A great answer from Ektoraskan in the reverse exercise cleared this up for me:
Both "yeni bir dil" and "yeni dil" are correct. I agree that "yeni bir dil" would be a more natural wording if you'll add only one language. "Yeni dil" on the other hand can be used to mean "yeni diller". It covers both options. You can use it if you don't know how many languages Duo has added.
Just making sure: for these exercises the words like "anlasilan" are to remind English speakers about what "-mis" implies, right? So in this sentence, even if you didn't include "anlasilan" it would still mean that you don't have first hand certainty of the new language having been added but that someone or something has indicated to you that that is what happened.
why cant Duo be after "yeni bir dil" lıke
"Anlaşılan o kelimeyi Emel silmiş"
I had answered this question earlier and so put duo at the end before the "miş"
NB: I wıll double check the lesson results when ı have fınıshed. just ın case
Anlaşılan yeni bir dil duo eklemiş (copıed answer)
"Anlaşılan yeni bir dil duo eklemiş"
If you do that, then "yeni bir dil" becomes the subject and the rest just doesn't make sense.
So you must mark that object with the accusative sign, just like "kelimeyi" in your other sentence. So it will have to be:
"Anlaşılan yeni bir dili Duo eklemiş."
It then does not matter that the object is indefinite. You have to add the suffix, or change the word order back to "normal".
And it will emphasize a different thing. Instead of "What did Duo do?", it will be about "Who added the new language?"
"Anlaşılan Emel o kelimeyi silmiş" is also true but the stress is different,meaning is slightly different. when you say "Anlaşılan o kelimeyi Emel silmiş" the stress is on Emel.it means i care about the fact that Emel did it.But in this sentence the stress is on "yeni bir dil".duo is not pointed out. its the difference. "Anlaşılan yeni bir dil duo eklemiş" is wrong.