34 Comments This discussion is locked.
As explained in the other comments, "Werkzeug" is not plural here, the plural would be "Werkzeuge". Instead, "Wekzeug" is here used in another acceptation, as an uncountable mass noun indicating tools in general, while still being grammatically singular. You could visualise it in English as "toolery". There are similar words in English, for example "cutlery" ("the cutlery is in the top drawer") which indicates kitchenware and "stationery" ("all my stationery is old"), indicating writing and office material as a whole; both of these nouns indicate a plurality of things but are grammatically singular: they are mass nouns. "Werkzeug" here is used in the same way.
A word of thanks to all who contributed to this discussion.
To summarise, Werkzeug can be used in three ways:
a) Singular - Werkzeug b) Plural - Werkzeuge c) As a Collective Noun referring to more than one tool - Werkzeug.
Collective nouns in English would be: a) Hair - when referring to a head of hair b) Rice - as in bowl if rice ( singular - grain of rice) b) Fruit - when referring to a bowl of fruit - ( it is grammatically incorrect to refer to a bowl of fruits.)
Which OP are you referring to?
de5260 with Werkzeuge sind auch praktisch ?
That's a valid German sentence, though it wouldn't be accepted in a "type what you hear" exercise for this German sentence, nor in a "translate this German sentence to English" exercise for this sentence.
Please read the other comments concerning mass nouns. How well does your spouse know English? Sure, “Werkzeug” is grammatically singular, but it can be used as a mass noun indicating a plurality of things, whereas the English “tool” cannot. It goes the other way, for example, with “information”: you can't have “many informations” but you can have “viele Informationen”.
"Werkzeug ist auch praktisch" = "Tool is also practical" / "Tools is practical as well"
"Tool is also practical" is not correct English, nor is "Tools is practical as well".
They are not good translations of Werkzeug ist auch praktisch.
The best translation is "Tools are also practical" or "Tools are practical as well" -- translating the German collective noun Werkzeug into the English plural noun "tools". (Because English doesn't use a collective noun here such as "toolery", but instead a count noun.)
"Tools are practical, too" = "Werkzeuge sind auch praktisch"
That's a possible translation, yes -- Werkzeug in German can also be used as a count noun.
It's a bit like "food" in English. It's usually used as a mass noun / collective noun (if someone eats two apples and a banana, you might say that "that food is healthy"), but is occasionally used as a count noun which has a plural, speaking of "foods". But that's not that common.
Similarly in German: if there are several tools, you'd usually use Werkzeug as a collective noun: grammatically singular but applying to all the tools together.
Using plural Werkzeuge would focus on the individuality of the various tools, a bit like how "foods" focusses on the fact that there are several distinct ones: something you wouldn't normally mention unless you wanted to emphasise this aspect.
I understand why you can translate to "Tools are also practical", but that doesn't explain why "A tool is also practical" is not correct. In German you don't always add "ein" before a noun, so in this sentence "Werkzeug" can mean both "a tool" and "tools". Remember, that there is no context for the sentence (usual problem for DL exercises), so the meaning is not obvious and both forms should be accepted.
In German you don't always add "ein" before a noun,
so in this sentence "Werkzeug" can mean both "a tool" and "tools".
...but that does not follow from the first part of a sentence.
In general, ein is used before countable nouns and omitted before uncountable nouns, much as in English. (The main difference is when talking about someone's profession or role, as in Ich bin Arzt..)
Thus "a tool" would be ein Werkzeug -- using the noun Werkzeug countably and accompanying it with the indefinite article ein.
Using Werkzeug without an article would only allow the uncountable, collective interpretation here, which would be "tools" in English.
(Another exception that comes to mind is headline language, where small words are often omitted -- e.g. "Tool found at scene of crime" instead of "A tool was found at the scene of the crime". But that's not the kind of language that Duolingo uses.)
I'm sorry, but these explanations make no sense to me. Tool is/tools are. Cutlery is because in English there is no plural word for more than one item of cutlery; cutlery is, items of cutlery are. Similarly, stationery does not have a plural, but in English tool has a singular and a plural - tools, which are practical. Count-noun, I assume, is an American expression, possibly for what in U.K. is called a collective noun. Even using this translation, the explanation means nothing to me.
Well, in contrast to the English word "tool", the German word "Werkzeug" can be used a countable noun or as an uncountable noun. It's just something you need to wrap your head around.
Ein Werkzeug ist praktisch = A/One tool is practical (In this case, "Werkzeug" is used as a countable noun. The verb is "ist" because we're talking about one tool)
Werkzeuge sind praktisch = Tools are practical (In this case, "Werkzeuge" is used as a countable noun. The verb is "sind" because we're talking about multiple tools)
Werkzeug ist praktisch = Tools are practicial (In this case, "Werkzeug" is used as an uncountable noun, like "cutlery". The verb is "ist" because non-count nouns are grammatically singular even though they may refer to multiple items)