My translation is "France is a land in europe" ---> i guess it's not wrong either
If by "land" you mean "country", then no, it's not wrong. I take it your comment means the course accepts it.
- "God bless America, Land that I love" -- this means country.
Land can also mean realm, domain, or area.
- "Land of Oz"
- The land I bought for my house.
- The land of the living.
These are not generally "lando."
It's not a sound combination in English, but Esperanto is an International language.
Think of the "eux" sound as a single-syllable sound similar to a toddler trying very hard and failing to pronounce the correct "r" sound in "hair".
Do you mean that "eux" is pronounced as /eə/ ? That is what I heard on the audio. /eə/ is very commonly used in England, especially in words like your example of "hair".
So, Euxropo sounds to me like / eə'ropo/ in IPA.
BTW off topic but isn't the audio for this course, just the best and clearest of all the Duo languages! Thanks so much to the Frenchman who recorded this.
no thats not the sound I meant, and I think the audio for this sentence is wrong in that word. However, I think your phoneme is more or less correct for the way the speaker says it in this particular sentence's audio. I meant simply /eu/ , (which I think is not a very difficult sound to make) but I was trying to use a creative example, since Junia9 had trouble with it.
I havent tried any other languages on duolingo. IMO the audio for this course is pretty good... but still, is littered everywhere with imperfections, such as using the hard instead of soft consonant pronunciation in many cases. Some of those imperfections are probably accepted as correct pronunciations, since Esperanto is meant be flexible, as an intended international language. But I know they are at least not considered "ideal".
Out of curiosity, I'd like to know what do you imply by 'hard' and 'soft' consonant pronunciation. Aren't all letters pronounced the same every time?
EUX is a substitute for EŬ. Esperanto allows for characters that arent in many other languages by recognizing the X as an indication that the previous letter should have an acdent mark. This can be Ŭ,Ĝ,Ŝ,Ĵ,Ĉ,Ĥ. These are different sounds than their unaccented counterparts and if you see the X in Esperanto, that simply indicates an accent mark on the previous letter.
In my head, I translated this as "France is a European country" - which came up as wrong. Can someone explain to me how this is incorrect? I'm not annoyed, I'm just intrigued.
Via traduko tradukus al "Francio estas lando EuxropA", ne "Francio estas lando EN EuxropO"
I'm afraid your translation is incorrect, @AjxojLerni (Btw. what did you mean by your username?). It doesn't make much sense to call a country eŭropana, since eŭropano is “a European, a citizen of Europe”, and countries definitely aren't citizens of anything.
Thanks for correcting. I fixed it.
My username is supposed to translate to English as "Things to learn". Of course, I created my account before I knew correct Esperanto grammar; i believe the correct phrase would be AjxojPorLerni. Someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.
Aĵo used as a word on its own is limited to material things; the word afero would be a better choice. Aferoj por lerni would be okay, but most natural way to express that in Esperanto is to say lernindaĵoj (lit. “things worth learning”).
My trouble with "AĵoLerni" or "AĵojLerni" or even "AferojLerni" - beyond the missing accusative - is that before I saw this comment, I (as a long-time Esperanto speaker) always thought it was supposed to mean "learning stuff." That is - the act of learning things. It never even crossed my mind that you were trying to say "AĵojPorLerni". As you said, this is correct.
You could also say Lernendaĵoj.
But why does it have to be absolutely and completely accurate, when in english it makes for an odd sentence. They should accept it as an alternative, but tell us, what it is exactly, in my opinion
It's not an odd sentence at all. Also, this is to show how the grammar works. The translation technically would be wrong if you said European country lah.
Notice that Eŭropo doesn't have a "-a" at the end of it. Without the -a, a word cannot be an adjective.
You definitely convey the same meaning, so I wouldn't mind your sentence being accepted. But it may also be that for pedagogical reasons one has to try to translate more closely to the original sentence, at least to satisfy the needs of the algorithm. ;)
How do you say "Indonesia", "Indonesian (person)", Indonesian (language), "Asia", and "Asian" in Esperanto?
The country is called Indonezi·o, so the citizen is indonezi·an·o. The adjective is indonezi·a so for example the language is la indonezia lingvo or simply la indonezia for short.
The continent (or the part of the world) is called Azi·o, so the inhabitant is azi·an·o. The adjective is azi·a.
La nuraj diferencoj estas la finaĵoj. Io estas moderna finaĵo, sed ujo estas uzata por malnov-mondaj landoj, ekzemple: Francujo, Germanujo, Anglujo, ktp...