I've reported this several times in the past couple of months. Whenever I review it in the morning when I'm half asleep I end up translating Tá púdar agam time and again. I figure if it was really Tá púdar uaim she would have said it!
Maybe one of these days it will dawn on you that reporting the same thing over and over again is only wasting your time and the time of the people getting the reports. Either they can't fix this type of problem or they won't fix it.
(In this case, the only fix available is to delete this exercise entirely - the people who get the reports can't change the audio, and the people who can change the audio won't make individual changes, so audio mismatches will not be fixed until there is a major change made to the Irish course).
OK, so post a sticky thread at the top of the discussion forum stating that in this case it creates problems if users follow the course directions to report glitches.
I'm just an ordinary user like you - your following the course directions isn't causing a problem for me, because I only know about it when you complain that nobody every does anything about those reports.
The course contributors are once again focusing their efforts on developing new content for the course. I'd prefer they not waste their time wading through reports of things that would have been fixed long ago if they should be fixed and could be fixed.
This seems like a fundamental issue with the architecture duolingo has set up - not an oversight but a decision that makes maintaining and creating things a bit silly. This, as well as how the contributor interface is dumbed down to the level where issues like this are inevitable (and confusing for learners). Would reports even go towards fixing this fundamental issue? I now feel like reports are basically useless, at least it helps for the next tree version!
SatharnPHL, you state that you are an ordinary user but that in fact is disingenuous, as you are designated as a moderator. Whether you are a moderator, or "just an ordinary user like" us, your tone of reply as in "Maybe one of these days it will dawn on you..." comes across to me, and probably to others, given the number of dislikes and the further responses of others, as sarcastic and condescending. If you don't intend to come across that way, perhaps you could endeavor to use wording that is more clearly polite and respectful. But if you do intend to be sarcastically condescending-- well, all I can say is that anyone with those qualities is a very poor choice of moderator, regardless of their knowledge of a language, and anyone who writes that way on this forum, deserves push-back and dislikes.
The post that you are complaining about was written on May 29, 2017. I was invited to become a moderator in January, 2019, about 18 months after that post was written.
There was nothing disingenuous about my description of myself then as an ordinary user.
The only additional power that I have as a moderator is to delete comments that are not directly relevant to the sentence. Like StanStanDaMan's original comment, and the subsequent comments, including your comment. Indeed any comment saying "I've reported an error" is, by definition, spam in a sentence discussion - just report, no need to tell the world.
As a Moderator, I don't have the power to sticky posts - I have to make a request to Support if I want a post stickied - my request might get more attention than other users, but that's about all.
As a Moderator, I don't have access to the Exercise database to correct errors or add additional answers. I don't even have a way to contact the Contributors, the people who can make those changes.
There is a saying that the definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result, and it has been variously mis-attributed to Einstein, Mark Twain and Ben Franklin, among others. I wouldn't necessarily go that far, but repeatedly reporting the same error again and again, expecting a different result, isn't behaviour that deserves respect. When it burdens other users, it deserves push-back and dislikes, but I'm not surprised that people who don't like being told that they're wasting other peoples time down-vote such explanations, instead of downvoting the people who are wasting everyone else's time.
Maybe I'm missing something, but would it be so impossible to correct the text, from "uaim" to "agam"?
Nothing is impossible to fix. As a former IT person, who created and coded many things, the answer is not "they would have to delete the exercise completely" or that reporting 'is a waste of their time'. Either fix it or delete it. It is not a bad idea to delete completely something that teaches incorrectly and/or confuses the student. There are many such issues in this language learning course which force the learner to deliberately learn something wrong in order to progress. Why do they have the option to report if 'it is just wasting their time' ?? This is not acceptable. It is wrong. Period. It truly brings down this wonderful opportunity into something strange and stupid and becomes 'a waste of the learner's time' in many ways. Considering that Duolingo is constantly trying to get people to purchase the 'plus' program... why should we waste our money?
Yes, I have read https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/4369754 and I do understand the issues. However it has been years of invalid teachings here according to many of the discussions.
I worked for a banking system. You don't get 'years' to fix the problem. You are lucky if you get an hour to fix it.
Is "a powder" a ephemism for a trip to the bathroom? "I want a powder" is an odd thing to say, if not.
In Australia we would say that we want or need a tablet(for a headache or some kind of pain relief)
Tá … ó X could be interpreted as either “X needs …” or “X wants …”, depending upon the dialect.
It means exactly what it states — the thing that I want (or need) is (a) powder.
If it's referring to talcum powder it would be more usual to say"I want some powder"
Since there’s no context with this exercise, talcum powder can’t be unambiguously identified as the speaker’s desideratum.