The English translation doesn't make much sense. What does it mean 'we go to grandpa and grandma'? I put down 'we go to grandpa and grandma's'.
You do say this in English (I'm American). But you wouldn't say it if you were going to their house. Rather, if someone said "are grandma and grandpa coming to us"? You would say "no we are going to grandma and grandpa".
It is more uncommon, but not unheard of. It depends on context and without context you'd assume they mean their house in the sentence above--sometimes duolingo does such sentences. ---ie. Pardon ik ben een appel.
A more clear sentence would be, "we are going to grandma and grandpa's house."
As a california native I would never ever say "grandma and grandpa" I would only say: "grandma and grandpassssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss"
I assume you also wouldn't jump in the car and say "we go to grandma and grandpa" unless you were speaking like a child.
Yes. I see where you come from. It is a very specific case though. I don't think the editor had this in mind when creating the translation. Anyway as long as the more common saying is accepted, I don't have too much of an issue with it.
That's right. "We are going to grandpa and grandma" sounds very strange and would never be said in English. I wrote "We are going to see grandpa and grandma" and was marked wrong.
It depends. You could already be at Grandpa's house and jump out of the car and tell mom and dad that you are going to grandma and grandpa or you could be at your own house and grandma and grandpa have just arrived and you are going to greet them, or they could simply be in another room.
I would totally say "We are going to grandpa and grandma's." Just like I would say, "I'm going to peter's"
Agreed. No native English speaker would say "We go to grandpa and grandma."
Unless we are not talking about their house, but about them at some other location.
Sadly it appears it's not accepted any longer. Just entered it and it was wrong.
The sentence doesn't really indicate that we're going to grandma and grandpa's house, though.
This is going to be tricky to do, because there is a lot of variation on these titles. I've heard "grandma," "grandmother," "gramma," "nonny," "nana," "grandmama," etc....
In my experience, Duolingo focuses on standard usages and not all the options through dialects and lesser used terms. I would assume they accept "grandmother" and "grandma", since those are the two most common standardized nouns for "Grandmother".
True, that does sound right. When I finished the lesson I noticed the Dutch appear to have a term for "Grandma" and a term for "Grandmother." No problems after all.
Right, so they should accept nan, since most Englishman would say "nan and grandad" over "grandpa and grandma."
I think they focus their English translation on American English; that might explain why nan is not accepted.
I always put grandma before grandpa when I am talking about my grandparents. It feels more natural, like mom and dad.
I do too. I think most people do-- We get that in our brains and then use it over and over until it's even more engrained.
My Dutch wife confirms that this is what you say when you are going to visit oma and opa at their house.. so lets admit that that is what this means and forget other scenarios. In Dutch you say you are going to the person but in English you say you are going to the place that belongs to them, their house is their possession. So the correct English must have the s at the end. We are going to grandma and grandpa's (house). Please just admit that this is wrong and correct it.
Nana is indeed colloquial use, but it is not standard. Duolingo focuses on standard speech and cannot accommodate all dialects.
It actually is a fairly good reason. They have to put every single optional translation in by hand. If they did every minor usage, that would be a lot of work, and it would slow down the path to beta and then full release considerably. This is true of all the languages. The German tree doesn't accept "nanny" or "nana" either, as far as I know. There are simply too many words in the English language to include every possible translation ever.
Thank you, I see that you understand my argument, and I understand and accept yours. By the way, I realise that obviously not every alternate translation could be noted before the beta release of the course. I did not necessarily expect 'nana (etc.)' to be accepted, I just think it should be. I suppose that's really the point of the beta phase - fix up mistakes, and make the course more user-friendly to everyone. Grazzi ħafna.
It's all good! I hope one day everything correct works :) Xorti tajba!
I still have to disagree. One or two extra alternate translates cannot possibly slow down the entire course. And when it comes down to it, 'nana' and 'nanny' are both very commonly used terms and should definitely be accepted.
And besides, what is the 'Report' button for? It is so alternate translations and mistakes can be brought to the course-makers' attention. 'Nana / nanny' are just as valid alternate translations for this sentence as any other translations for any other sentences.
Your disagreement is duly noted, but economies of time disagree with you--the more things you have to do (there are many sentences with grandma or other words that people want accepted) the more time it takes to release a product. They would have to do all the sentences with "grandma" plus any others that have alternate meanings that people report--you can see that this could get out of hand quickly.
As far as 'nana' and 'nanny' being very common, I never hear them in the western or eastern United States, (I think it's a southern thing)? It's VERY regional.
However, I agree with you that if you report it and they accept it, then great! However, for the time being, it might be safer to use the standard "grandma".
Wij gaan naar opa en oma toe. When do you use the "toe" and what is the difference?
From what I understand in the course so far, is that when you add "toe" it translates more as "towards", instead of "to".
This in English is fine. It seems strange only without context. "Who do you ask about forestry?" "I go to grandpa and/or grandma."
But more importantly, in Dutch when you go to (someone), you go to their location.
Naar is to but try to think of it as being synonymous with 'near'. I go near grandpa and grandma, where 'near' means into their vicinity.
Though it doesn't indicate that we are going to their house, we would still be going to "See them" therefore it should be we are going to see grandma and grandpa, for this is not fluent english. Is there any specific reason this is incorrect?