1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "That is no moon!"

"That is no moon!"

Translation:Tuo ei ole kuu!

July 17, 2020

15 Comments


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

But it is fully operational


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Thomas31337

It's an older meme sir, but it checks out


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Nattju1

Se on avaruusasema!


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Pete215

Does not “tuo ei ole kuu” mean ”that is not the moon”. “That is no moon” is perhaps “tuo ei ole mikään kuu”, or similar?


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

You are right. However, this is a reference to SW, which affects the translation.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Dylan600886

Memes are all well and good, but they should not trump a correct translation. "That is not a moon" and "that is not the moon", if correct, should be accepted.


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

Yes, I thought the object in a negative sentence was always partitive?


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

That would be "that is not a part/piece of a/the moon".


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

Like NiallMulli, I also thought the object in a negative sentence was always partitive. Why the exception in this case?


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

This overview says that there is an exception to the negative sentence rule (see 1.4 https://uusikielemme.fi/finnish-grammar/grammatical-cases/the-partitive-case-partitiivi ) It seems that this sentence is that kind of exception?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Esther-Louise

I am wondering the same thing....?


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

As suspected, this is an exception. It applies to negative sentences where the verb is olla and we're talking about a countable thing. Then partitive is not used.

Vene on punainen (the boat is red)

Vene ei ole punainen (the boat is not red),(countable)

Vesi ei ole punaista (the water is not red),(uncountable)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Mari893657

Without knowing the context, it is impossible to know the "correct" answer. "That is no moon" translates to "tuo ei ole mikään kuu" whereas "tuo ei ole kuu" should be "that is not a moon." At the very least, both answers should be accepted.

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