1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Me kuulemme, että ne ovat ka…

"Me kuulemme, että ne ovat kaukana."

Translation:We can hear that they are far away.

July 1, 2020

10 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/n2fole00

Is, We hear that they are far away, incorrect?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MCRmadness

No, in fact it is a literal translation of the original phrase.

"We can hear..." is actually "Me voimme kuulla..."


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AGreatUserName

There's very little difference between "we hear" and "we can here" in this context in English, except that "we can hear" is more natural.

Both should be accepted. "Can" should definitely not be marked wrong for this sentence.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JANBOEVINK

On the basis of your statement I have reported that -We hear that they are far away- should be accepted.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TheWordPunk

"we hear" is acceptable. It's said in English.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Patito1703

Why ne ovat and no he ovat? Which is the difference?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MCRmadness

Both should be accepted - 'he' is used about humans and 'ne' about everything else but in this sentence there is no context so it's just a missing alternative translation. (You can report it.)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Zlatka_M

Why should we use 'can' in this sentence?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ZaidKhalifa

It is just implied meaning.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AGreatUserName

It's just a bit more natural in English, but both are correct.

Learn Finnish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.