"I am at the breakfast in the garden." is also accepted as correct by Duolingo. This is about giving location and less about what I am doing there, I think. So, if I were at a hotel and someone were to meet me, I would want them to know where I am: I am not at the breakfast in the buffet area, but at the breakfast in the garden. Being at breakfast or having breakfast is concentrating on what I am doing there, but this sentence is supposed to be concentrating on where I am.
At the breakfast is bad English. I have never ever heard anyone say that in UK, eg at the meeting, at the restaurant, at the birthday party sound fine. It would be that people dont have the same traditions and in UK you wouldn't really meet for breakfast so maybe that's why it sounds strange and 'having breakfast' is usual
I agree. If I heard someone say 'at the breakfast' I would simply assume they were not a native English speaker. I can see grammatically how it is fine and would seem the best translation from many languages but it is certainly not something we say in English. There is of course that rare exception where there is a special event breakfast like a wedding breakfast which we might shorten, for example, from 'are you going to the wedding breakfast?' to 'are you going to the breakfast'. There is nothing to suggest this rare/special case in the Turkish. The Turkish means what an English person would mean by 'at breakfast'. It is a bad translation and misleading. You could defend 'the breakfast' on the technicality of a special case if you were doing a test but you really shouldn't teach it.
Given you a lingot as you have said exactly same as me. Actually when I was new to the tradition of Turkish breakfast meet ups I was invited to 'come for breakfast tomorrow' I didn't go as thought it was a' come on' not a real breakfast ha! ha! Probably why it doesnt translate well!!
I think it is acceptable to use "at the breakfast." One could say, for instance, "I am in the garden at the breakfast given by our association."
Leaving off "given by our association" would be fine as long as the context was known. In this case, "I am in the garden at the breakfast" would be fine.
In any case, I believe this is perfect English, at least in the United States. Perhaps we are encountering another example of what constitutes proper usage of "at" versus "in" in British versus American branches of grammar.
I think what is throwing most people here is the misplaced comma. There is no need for it in the translated sentence.
I am going to have to disagree with you here. There is a specific verb for "to have breakfast" in Turkish that is used quite frequently. This sentences just means that you are "at a/the breakfast," meaning that it was a planned event with friends/fam/etc.
Your sentence would be "Bahçede kahvaltı yapıyorum" :)
Not really, locational adverbs are like here, there, everywhere, anywhere, up, down..
it's more like adverbial prepositional phrases. it's called dolaylı tümleç in turkish. dative, locative and ablative cases that give information about location are placed in this category. adverbial prepositional phrases can be counted as adverbs in english but a dolaylı tümleç would not be counted as an adverb. so we perceive them like indirect objects or more accurately 'indirect complements' rather than adverbs.
it's also open to debate i guess. for example
Yukarı çıkıyorum. -> I'm going up. here yukarı is adverb. Yukarıya çıkıyorum. -> Im going up. here it's a dolaylı tümleç just because it's inflected in dative case.
It's really weird. Maybe that would be correct to say it's both adverb and dolaylı tümleç (indirect complement).
Well, we do replace it in English with an adverbial prepositional phrase. "in the garden" describing where, which is functioning as an adverb does. In Turkish, there is no preposition, just a noun in Locative case.
I think it is confusing to say it is like an indirect object just because it is a noun coming after a verb and is not a direct object. The location is not exactly receiving the action. I threw him the ball in the park. "him" would be the indirect object, "ball" would be the direct object, "in the park" would be the adverbial prepositional phrase that would be replaced with a noun in locative case in Turkish.
Yes, you really can't say ''at the breakfast'' in English. 'Having' breakfast would be best, but if you're not allowed to use 'having' because of the Turkish construction, then 'at breakfast' is better, but nobody would say that. Could we not be allowed a good translation, rather than a literal one?
I think the problem is most non-native English speakers are ok with breakfast being an event, so therefore the word can stand alone. When we use breakfast as an event, we use it as an adjective, such as the breakfast meeting. We will also use it as a noun for an event, but it is very specific. Easter Breakfast, Christmas Breakfast, or birthday breakfast.
So in your example, we would actually say, "Do you know who is going to be at the breakfast meeting"? Or "Do you know who is going to be at Easter breakfast"?
Actually, I don't think any American would say "at breakfast" for the daily meal either. But "at the breakfast" referring to a specific organized event would make sense.
For everyday use it is simply "have breakfast" or "eat breakfast".
If the Turkish implies a formal planned event, then "at the breakfast" is ok. If it is intended to refer to any breakfast any day I think the most idiomatic translation would be "I have (or eat) breakfast in the garden."
If you read the thread, this sentence is about an event.
Not quite sure what you mean by "for the daily meal." "at breakfast" refers to what I might refer to as a smaller scale event than what I'd use "at the breakfast" for. If someone were out to breakfast with a friend and somebody called them and they answered the phone," I could easily imagine them saying, "Sorry, I'm at breakfast; I can't talk now." Or, upon saying good-night, "So I'll see you tomorrow at breakfast?"
Besides the power dynamics at play in conversations over who qualifies as 'English' or 'American', as piguy3 says, more people speak the language outside of these places than inside. The 'truth' of a language is a fiction. Language is, in some senses, a tool used according to, in part, the needs of the users. Anyway, besides this, people in England do say "at breakfast" on occasion. I'm thinking of in hotels and among the ruling class - this is quite frequently used, enough that a person who is neither in hotels or of the ruling class knows of this usage :)
Jeez! I was going to recommend simply "I am having breakfast in the garden". But this is getting heated! Rather than make a case for it, I will simply say that this is the most general way of saying this in American English--Oh, yes, if by "garden" you mean "grass", then we say, "I am having breakfast on the lawn".
Unless you are simply giving your location to someone who will be meeting you there and you are not having breakfast yet, but are waiting for that person. You needed to let the person know that you were at the breakfast in the garden, because you could have been at one of the other breakfasts in the many other locations at the hotel.
100 comments about "at breakfast"!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not English native but i remember my English lessons. Dont you remember, don't you know or haven't you learnt that "AT, IN and ON are prepositions of time, not only of place? For example in: "It is cold AT nigth, I shall go AT six, We are leaving IN October, I shall go shopping ON Saturday, ....etc Night, six, October and Saturday are not places! And "breakfast" too. So "at the breakfast" is ok. What do you think about that?
You have been such a help throughout this thread Mariane!
I cannot speak on behalf of all dialects of English. However, this course was created with American English in mind. at the breakfast and at breakfast are non-issues in most varieties of American English.
If you know someone who speaks Turkish and British English, please have them apply to help on the course!
I have never once heard anyone around me say "I am at breakfast time." Sounds like something my grandma or the Silent Generation would say.
Marianne is not incorrect. It is perfectly acceptable to say "I am at the breakfast", but I already explained this in another response to one of your other comments.
No... If there are two subjects in a single Turkish sentence, we have to include both pronouns to avoid that exact confusion :-)
He's in the garden, I'm at the breakfast =
O, bahçede, ben kahvaltıdayım.
In Duo's sentence, the pronoun has been omitted, so the whole sentence must share the same subject :-)
If there are two subjects in a single Turkish sentence, we have to include both pronouns to avoid that exact confusion :-)
He's in the garden, I'm at the breakfast = O, bahçede, ben kahvaltıdayım.
In Duo's sentence, the pronoun has been omitted, so the whole sentence must share the same subject :-)
'...at the breakfast.' sounds completely wrong/odd to a native english speaker. 'I am in the garden having breakfast' or I am having breakfast in the garden' sound natural. An english speaker would never say they were 'at the' of any meal though they would say (for instance) 'at the breakfast table' or 'at the breakfast buffet'.
This seems silly. I have never heard any English dialect say "at the breakfast". Breakfast is not a place, and is definitely not a place inside a garden. But good to know Turkish uses breakfast that way, as that is the reason why it's not allowing other usages, even if that is breaking English and thus not truly DUO lingo on this one, as that is teaching poor English usage.
Hello hamed, i think that in this sentence, "kavaltidayim" means the place where i have my breakfast, the place in the garden, table, chair and so on. In "kavaltidayim", locative case is used, so, it is a matter of place and not action (have, eat breakfast=kavalti yapmak, as AlexiNotTurkey writes in a comment above).
"I am at the breakfast in the garden." is accepted as correct by Duolingo. They are both correct and one is not more official than the other. They just show one possible answer at the top of the page and that is not always the best answer. Sometimes it is the last answer added.
No, "at the garden" has a different meaning. It would mean that we have breakfast outside the garden but very close to it. It's the same as with a house, for example. When you have an appointment "in the house", you should wait inside. When you have an appointment "at the house", you should wait outside.
I still disagree. At least in American English, you cannot say "at the garden." I just sounds like foreign and non-native, but understandable.
The one exception of course (me being a proud Bostonian) would be if you had a concert hall or stadium called "the Garden." There is a stadium in Boston called the TD Garden and we would say that an event happens at the garden.
You seem to be under the impression that you are contradicting what I wrote. But I think if you look again you will see that I didn't claim "at the garden" is idiomatic. I just added a new aspect to your response.
On the other hand, I think you just overstated how unidiomatic it is. It is a well known linguistic phenomenon that native speakers make questionable utterances all the time - utterances which they often deny and reject as incorrect when you confront them with what they just said. There is a huge difference between what is fully grammatical/idiomatic in the strictest sense and what native speakers say and understand in typical communication situations without noticing any problem. This zone isn't well defined. It doesn't just vary from speaker to speaker - you can easily get contradictory statements from the same speaker within a few minutes.
I am pretty sure that "at the garden" is near the grammatical/idiomatic end of this spectrum. Sometimes it will be considered fully acceptable by native speakers even on reflection, and occasionally it will be rejected. Though I don't really know, I instinctively doubt that there is a significant difference between major variants of English here.
A typical communication situation where this could arise: Having met someone "at the garden gate" last week, you might propose meeting "at the garden again", as a good compromise between precision and brevity.
"at the garden" seems completely fine to me in limited circumstances.
Simply consider the sentence, "I'm at the breakfast at the botanical garden."
If you're talking on the phone to someone who is not at the same garden, then "at the garden" arises naturally (naturally enough that I doubt my use of the relevant preposition-noun combo in the previous clause drew any particular notice ;)
Of course "the breakfast at the botanical garden" is not restricted to being near but outside the botanical garden. It can very much be within the confines of the garden itself.
I suspect what you find weird about "at the garden" is many times there's no garden that's contextually clear enough to be referenced by "the." But when there is (just a broader case of the exception you note at the end, really), then it works.
As Mizinamo explains very clearly above, when you have two verbs in a sentence, with the same subject "i", you don't need to repeat the personal ending "-yim". "Bahçede" alone does not mean 'i am in the garden", but "Bahçede, kavaltidayim" means "i am in the garden, at the breakfast". I assume that "Bahçede" or "O, bahçede" alone, means "She/he is in the garden". And you would have "(O), bahçede, kahvaltida= She/he is in the garden, at the breakfast". What do you think about that?
Please, before post a question, do read all the comments! About the topic do read the comment of Orde90 who answers to "spekypsyche", at the top. When there is one subject, here "i"="ben" and two verbs, you don't need to put the personal suffix at the end of the first verb.
The "correct answer" given is not English. The most common translation would be "I'm having breakfast in the garden" or "I'm in the garden, having breakfast", but these are not accepted. If you were a member of the royal family, you might possibly come out with something like "I'm at breakfast", but I've never heard anyone say it in real life. And if it means "I'm at the breakfast", as in a planned, relatively large-scale event... Well, that's a really rare occurrence for most people, and not very useful for learning a language (not to mention confusing).
It is acceptable to say if the breakfast is a specific breakfast.
Person A: Where are you?
Person B: I'm at the breakfast given by our department.
If it's wrong, how else would you say it in this context?
As an aside, and this is certainly not an attack on you, but I'm struggling to figure out why so many purportedly native English speakers on this thread think this is an unacceptable way to say it when it is in fact perfectly fine in the context I wrote it.
I'm at the meeting.
I'm at the event.
I'm at the breakfast.
In response to the plethora of comments addressing it, I must strongly disagree with the assertion that "I am at the breakfast" is incorrect English. It is not, at least not among North Americans.
We use this construction all of the time: I am at the dinner, I am at the lunch, I am at the breakfast...
IF... said dinner, lunch or breakfast is a specific lunch and has the implication of being pre-planned or as a meeting known among peers.
Usually, it is said this way to indicate that the person is at a nutritional event and has made others aware of it beforehand. For instance, consider this brilliant slice of text of an angry boss over the phone to a calm employee:
Angry Boss: Where are you?! You're supposed to be at your desk! Calm Employee: I'm at the breakfast being given by the company President. Angry Boss: Wh... what? Is that today? Calm Employee: Yes. Will I see you at the lunch? Angry Boss: fidgeting Too much to do here, I'll be at the dinner, though.
Perfectly acceptable in all cases in this context.
I'm thinking most of the people who oppose this or thing it is wrong are of British origin, or have had British-based teachings.
This is fine, but be aware that not every nuance of English is shared all around the world. Where you say "We are at breakfast" and NEVER say "We are at the breafkast" (by Jove!), we say it all of the time in context of what I wrote above.
I'm American and it sounds 100% natural to me. America is a big place and there are often dialectical differences amongst various states, even within states. As I said in my previous comment (which you ostensibly downvoted) it could be related to regional differences.
English isn't all on the straight and narrow and is very inconsistent much of the time. Where a grammar rule works in one part of the globe it gets shunned in another. I think some of us forget that.
I stand by my comment. "I am at the breakfast" is just as acceptable to say as "I am at the train station" assuming you are talking about a specific breakfast made known to others.
"I am at the train station." Acceptable.
"I am at the work breakfast." Acceptable.
"I am at the breakfast." Also acceptable.
Sami, perhaps it is a question of size....but my friends who are market gardener tell about "their garden" where vegetables, fruits...grow - but a garden of 4 hectars!!! Perhaps in a garden you rather work the land to get flowers, vegetables, fruits and in a park you rest, you walk, you run, you talk...., you have picnic, etc.