"They do not offer food."
Translation:De bjuder inte på mat.
Duolingo surprises me once again, presenting erbjuder for the first time when I'm strengthening my skills for fifth time
erbjuder also means 'offers', but it isn't taught in the course, it only appears in some accepted answers. The system tries to match whatever you input to the closest accepted answer. So you may get shown this depending on what you write.
I actually got it as a multiple choice answer while strengthening this skill and chose it based on process of elimination. I don't remember seeing bjuder in the lessons.
what is the difference between 'bjuder' and ' erbjuder' and why did they use 'på' with bjuder?
Bjuda means to treat someone to something, whereas erbjuda means to offer.
På is used here because that's the word you have to use with bjuda when it has an object thats being treated.
"They do not offer food."
Translation: De erbjuder inte på mat
At least for me that's what it said
The accepted multiple-choice selection for me was "De bjuder inte på mat" The question it gave me was: "They do not offer food".
Then either an incorrect translation has been added, or you misread. It is definitely not a valid translation. It would mean that they are offering something while standing on food.
From what I can see, that should not even be possible as a correct translation. If it shows up anyway somehow, report it.
Zmrzlina is right in that Bjuda = to offer something for free and Erbjuda = to offer something at a price. But I think the English word Offer can have both of these meanings. As in: Can I offer you a drink v.s. I can offer this xxx at a special price. . . . but then again, - we are not here to learn English!
Where does the "på" come from in this sentence? I had "De inte bjuder mat", which is wrong (probably because of the word order, which I mix up all the time :)), but I don't really get the meaning/purpose of "på" here?
It's a particle verb, so the på is part of the verb. Just like e.g. tycker om.
And you're right, the v2 rule is in effect so that'd be De bjuder inte på mat. :)
I'd say it is not a particle verb, it's just a verb which requires a preposition in order to have a second object. The only object it can take without a preposition is the person invited, or "treated", but if you want to say what you treat them to, you need a preposition. Much like in English with I treated them to food.
It's just that I think it's better if we can claim that the particle is at least almost always stressed, otherwise I wouldn't care either way.
Edit: Maybe I should clarify. His streak is currently at 666.
Please give a better explanation of bjuder. I thought ut was to offer or to invite. This sentence implies that they dont serve food at all. Invite implies they have food but they dont invite me to partake. Please explain.
For "offer", the first translation is "bjuder", but "bjuder" is marked wrong... Confusing for a learner. How would you have to use "bjuder" here, if at all?
You need the preposition as well: you bjuder på something. Hence the default translation for the sentence is De bjuder inte på mat.
So if you see this for the first time, there's no chance to get it right (if you use the first translation for 'offer', which is 'bjuder'). So maybe move erbjuder up as first translation?
The order isn't for the specific example, and the course content creators - amongst whom I am not one - can't affect it on a micro level.