When you have to match pairs of words dorst is matched with thirsty. It should be matched with thirst.
De man heeft dorst
The man has thirst
The man is thirsty
The Dutch word for thirsty would be dorstige, it's just not how they say that expression. De dorstige man - The thirsty man.
I'm unsure of the dutch use of dorst but for the english portion ¨the man has thirst¨ shouldnt be correct, its awkward and will definitely get you strange looks if you said it to a native speaker.
I assume ¨the man is thirsty¨ is the closest equivalent that is used in english,
also ¨the thirsty man¨ and ¨the man is thirsty¨ are very subtly different in the way you would use them.
I was trying to say that the second line is the English gloss of the Dutch and the third line is the English translation. You can see that dorst is almost the same as thirst and dorstige is closer to thirsty, both in spelling and meaning (-ig(e) in Dutch has much the same function as -y in English). Duolingo is asking us to translate a noun into an adjective!
Thanks for your report/feedback. :)
Note however that literal translations sometimes do not work and that having words match like that is not a requirement.
I would say that this is one of those cases where a literal translation does not work.
I'm pretty sure we rejected the sentence 'He has thirst' for that reason, but we'll take a second look. :)
I'm not saying He has thirst should be accepted because even though it is grammatically correct and conveys the intended meaning it is not how it is naturally said in English. I'm complaining that we are being taught to match the noun dorst with the adjective thirsty. dorstig(e) is an adjective and thirst is a noun (or a verb). I have a thirst for knowledge. I thirst for knowledge. I don't know anyone who would say I am thirsty for knowledge though, only I am thirsty (I need a drink)!
I understand what you're saying cj-dennis, I do!
I know that one word is the noun and the other is an adjective and I hear your complaint, but I don't think this is an issue.
If you're not supposed to translate sentences literally when expressions are concerned, why is the fact that one word is a noun and the other an adjective an issue?
The hint shows you how to translate this sentence too ('heb dorst' = 'am thirsty').
This is one of the few sentences in our course that has very few reports, so it doesn't seem like many students of ours are struggling with it.
I'm not struggling with it, I just want to think in Dutch as much as possible. It seems that the way they say it is the way they think about it. So in English I want to think that I am thirsty but in Dutch I want to think that I have thirst. It seem to me that if people learn it this way and then go over to the Netherlands they might end up saying Ik ben dorst by mistake because, after all, they were taught that "dorst" means "thirsty"! Hihihi! It sounds like a supernatural being! "I am Thirst!"
Hahaha, well that would be an easy way to find out whether someone's been taking our course or not! (;
You can say "De man is dorstig" in Dutch, the equivalent of "The man is thirsty", but it isn't used as often as "De man heeft dorst". If you'd ask me to translate that, I would indeed say "The man is thirsty". So probably the hints translate "dorst" to "thirsty" here on Duolingo because of the expression, and you might see "is" as the translation of "heeft" there, even though that isn't literally correct, but because Duolingo wants to teach you the correct way of saying this in both languages.