"No soy un atleta."
Translation:I am not an athlete.
An athlete is not a profession. Otherwise you wouldn't have to say "professional athlete" when talking about a pro.
Think about it. If you were talking about Labron James' occupation you would either say "pro athlete" or "basketball player" instead of just an athlete.
I agree that it is confusing since this lesson's theme is occupations and they have sentences that use the unprofessional form.
Not using an article before a profession only applies if you are not using any modifiers. Which, in this case, you say you are not one, so an article is needed! I hope I helped!
The article determines the gender. So it can be either el atleta or la atleta. Most of the occupations are like this.
What throws me is that with the "a" at the beginning of "atleta," it is hard to hear whether the speaker says "un" or "una," and it was the female voice saying "un"! I put it on snail speed so I could hear the words separated, and I got it right, but still it seems just odd to hear a woman saying anything about herself being "un" anything!
So what if I wanted to say "I'm no athlete," meaning that I have no athletic talents whatsoever?
Thats colloquial English. I think what you mean is "no estoy atlético" or "I am not athletic," and I'm hoping I got the ser/estar thing right, but the adjective atlético is the point here.
In a previous discussion, one user said that if the the profession of a person is not modified, then "un/una" are left out. For example "Soy profesor" vs. "Soy un buen profesor." However, in this exercise, "atleta" is not modified, so why is "un" included?
Or perhaps one does not need to be a professional anything in order to be an athlete.
Duolingo: No soy un atleta Me: No you're not, Duo. Duolingo: ¿Que? Me: You're an app. You are no athlete
what's the difference of "no, i am not an athlete" and the answer they provide???
Since I'm male, I say "un atleta" But if a female were to say that she was an athlete, would she say "una atleta," or would it stay "un atleta"