Translation:They are the grapes.
"L'uva" is a tricky word in Italian. In Italian, "l'uva" is singular but it refers to what we understand as "grapes" in English. So, for example, you would say "Dov'è l'uva?" to mean "Where are the grapes?".
As far as I know, there is no grammatical plural for it in Italian and it is always just "uva". If you reaaaaally want to talk about a single grape, you would use "un chicco d'uva".
I would say it's comparable to the word "wheat." You wouldn't say "I have five wheats"; you'd say "I have five grains of wheat."
Likewise, in Italian you don't say "I have five grapes"; you'd say "I have five grains of grape" ("Ho cinque chicchi di uva").
And just like with the word "wheat," you normally wouldn't use the word "grain/chicco" with grapes because you normally don't need to specify how many.
But in the rare event that you need to specify a quantity of individual grapes, you can use "chicco."
Does that make sense?
I did a context search and found lots of examples of le uve.
l'uva = "grapes" seems to be an uncountable noun reference to grapes in general. However, if you want to be eating a handful of grapes, then le uve might be correct.
I listened to the audio several times over and I swear she is saying (phonetically) El Luba. I definitely hear a "b" where there is supposed to be a "v" and I am using a headset, not listening over speakers. Anybody else? I reported the audio as a problem, but I want to see if it's just me or if or there is a consensus on this, and therefore make sure it's not my ears.
Actually that's not correct; it's always singular. In Italian, "grapes" are a mass noun--specifically, a granular aggregate, like "rice". In English, we always say "the rice" (not rices) and if you want to talk about an individual grain, it requires a qualifying noun like grain, morcel, etc. The sense of the word is plural in that way when we use it in English.
"Uve" as mentioned elsewhere is a formal word used by vineyard owners and wine makers when they talk about varieties of grape... the plants/species, not the fruit.
"This is the grapes." is accepted and "They are the grapes" is not - are you kidding me? How the hell you can say "This is the grapes", when "the grapes" is plural??
"Uva" refers to an unspecified number of grapes: "un acino d'uva" or "un chicco d'uva" is a single grape, "un grappolo d'uva" is a bunch of grapes connected to the same stalk, "un'uva" means a variety of grapes. So the plural "le uve" (the article is not elided in the plural in modern Italian) is mostly used by farmers to list the varieties they planted, and by winemakers to list the types of grapes used.
"uva" is always singular. In Italian, "grapes" are a mass noun--specifically, a granular aggregate, like "rice". In English, we always say "it is the rice" and if you want to talk about an individual grain, it requires a qualifying noun like grain, morcel, etc. The translation should be plural in that sense, though I share the frustation at DuoLindo's forceful interpretation of "correct".
This is confusing to me because in the previous food lesson, "We eat apples" translation was "Noi mangiamo le mele" (no definite article in English) but here not leaving out the definite article in the English is incorrect. There seems to be a lack of consistency, especially as sentences are given without context.
Can someone help me out?
It asked me to translate "É l'uva" and I put "It is the grape" and got it wrong with the answer being, "They are the grapes."
Assuming we live in a world where someone would say, "They are the grapes," shouldn't the Italian translation of that be "Loro sono l'uva?"
Did the app make a mistake or is there a special gramatical rule for the word "grape"?
We do live in a world where someone would say "They are the grapes," and that someone speaks English.
But on a more serious note, in Italian, grapes are treated as mass nouns. Just like English treats rice as a mass noun, and you can't say "a rice" for a grain of rice. It's the same way with grapes in Italian.
"uva" is always singular. In Italian, "grapes" are a mass noun--specifically, a granular aggregate, like "rice". In English, we always say "the rice" (not "the rices") and if you want to talk about an individual grain, it requires a qualifying noun like grain, morcel, etc. The English translation should be plural in that sense, since we DO use the plural in English--though I share the frustation at DuoLindo's forceful interpretation of "correct".
Think of it grammatically in italian like rice: È l'uva (singular the way we say "it is the rice") bu since we have a plural word for grapes, "They are the grapes".
And I agree, it's a weird sentence to say! Not very natural. And the "correct" checker is way too strict.
My example may be bad. My point is not. How would you translate "Io quell'uva non la mangerei"? Or "Sai, stare là sotto sarebbe come calpestare l'uva." Or, more directly, "È l'uva di cui ti parlavo." The Reverso dictionary translates each of these examples in the singular. The singular "grape" is also used in English to convey the plural (as it is in Italian). So, for example, were one to ask "What makes this wine so delicious?" A perfectly good answer would be "It's the grape." Consider:
Hm, going by dictionaries I'd argue that the article you linked is about the vine, e.g. Merriam-Webster meaning 2, while the Oxford dictionary interprets it as an informal reference to wine. The proper name for that in Italian would be vitigno (= grapevine variety), but uva can be used in its countable meaning (grape variety). All your examples aren't about a single grape nor grape variety, so I would still translate them with 'grapes'.
You haven't given me your English translations of the Reverso examples, i.e., Italian uses of "uva" for which the singular in English is appropriate. I'd like to see those.
I think it's relevant to note that this is not a discussion of what one might say in a given circumstance (in which case the Duo example -- an odd sentence in English except in the contexts I offered -- would be out of place), but of how one would, should, could translate the sentence Duo gave. And whatever Duo's intent, the rejection of the singular in this example reveals a gap in English fluency.
From my reading, it seems evident that in Italian, "l'uva" can be used naturally (as it is in the article I shared in English, or here https://vinepair.com/wine-101/merlot/) to refer to the grapevine variety, your dictionary reference notwithstanding. As, for example, it is in this sentence from an Italian website: "L’uva serpe, da cui si ricava il vino Cecubo ha la caratteristica di tramutarsi in un vino corposo, rosso, intenso, con una nota amara e dolce insieme . . . " http://www.cittadiamyclae.it/luva-serpe-ed-il-vino-cecubo/ or in this: "L'uso più frequente dell'uva Merlot è nella composizione dei vini assemblati, miscelato ad altre uve riesce sempre a fare notare il suo carattere e il suo contributo." http://www.diwinetaste.com/dwt/it2004033.php or in this : "L'uva Regina è tra le più note e richieste uve da tavola italiane, esportate anche all'estero in due varietà principali." https://www.olioevino.org/uva-e-olive/uva/uva-pizzutella.asp
In each of these cases, "the grape" is the appropriate translation. I cannot imagine that any native English speaker would translate any of these (or the Reverso examples) in the plural.
I would note, too, that the reference to the olive and the grape (my original example) is a culinary one -- as reflected in my last referenced site. This name -- as I'm sure you'll agree -- does not mean or imply either noun in its literal countable usage, but still we would put both in the singular.
Oh, as I said I would translate all those reverso sentences you mentioned with the plural grapes, and one of them, "È l'uva di cui ti parlavo" is as ambiguous as this sentence: but the plural is perfectly fine to me. Then again I'm not a native English speaker. I don't understand your last sentence to be honest: how does a culinary meaning change anything? That's not how it works in Italian, for sure, and in Italian it is in its countable usage, hence "uve da tavola" (plural).
To make myself clear: "uva" is uncountable like water and refers to the berries (grapes), "uve" or "un'uva" are countable and refer to grape varieties. "L'uva" could be either depending on context, but it requires a specification: "compro l'uva" -> I buy grapes, "compro l'uva da tavola" -> I buy table grapes (possibly table grape, but the dictionaries don't agree), "questo vino è fatto con l'uva Merlot" ("this wine is made with Merlot grape" should be fine, but so is Merlot grapes to me).
I should have been clearer regarding my culinary comment. There are blogs and pages and restaurants called "The Olive and The Grape" -- mostly, I think, about Italian cooking. The singular forms are used for both nouns -- olive, grape, but the suggestion is for things made from the items in the plural, mostly olive oil and wine.
Thank you for this discussion. I have no problem necessarily with the translation into the plural -- my issue is that since a singular equivalent is acceptable to a fluent speaker of the target language, it should also be acceptable to Duo. [Also, I think it would be beneficial were Duo to include the count-singular form for greater clarity.]
The word "uva" is always singular, though the meaning is closer to the plural "grapes" in English. In Italian, "grapes" are a mass noun--specifically, a granular aggregate, like "rice". In English, we always say "it is the rice" "pass me the rice" "I like rice" etc. and talking about an individual grain requires a qualifying noun like grain, morcel, etc. Italian does the same: you MUST use a qualifying noun to talk about one grape (cocchi, etc.) Thus the translation is correct as plural in that sense... though I share the frustration at DuoLingo's over-zealous interpretation of "correct" with articles etc.