Same here. The odd part is that it works on singular. Lei pranza la ristorante (with correct spelling) works. Maybe it's something with the plural of the subject?
why does it give a translation as "dine" but the reject "the men dine at the restaurant"?
Dine in English doesn't necessarily mean eat dinner, but in Italian cena can be the verb which means to eat dinner or the noun dinner. Dine can mean eat a meal, any meal in English. Since this is lunch, the more specific Italian might not accept the word dine, but I wonder if they would accept it for dinner.
As far as i can tell, prenzare=to have lunch, cenare=to have dinner. It appears that duo reserves the word "dine" for dinner
Ugh, I've had this problem twice now in this exercise. One of the earlier answers gladly accepted pranzare as "to lunch", but two out of three answers so far using this verb have not accepted "the x lunch", only "the x have/eat lunch". UGH.
Does anyone else feel like "The men take lunch at the restaurant" should be an acceptable translation? I don't know if I'm being influenced by Spanish here, where tomar can be used with food
Oddly, I don't take lunch. I either have lunch or eat lunch, but I can take a drink or medicine.
"Take lunch" is a workday term, as in, "I'm taking lunch now" (i.e., I'm taking my lunch break now and I'll see you in half an hour).
Il pranzo is a noun and means "the lunch." Pranzare is a verb meaning "to have lunch" of which pranzano is the third person plural ie. they have lunch. The translation is a little idiomatic in that "to eat" would be mangiare and so we have to accept some fluidity between eating and having in this case. Hope this helps :)
Does Duolingo accept "the men have lunch.." as well as "the men eat lunch..."? Because it should.
"He lunches, they lunch" DuoLingo could have meant the verb lunch instead of the noun. It is more common in English to say "eat lunch" or "have lunch".
I wrote that too. "The men are lunching" is a very peculiar construction but technically not incorrect. I've mostly heard people use "lunch" as a verb in a humorous way, to sound hoity-toity (like "Shall we lunch?"), rarely if ever seriously, which is maybe why it was rejected?
hmmm ... thanks for the suggestion - never thought of it as a "humorous" or "hoity-toity" usage - saw it more as parallel to "dining" as in "dining out tonight" - not common but to me not unusual -
pranzare is a verb that means
to eat lunch and so it must conjugate properly.
Is another way of saying this "Gli uomini mangiano pranzo al ristorante."?
Why is the translation : "The men have lunch at restaurant" is wrong ? I'm influenced by french : " Les hommes dinnent au restaurant" but I thought it would be okay :/ Does "al" means 'at the' rather than just "at" ? And if yes, how do we simply say : 'at' ? Thanks.
In English, we need some article. It can be "at a restaurant" or "at the restaurant" but just "at restaurant" does not sound like something a native speaker would say.
The French "au" is actually "a + le" the same way the Italian "al" is "a + il".
Could you tell me what's the difference between "Gli uomini pranzano al ristorante" and "Gli uomini pranzano nel ristorante"? Both are acceptable.
Literally, "al" is "at the" and "nel" is "in the". As to which is the preferred idiom in this context, I do not know.
Why can I not say "l'uomini"? Why does it have to be "gli uomini"? This is probably very basic, but I do not understand
l'uomo is "the man", singular
gli uomini is "the men", plural
So 'eat lunch' is an acceptable english translation here? But DL don't accept that translation.
It would be helpful to know more details. How was the question presented to you and how precisely did you respond? Free writing? Did you have an error or typo elsewhere? Multiple choice? Did you fail to select all of the valid responses?
We need to rule out an error on your end before we can chalk it up to an error or glitch behind the scenes.
I typed in "The men eat lunch at the restaurant" (free typing) and got it wrong, as "eat lunch" is not the same in Italian as "have lunch". I'm confused as to they're different concepts in Italian.
In Italian, "to have [food]" means to literally have it/own it/possess it. The sense of "to eat" is an idiom in English.
If you're 100% positive that you made no errors in your response, then it's either a glitch on Duolingo's end or an oversight on the part of the course contributors. Flag it and select "My answer should have been accepted".
Now only have lunch works, whole eats lunch gets rejected Both have the same meaning, in this case anyway
Im super frustrated...I've completed 2 lessons an my XP points werent added to the leaderboard total. I cant get through to custkmer support. Please advise.
Why is it 'al' and not 'nel'? I thought 'al' (= a+il) meant either 'direction' (Scrivo al ragazzo) or 'made of' (gelato al cioccolato). Is this a new meaning, and if so, what is the difference with 'nel'?
Italian "a" can correspond to English "at" or "to". And just like in English, Italians say that people eat "at" restaurants more often than "in" restaurants.
Idiomatic usage. It's just the difference in how different languages frame things.
I wrote the men dine which is listed as one of the options but was marked wrong...why? I could have said the men have lunch but dine was also an option.
Why can't I 'take' lunch? Why must I 'have' lunch? To take lunch is a very refined thing to do!
Because the course contributors didn't include that in the list of accepted answers.
Click on "uomini" so she just speaks that. Now picture her on a horse named Mini trying to slow her - woaa mini
Why is it wrong when you just skip "the"? It doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. -_-
Because all languages have grammar rules. Some languages require the use of the definite article in certain contexts.
It would be same in English "Why is wrong when skip 'the'? It not change meaning of sentence." Semantics and grammar are separate things.
"The men have lunch at a restaurant" sounds more natural but I guess for the purposes of a direct translation...
I'm sure that's right - al ristorante means both 'at the restaurant' and 'at a restaurant' -.
No, it doesn't.
a + il: at/to the. "at a restaurant" would be "a un ristorante".
I think it does - it can be used generically , ie - the men lunch at some restaurant or other, doesn't matter which - often said as 'al ristorante'
to have lunch is also to luncheon-it is not incorrect. Bad form Duolingo!
Unless it refers to a specifically formal event, "luncheon" is archaic/posh. The course contributors tend to prefer modern standard usage, and this is "lunch" in the general sense.
HOW DOES THIS EVAN MAKE SINCE AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE MAN HAVE DINER THAT IS NOT PRPER