A question about indirect object pronouns and IO or reflexive pronouns instead of possessive pronouns?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.
Hi, in one of the quizzes, the answer to this question:
Ben ________ la alarma.Write ''Ben had been woken up by the alarm.was: había sido despertado porcould it also be "hubo sido"?
Inma, Shui and all - Sorry to be a nuisance: (you certainly do an absolutely incredible job, day after day; many thanks !) - but in the C1 dictation exercise "Verano en la azotea ", your 'tilde' in difícil needs correcting: (your version shows "No fue muy díficil de transformar") - see the original request at https://progress.lawlessspanish.com/questions/view/dificil-dificil [19th June].
Hi - In your topic on El Condicional Simple, the description reads as follows : "El Condicional Simple expresses hypothetical actions that would or might happen in the past and in the future. It is also used to express wishes, to give advice and suggestions or to invite and ask in a polite way."
How does one differentiate between this description and the use of El Futuro Simple for the use in prediction, probability and speculation? Seems quite confusing and overlapping.
¿Tienen el mismo significado "está por llover" y "está para llover"? ¿Hay algún matiz?
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.
Are Spanish restaurants really rated in tenedores? I would've thought that it would ha derived from Michelin stars. At least, I always assumed stars was the literal translation of whatever the French is.
Coudl you please add examples of compound sentences with theconjunction si? Or is it covered in another lesson?
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level