"We have the letters."
Translation:Vi har breven.
"Brev" is an ett-word, so it doesn't get the "erna" endings like the en-words.
To make "ett brev" (a letter) plural, you don't change it "brev" (letters), although you take away the "ett".
To make it definite (the), the singular is "brevet" (the letter), and plural is "breven" (the letters).
So to recap, the 4 forms are:
ett brev - a letter
brev - letters
brevet - the letter
breven - the letters
Is this consistent for all neuter words? I'm finding the rules for neuter versus non-neuter declensions quote perplexing.
I also am a bit frustrated that some less common English syntax isn't allowed in translations. It feels natural to translate "Jag dricker inte kaffet" to "I drink not the coffee" because where I grew up that's not uncommon construction, but I am marked wrong and the app insists on "I do not drink the coffee."
Not across all neuter nouns, but at least across the vast majority of them. I'd use that as the default, and keep a mental list of exceptions updated as I go.
Our main problems with less common English syntax are 1) it's actually quite a lot of work to keep these updated as well, for a comparatively small number of users, and 2) Duolingo insists on showing any accepted translation to users at any point, which easily causes problems when other learners - especially non-native speakers trying to improve their English - come across the less common translations. As long as that technical limitation exists, we need to consider each sentence individually, and as a result, we're not quite as consistent as we'd like to be. If Duolingo ever introduces a feature "accept this, but don't display it otherwise", I'd be thrilled to start entering a lot more of these translations.
"Vi har bokstäverna." is grammatically correct with similar meaning. But I don't think it is correct answer here.
Bokstäverna (bokstav) means letter as in a letter of the alphabet, not a letter you write and mail.