Translation:I like the city but I prefer the woods.
Why do they constantly use "na coillte" (plural) to translate woods, which is uncountable and acts a singular in English? If I were to change the English slightly, and say "... but I prefer the forest." it would mean the same thing, but the Irish would certainly be "an choill" at that point. This is very confusing to me.
In American English it is always uncountable. In Modern British English that is a quaint archaism. I have not heard one person in casual speech ever use the word "woods" to mean "forests". Even if you can justify their translation, it is obviously not the most correct translation, and yet "coill" is not accepted right now.
I didn't say that I expected "coill" to be accepted as an English translation at all. It's not English. I also didn't say that I think "coill" should be accepted as an Irish translation of an entire English sentence. Then again, this isn't the only "sentence" that suffers from this problem. One of the "sentences" is just "woods". Also, note that in this sentence "city" is singular and most likely abstract. One doesn't say, "I like the city, but I prefer the forests." One would more reasonably say, "I like the city, but I prefer the forest."
I didn’t say that one does say “I like the city, but I prefer the forests”. I did say that “woods” doesn’t mean “forests”.
I agree that one would more reasonably say “I like the city, but I prefer the forest” over “I like the city, but I prefer the forests” — not surprisingly, coillte (but not coill ) can be translated as either “woods” (in the countable sense) or “forest”. There isn’t always an exact grammatical translation for words — consider bríste (in the singular form) vs. “trousers” (in the plural form for a single pair).