirjävää kravattia" is correct? Duo told me it was. But from the title of the SD above, it looks like kirjavaa does not have the shorter, umlautted a.