Había vs HuboWe are taught that El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past actions that were ongoing with no clear end that describes what was happening or what things were like. Also El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past habitual action, repeated / regularly occuring past actions, and actions that used to happen in the past.
We are also taught El Pretérito Indefinido is used to describe past actions in a way that conveys the sense that were completed / finished, this can be one off actions / events, series of actions, actions that happened a specific number of times, actions that happened at a specific point in time, and actions that interrupt an ongoing past action.
However most of the time these two past tenses translate to the same in English which can cause us problems with which one to use.
So after studying these two tenses a lot, I think that I have a trick that helps me most of the time choose the right tense. (although with some verbs, I need to study the nuances just a little more)
So if I want to describe a past action, as in setting a scene or convey the action was ongoing without showing an ending etc. Then I use El Pretérito Imperfecto, Había, comía, hablaba, pensaba.
Now with El Pretérito Indefinido hubo, comió, habló, pensó, I have started to think of it as a fact (100%) to help me know that the action has happened and finished / completed. (or didn't happen if we use NO infront of the verb)
When it comes to había and hubo (from the verb Haber to exist in this use) they translate the same in English as '’there was'’ and our English thinking part of the brain doesn't know what to do with the word hubo.
Therefore to help with this, I asked myself '’is this a descriptive '’there was'’ (había) or is this a '’there was'’(hubo) that is stating a fact (100%)'’.
Había mucha comida en la fiesta. (descriptive)
Hubo mucha comida en la fiesta. (fact)
There was a lot of food at the party.
Había una reunión importante el sábado. (descriptive)
Hubo una reunión importante el sábado. (fact)
There was an important meeting on Saturday.
I hope I am on the right path of choosing the right tense when talking about the past, I think it's all down to what you want to convey to the listener, description or fact.
I am in the Latin American course. Anaranjado is more common for orange in Latin America. Anaranjado does change -o or -a endings.
Darn! once again is am trying to re-take a quiz I (really) need to work on. Message displayed after taking first quiz: "This lesson is already in your notebook. Go to your notebook now to kwiz this topic as many times as you like." Yesterday I reported this and shortly later I was able to retake the quiz (and still struggle). So, I studied and read ALOT today and want to take the quiz again. Is there a timer I need to know about (i.e. you must wait 12/24 hours before retaking a quiz? Sure would like to get a better understanding on this lesson and quiz's do show if I am "getting it" or not. As always you help is VERY much appreciated. :)
"Los turistas no ________ al guía del grupo.
The tourists do not understand the group guide.(HINT: Conjugate "entender" in El Presente)"
¿Por qué dice "al guía" en la oración y no "la guía"?
Por qué se dice 'evitar propagar' en vez de 'evitar propagando'
I wanna know why sometimes it's te gustan, not te gusta, In what situation we gotta add 'n' behind the gustar?
We are taught that El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past actions that were ongoing with no clear end that describes what was happening or what things were like. Also El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past habitual action, repeated / regularly occuring past actions, and actions that used to happen in the past.
We are also taught El Pretérito Indefinido is used to describe past actions in a way that conveys the sense that were completed / finished, this can be one off actions / events, series of actions, actions that happened a specific number of times, actions that happened at a specific point in time, and actions that interrupt an ongoing past action.
However most of the time these two past tenses translate to the same in English which can cause us problems with which one to use.
So after studying these two tenses a lot, I think that I have a trick that helps me most of the time choose the right tense. (although with some verbs, I need to study the nuances just a little more)
So if I want to describe a past action, as in setting a scene or convey the action was ongoing without showing an ending etc. Then I use El Pretérito Imperfecto, Había, comía, hablaba, pensaba.
Now with El Pretérito Indefinido hubo, comió, habló, pensó, I have started to think of it as a fact (100%) to help me know that the action has happened and finished / completed. (or didn't happen if we use NO infront of the verb)
When it comes to había and hubo (from the verb Haber to exist in this use) they translate the same in English as '’there was'’ and our English thinking part of the brain doesn't know what to do with the word hubo.
Therefore to help with this, I asked myself '’is this a descriptive '’there was'’ (había) or is this a '’there was'’(hubo) that is stating a fact (100%)'’.
Había mucha comida en la fiesta. (descriptive)
Hubo mucha comida en la fiesta. (fact)
There was a lot of food at the party.
Había una reunión importante el sábado. (descriptive)
Hubo una reunión importante el sábado. (fact)
There was an important meeting on Saturday.
I hope I am on the right path of choosing the right tense when talking about the past, I think it's all down to what you want to convey to the listener, description or fact.
I made some errors, had some typos, some dropped plurals, missed accents, etc., but I got most of it right. But then the score said "0 out of 60. Missed your morning coffee?" I think I do not understand how the dictation is scored. Could you please explain?
Listen to the birds sing.
I put ' escuchar al canto de los pájaros'. I don't understand why this is incorrect as another option given was 'escuchar a los pájaros cantar'
I'm not sure when I can use escuchar + a
Gracias
This lesson overcomplicates what should be a pretty straightforward use of the simple future tense. Just look at all the questions on this topic! While all of us know that the future is not fixed or 100% predictable, we still make predictions that sound pretty guaranteed even if they are technically probabilities.
The quiz questions complicate this further by giving us examples that are, frankly, poor translations. For example, one quiz question asks us to translate: "With this crisis, the currency could lose value." I would bet serious money that if you gave this sentence to 100 native Spanish professors, at least in Mexico, not a single one of them would ever give the supposedly correct answer: "Con esta crisis la moneda perderá valor." Not a single one of my three Mexican professors, including a DELE examiner, translated "could lose" as "perderá."
They all used "podría" for "could," with either "podría perder valor" or "podría depreciarse." Conversely, in reverse translation of the Spanish answer to English, they all 100% translated "perderá valor" as "will lose value", with certainty—not as "could lose value."
Maybe Spanish from Spain is different, but that quiz question and translation are not correct in Mexican Spanish. I suggest editing the lesson and quiz questions to remove the "could, might" possibility from translations using the simple future tense—at least in the Latin American Spanish lessons. At best, it's confusing, but more likely, it's just not a good translation.
Greetings,
Can you explain why the article is masculine here?
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level