"Es gibt zahlreiche Gruppen."

Translation:There are numerous groups.

May 19, 2013

This discussion is locked.


So "es gibt" can be used for plurals?

[deactivated user]

    Yes, both "there is" and "there are" translate to "es gibt". "gibt" agrees with "es", not with the noun that follows.


    Makes sense-- zahlreiche = "number rich" = numerous


    that's also how i remember this word


    Why doesn't this except "bands"? Does the context somehow rule it out?


    I don't think so. Probably should be accepted.


    I've seen other sentences like this where it's "Es sind..." (which struck me as odd, but I was told it was correct). Is there any sort of rule here?


    Large is given as one of the meanings of zahlreiche, so why is "There are large groups" apparently incorrect? How should one distinguish between a large number of groups and groups which are large?


    Mnemonic tip : "Zahl" means "number" and "reiche" means "rich", so zahlreiche literally means "a rich number of something" or "many".


    Yes, exactly, so countless should be accepted in my opinion, yet it was marked incorrect!


    Just because there is a large number of them doesn't mean there are too many to count. According to Wiktionary, countless would be unzählig, unzählbar or zahllos.

    [deactivated user]

      Usually, it doesn't mean large. The only exception I've found is "ein zahlreiches Publikum". Note that the noun is in the singular.


      Are viele and zahlreiche synonyms? Can I use Viele instead of zahlreiche in context of this sentence? Pease comment,


      Viele is used to describe many, or several. Zahlreiche would be used to make more of a point of the number, for example where you would say numerous in English. It's slightly more formal too.


      I barely could gettin' the last word 'Gruppen'.


      Same here. It sounded more like "Groppen."


      Same...It's a triple exercise: writing, listening and figuring out what she's trying to say...


      Yes, the last word was really unclear. Caught me out both first time and on the repeat after I got it wrong the first time!


      Sounds like "Koopen" to me. This one needs to be re-recorded.


      It was the woman speaking in the lesson. I understood the man in the "forum" just fine.


      So to be clear, this means that there are many groups, not that there are groups that consist of many individuals, right? Is there a way to change this sentence slightly to express that other concept?


      It wouldn't be a slight change as its a completely different meaning. Die Gruppen bestehen aus viele Leute?


      Well, all the relevant concepts are the same, so I thought it might be slight even if the meaning was very different... I think in Dutch "er zijn talrijke groepen" might already be ambiguous between the two meanings (not sure though). But I see that's not the case for German.

      Thank you for your reply :)


      Why can't 'es sind' be used?


      In most cases, "Es gibt" is the way to say both "there is" and "there are". You wouldn't use 'sind' with 'es' in any case. It would have to be "es ist" or "sie sind".


      Actually 'es' is used with 'sind'. If you want some examples look here: http://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch?query=es+sind&source=german

      [deactivated user]

        Yes, but "es sind" translates to "they are", "these are" or "those are", not "there are".


        How then would you translate, for example: "Es sind momentan keine Anmeldeserver zum Verarbeiten der Anmeldeanforderung verfügbar."? To my mind "es sind" here cannot translate as "they are", "these are" or "those are" but rather as "there are.." As in "There are currently no logon servers available to service the logon request."

        [deactivated user]

          My point is that "es sind" on its own never translates to "there are". You need to add something like "vorhanden" or "da" for it to mean "there are". "es sind ... vorhanden/da" is one unit. You can never ever drop that second bit.

          [deactivated user]

            That's "es sind ... verfügbar". You can't drop "verfügbar". In this case, "es" is just a dummy pronoun. You might as well say "Momentan sind keine Anmeldeserver zum Verarbeiten der Anmeldeanforderung verfügbar".


            Duolingo wont allow me to reply to your response, so I have to place my reply here:

            When you drop the 'es sind' from the sentence in German, the 'there are' in the English translation also disappears:

            "Momentan sind keine Anmeldeserver zum Verarbeiten der Anmeldeanforderung verfügbar". translates to:  "Currently no logon servers are available to service the logon request."

            Which to my mind just confirms that "Es sind" in this sentence is correctlly translated to "There are".

            But I think you have misunderstood my point. It was stated that 'sind' isn't used with 'es'.  I mearly pointed out that in some situations these two words can be used together.

            You stated that 'es sind' never translates to 'there are' and I have shown, in at least one situation, that it does in fact translate to "there are".

            I'm not trying to list all situations where 'es sind' translates to 'there are'. I only wanted to let others learners of German here know that they will come across circumstances where 'es sind' does in fact translate to 'there are'.


            Okay, but 'Es sind' on it's own doesn't even form a sentence, so I'm not sure how useful that is. And is really beside the point I was making.

            But to your point, perhaps you can clarify a sentence some native speakers said is ok, which has no 'verfügbar' , 'da' or 'vorhaden' :

            “Es sind viele Besucher im Garten."

            Were they wrong to say this is okay? Or is something like 'da' implied but can be left out in this case?


            Here's some more discussion for the sentence "Es sind Planzen im Garten." https://www.duolingo.com/comment/120350 Still not sure I understand when "es sind" can mean "there are", but maybe it will help others.


            Why not "da sind"?


            The groups are rich in number could also mean that the groups are large. If eine zahlreiche Gruppe does not mean a large group ok else it should have been accepted.


            Is it okay to say "There are number of groups?"


            I'm disappointed "countless" wasn't accepted for "zahlreiche".


            Countless is more hyperbolic that numerous. Perhaps there are only twelve groups vs thousands


            What is wrong with "it gives numerous grupes"


            "Es gibt" is the normal German way of saying "there is..." or "there are....". Geben does mean to give, but it is not used in this sentence in such a literal sense. You are right in that it does literally translate to "It gives numerous groups", but of course that doesn't make sense in English.


            so question, does German ever use "es gibt" for it gives? or is it always going to be "there is"?


            It has many groups? It should be accepted even though strange


            May I ask why it says "es gibt"? I don't think I have come across this before. To me, it seems as if it is translated "it gives." Is there a reason it would translate as "there are"? Is there ever a time that it is translated "it gives"?


            It's been a long time now since you posted this, but "es gibt" is just how one says "there are" in German.


            Why does "multiple" not work for "zahlreiche"?


            I answered "There are a large number of groups" which was marked incorrect but I think it should be allowed. But on that page Duo said the correct answer is "There are a range of groups." I've seen this before where the answer on the quiz page is different than the answer Duo gives in the discussion. 'Range' doesn't seem to be correct at all. I submitted it.

            I would like Duo to always provide the same answer on the quiz page and also include the mouse-overs for each of the words so I wouldn't have to go to the discussion page when I have a simple question.


            "Es gibt" is translated as "there is" or "there are".


            why is countless wrong?


            That's a very common question in this thread. ;) The answer seems to be that "countless" implies that there are a ridiculous number of groups, where numerous could mean twenty.


            Is Gruppen Akkusative? If it is, what is the rule for plural nouns in akkusative? Just add -n at the end of the words not ending with -n or -s?


            The audio for "Gruppen" is impossible to understand.


            "countless" is incorrect?


            Can you explain why "zahlreiche" just used previously in this lesson as many is not accepted in this sentence, instead numerous which in English is pretty much the same

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