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
Sin duda, un tema que debería haberse resuelto hace tiempo. Creo que para una pareja "casada" (realmente comprometida con una relación de por vida) después de la boda, el empleador de quien trabaje fuera de casa debería dividir el salario por dos y establecer dos cuentas de seguridad social y de jubilación. Así, independientemente de lo que ocurra más adelante, tanto el marido como la mujer estarán protegidos. La pareja debería compartir los gastos del hogar y decidir conjuntamente las compras importantes, disponiendo cada uno de un "dinero de bolsillo" mensual justo. Una cuenta de ahorro conjunta sería una buena idea.
Hola Inma,
I used "planta" rather than "piso," and was marked incorrect. Is there a subtle difference?
Saludos
John
Hi
Forgive me if there is already a thread addressing this question.
I was a bit confused about a question that began with "no dudo que..." and asked for the verb to be conjugated in the present subjunctive. I followed the hint and it was marked as correct even though it ran contrary to my prior understanding of the subjunctive. I thought "dudo que..." indicated subjunctive because there was uncertainty/doubt but "no dudo que..." negates the doubt making it certain and thus, requires the indicative.
Is this an exception to the rule or did I simply mislearn this topic?
Thanks
Nathan
I've read the Q&A and related articles and am still confused. The sentence is: My sisters are often late, I always wait for them for two hours. When I apply the information in the lesson's Q&A, I ask myself: "For whom do I wait? For my sisters." Therefore sisters should be an indirect object. However, the quiz gives the direct object pronoun, las, as correct. Which is it and why? (Also, it would be helpful if you edited the questions so the correct answer to this appears consistently.)
ps: it looks like Marcos and Lisa, below, are asking the same question in slightly different ways. Perhaps you can address all 3 questions as a group. Thanks!
¿Tienen el mismo significado "está por llover" y "está para llover"? ¿Hay algún matiz?
Hola,
In a Spanish show I've been watching, I often see the Object verb subject construction. What I would like to know is how prevalent this construction is in everyday Spanish. Are there situations where it is more commonly used?
Example.
Nos gustaría que sus cosas las tuvieran los niños.
Nos gustaría que los niños las tuvieran sus cosas.
*Sus cosas = Las cosas de sus hijas
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level