"Li kaj ŝi matenmanĝas kaj tagmanĝas."
Translation:He and she eat breakfast and lunch.
23 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
- (li kaj ŝi) manĝas = (he and she) eat
- matenmanĝas = eat breakfast
- tagmanĝas = eat lunch
So your sentence would mean “He and she eat eat breakfast and lunch.” Eo words ending in -as are verbs in the present (mi manĝas = I eat, vi manĝas = you eat etc.).
In case you were looking for the words “breakfast” and “lunch” (without “eat”), they are “matenmanĝo” and “tagmanĝo.”
"He and she eat breakfasts and lunches" should be accepted. It is not specified whether the sentence is describing an event (they go out and eat two meals together) or a habit (both of them regularly have breakfasts and lunches - unlike me who sleep until it's time for lunch).
That is a really awkward sentence in English. We don't really refer to multiple meals as breakfasts and lunches in my country. I guess the claims supervisor may ask, "How much did you spend on breakfasts and lunches?"... Not very common to say, "He and she eat breakfasts and lunches" though...
If it wasn't for what the Owl wants you to learn here, I would have made "They have breakfast and lunch." Ili matenmanĝas kaj tagmanĝas.
We can all wish that things were different, and changes can be made if the argument for the change is compelling enough (and sent to the right place) but we shouldn't expect a whole lesson to be rewritten just because if sounds "clunky."
I am going to guess it is because depending where you live in America the third major meal of the day is called dinner instead of supper.
Where I grew up in Minnesota, we called the three major meals breakfast, dinner, and supper. Where I live now in another part of the state we call them breakfast, lunch, and dinner. And to make it more confusing in my house we often call them breakfast, lunch, and supper. How does my brain not explode over this?
To cut a very long story short: What's your proposal how to teach the Esperanto words “matenmanĝas” and “tagmangas” to speakers of English? That's the objective of this lesson.
We've spent so much time now discussing why Duolingo's way is bad. What's a better way to do it?
Edit: Thanks + lingot to MichaelFre947953 for clearing up the misunderstanding.
Renardo, I actually was not criticizing duolingo. A choice must be made whether or not to accept dinner == lunch since this usage is dated but may be used by an older speaker. Dinner == "evening meal" should definitely be accepted. I think the instruction indicating "evening meal" and avoiding the ambiguity is quite sensible even if some people might not be familiar with the reason why it is needed.
This discussion page seems to be about the eo → en translation but Dylan's question is about the Esperanto sentence. So it's not so easy to answer.
Certainly the Esperanto sentence could be reformulated using “ili” or “la viro kaj la virino.” All those yield meaningful and perfectly acceptable sentences in Esperanto. The respective English translations could then be (barring discussions about lunch / dinner / supper and the like):
- They eat breakfast and lunch.
- The man and the woman eat breakfast and lunch.
So much seems rather elementary. I can see why we would discuss about different translations into English but why would we discuss about different originals in Esperanto?
One could equally well ask “why isn't it 'bonan matenon'.” The course contributors choose the sentences. Somebody might ask “is xyz also a valid sentence” but not “why couldn't it be xyz.”
Something keeps telling me I am missing something… FredCapp obviously got what it's all about.