Preposition "de" with coloursIn the second question of the writing exercise Red Poppies (B2) the way that the preposition "de" changes the meaning of the phrase is not the way I understood that it should be used with colour.
In the exercise we are asked to translate: "red poppies will cover (the Spanish fields)" and the hint goes on to suggest we use: Lit: "the poppies will cover of red", to cover = cubrir. From this hint I was able to assume the required answer should be: "las amapolas cubrirán de rojo los campos españoles"
However, this phrase does not seem to translate well to "red poppies will cover" (that would be "las amapolas rojas cubrirán...) rather it translates more closely to "the poppies will cover the Spanish fields (with) red".
I believe there is a small, but important, difference between these two: one describes the quality (red) that a thing possesses; the other describes an action performed by a thing on another thing (the poppies on the field). Grammatically speaking, in the latter, we could say that the two things in the phrase have a subject/object relationship (in a similar way to how the giver/receiver relationship works in grammar: "Ellas los cubrirán de rojo").
Some examples:
El cielo es azul.
El sol pintó el cielo de naranja.
Llevaba un vestido blanco.
Ella estaba vestida de blanco.
Era una puerta verde, pero la luz del amanecer la había coloreado de rojo.
I appreciate any feedback
In the second question of the writing exercise Red Poppies (B2) the way that the preposition "de" changes the meaning of the phrase is not the way I understood that it should be used with colour.
In the exercise we are asked to translate: "red poppies will cover (the Spanish fields)" and the hint goes on to suggest we use: Lit: "the poppies will cover of red", to cover = cubrir. From this hint I was able to assume the required answer should be: "las amapolas cubrirán de rojo los campos españoles"
However, this phrase does not seem to translate well to "red poppies will cover" (that would be "las amapolas rojas cubrirán...) rather it translates more closely to "the poppies will cover the Spanish fields (with) red".
I believe there is a small, but important, difference between these two: one describes the quality (red) that a thing possesses; the other describes an action performed by a thing on another thing (the poppies on the field). Grammatically speaking, in the latter, we could say that the two things in the phrase have a subject/object relationship (in a similar way to how the giver/receiver relationship works in grammar: "Ellas los cubrirán de rojo").
Some examples:
El cielo es azul.
El sol pintó el cielo de naranja.
Llevaba un vestido blanco.
Ella estaba vestida de blanco.
Era una puerta verde, pero la luz del amanecer la había coloreado de rojo.
I appreciate any feedback
Why isn't vegetales accepted for vegetables?
In the exercise we are asked to translate: "Also, they would teach them a new language and accompany them in their daily games." The answer given is "También, les enseñaría un idioma nuevo y los acompañaría en sus juegos diarios." but this should be enseñarían.
The problem seems to be that the hint in the exercise doesn't match the actual text: "También, el robot les enseñaría un idioma nuevo y los acompañaría en sus juegos diarios."
Hello,
It says verbal structure. Does this mean that this is only used in spoken Spanish?
Also, I thought that we used the present perfect for actions that have just happened?
The subtlety of this concept is lost on me. Can you explain in more detail the difference between these two sentences, please.
Hacía unos meses que trabajaba con su padre.
He had been working with his dad for a few months.
Trabajaba en la empresa desde hacía tres años.
He had been working in the company for 3 years.
Indirect objects/pronouns are clearly necessary in certain cases such as when pegar is used to mean "to hit" someone/something as in "Le pega al hermano" for "He hits his brother." (Golpear takes a direct object as in "Golpeo la pelota y ella la golpea también" as in "I hit the ball and she hits it too.")
However, when given the sentence (in Duolingo):
"Did you see the goalie stopping all of their penalties"
why are the translations:
1) "Viste al portero atajándoles/parándoles/deteniéndoles todos los penales" accepted
while the translations:
2) Viste al portero atajándo/parando/deteniendo todos sus penales aren't accepted?
I know that we use object pronouns in place of possessives with body parts most of the time and sometimes with clothing as in "Me pongo los guantes" for "I put on my gloves" but why #2 supposedly unacceptable (or is it acceptable also)?
Any help would be appreciated as I can find no clear explanation and most translators actually give #2 as the answer.
There could be an element of doubt in "Piensan que"
Would you use subjunctive to translate?
They think that the missing jewels might have been stolen but they are not sure.
She might have left them at the hotel.
Your English original is: "the tango is one of the most sensual dances that exists in the world". During the course of the exercise, I felt that "exists" should really be plural, so I put "existen" in my translation answer - and that was accepted as correct. However, your final Spanish version still makes it singular.
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level