I think there are too many answers for this question because everytime I enters doulingo to answer it gave me this question the first
So everytime I writes a new answer
Some of the answers I wrote and it gave it correct are :
They eats apple
They eat an apple
But I never till now wrote this answer
of course it is correct!
you can always omit "bir" for a/an unless you want to stress it, and unless there is an adjective. And actually usually it is even weird to use it, like when you are talking about profession, gender etc
however, if it were "they eat a red apple", we would have had to say "onlar kırmızı bir elma yerler"
As far as I understand, no, the lack of ‘bir’ just means that you're not emphasising how many apples (it's similar to the difference between ‘I eat one apple’ and ‘I eat an apple’). If you wanted to indicate determination you could use the ending ‘yı (i/u/ü)’, yielding ‘onlar elmayı yerler’, but this is only true for direct objects.
It is not correct guys, as I am Turkish native speaker, pronunciation is shit and additionally, no Turkish guy can understand this sentence when they hear it. Moreover, "bir" is not alternative to the article in English. Because, there is not any article in Turkish language, "bir" means one as a number. If you say "I am eating an apple", Tranlation is "Ben elma yiyorum" not with bir.
Juraj_Pechac, you are rigth when you write that "they eat the apple"="onlar elmayı yer", "elmayı "="elma" at accusative case. But not rigth when you write "they eat an apple"="onlar elma yer", "elma" at "accusative" case. "Elma" is at nominative case, because it is an indefinite apple. Did you mix your words?
Onlar elma yer - elma is general direct object
Onlar elmayı yer - elmayı is specific direct object
What is the Accusative Case? The accusative case is used to signal the direct object (the thing that is being acted upon). We also use the accusative case after certain verbs and prepositions.
The questions for the accusative case are Who?/Whom? or What?
Remember, native speakers think differently. They eat chicken (Onlar tavuk yer) makes sense in English as well as we eat pasta (Biz makarna yeriz). Chicken generally needs an -s for pluralisation but the context says otherwise here as we can tell they mean chicken in general in an undefinable amount. Same with pasta, which is very unclear whether that is singular, plural, what is A pasta? İs it a plate or an overall type? İs it a noodle? They eat apple however makes no sense in english as we would say They eat apple-s. Turkish grammar isn't as arcane however so elma does not need pluralisation here (elmalar) as they do not have different words for different amounts (goose, geese / mouse, mice / fish, fish). So even though it sounds incorrect reading it back in eglish in your head, it does make sense to native speakers as their visualisation of things (for lack of a better word) are slightly different.
this question is answered above, please always read other comments before asking, otherwise the discussion get too crowded and nobody can find answers easily. When you say "onlar", -ler at the end of the verb is optional. If you want to omit "onlar", you have to use it. So "Onlar yer", "Yerler" and "Onlar yerler" are all correct
What's wrong with "they eat the apple"? I was told that a lack of any defining sentence structure like a suffix on "elma" or using "bir" before hand means that it can translate to both "the apple" and "an apple" (or rather it doesn't mean quite that in Turkish, but we have to pick one in English). Am I wrong? If so, I think Duolingo needs to update their notes
That's true in general, but not when the word in question is the direct object. A definite object would have to be in the definite accusative case, taking the suffix -(y)I. However, an indefinite object in Turkish is not specific for number, so the sentence above can mean both ‘they eat an apple’ and ‘they eat apples’. ‘They eat
the apple’ would be ‘elma
yı yerler’; ‘they eat
s’ instead would be ‘elma
In case you're unfamiliar with this course's shorthand for suffixes: ‘(y)’ is a buffer consonant, only used when the word ends in a vowel; ‘I’ signifies four-way vowel harmony: ı-i-u-ü.
Sorry This is not logical The indefinite article in turkish gives an imperfect noun. No article would suggest either just apple - cant remember what that part of speach is called perhaps someone could enlighten me - or the apple At no point so far have we been the definite article which could lead the student to believe that it does not exist.
There is no article per se in Turkish, but there are ways of making nouns definite, which would be translated with a definite article in English (‘the’). Direct objects are assumed to be indefinite (and also not specific for number) when they have no ending (‘elma’), but definite when they have the ‘accusative’ ending -(y)I (→ ‘elmayı’). In general, adjectives (when not followed by an indefinite marker like ‘bir’) make a noun definite: ‘kırmızı elma’ = ‘the red apple’ (as a subject, but as a direct object this would still need the accusative ending to be correct: ‘kırmızı elmayı’); ‘kırmızı bir elma’ = ‘a/one red apple’.
What this all means in the end is that there are four ways to mark ‘apple’ for definiteness and number in this sentence:
‘elma yerler’: unmarked → ‘they eat an apple’ or ‘they eat apples’;
‘bir elma yerler’: marked as indefinite singular → ‘they eat an/one apple’
‘elmayı yerler’: marked as definite singular → ‘they eat the apple’;
‘elmaları yerler’: marked as definite plural → ‘they eat the apples’.
If the object is indefinite it cannot be marked for plural, so ‘onlar elmalar yerler’ would simply be ungrammatical.
Nabeelawkhan, have a look at the notes of Selcen about personal pronouns and others: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/7736569. You wiill get an owerview of pronouns topic.If you look for "Pronouns in Turkish grammar" or "Personal pronoun in Turkish grammar", you will find o lot of other sites.
As explained below: that's an option, but it doesn't have to be ‘yerler’. With human referents, both singular and plural third person can be used: ‘onlar yer’ and ‘onlar yerler’. ‘-ler’ would only be necessary if the subject weren't present and thus the number could only be inferred from the verb (as in ‘elma yerler’; instead ‘elma yer’ would be understood as singular).
Keep in mind that for nonhuman subjects adding ‘-ler’ to the verb is ungrammatical (when the subject is explicit), so only ‘kediler içer’ is correct.
If you omit the subject "onlar" from a sentence, you have to add the -ler/-lar so you would have to say "yerler". In the opposite case, you are free to use either. However, if you want a more specific detail about yer vs. yerler (I tell through this example, not for this specific example), yerler might sound more explanatory/encyclopedical/informed etc.