Spanish language Q&A Forum

RE: Chupachups (B2) Spanish writing exercise

Sentence:  and about 800 lollipops were produced a day.

Kwizbot: y se producían unos 800 chupachups al día.

Is there any other way this sentence could be constructed, and if so, what, and if not, why not? And what are the rules pertaining to this. 

I know that Spanish is pretty flexible, where I get tangled up, is where it’s not flexible in sentence structure.  i.e. what things are “verboten”?  Thank you, I appreciate any help in this area.

For Question 8   I answered 'trabaje' believing it to be the correct subjunctive form but it was marked incorrect and 'trabaja' was given as the correct answer.  Would you please explain.  Many thanks.

"Hacía varios días que alguien me acosaba" means:

Someone was stalking me for several days.

I was stalked for several days by someone.

Someone had stalked me for several days.

None of these answer carry the sense of being in the time frame of the past the way the examples do, such as "someone had been stalking me for several days". In English, I don't think the 2nd or 3rd answer are functionally any different. The first one is the only one to partly give a sense that this is an ongoing thing, even though it doesn't give the same frame of reference. 

I suggest you change the available answers. 

Hola Inma,

The hint for the phrase "The clergy was the principal promotor ....." is to use the singular form of the verb for 'the clergy'." It should be singular form of the noun.

I enjoyed the history lesson in this exercise and definitely learned from seeing how the verbs "fundarse and instruirse" were used.

Saludos

John

 When I look at these two examples from the English to the Spanish there is no clear indication of why  the pluscuamperfecto de subjuntivo is being used vs. the condicional.

Si no hubiésemos comprado esta casa, hubiésemos tenido más dinero para vacaciones.

If we hadn't bought this house, we would have had more money for holidays.

Si no hubiéramos comprado esta casa habríamos tenido más dinero para vacaciones.

If we hadn't bought this house we would have had more money for holidays.

Luis and I haven't broken up but we gave each other some time to think.

I put "pero" because this seems like new information as much as a substitution, or at least it's a very complex substitution.

BUT, one of your example sentences for "pero" is, roughly, "I can't go out tonight, but I'll go out tomorrow." In one of your earlier replies, you give this example: "Ella no puede venir hoy sino mañana. (substituting)S he can't come today but tomorrow" 

I don't understand why these two seemingly interchangeable examples are given first as an example for "pero" in the main text and then as an example for "sino" in the comments. 

 This seems much more like a substitution, no? 

On another course, an example conversation between novio and novia goes: “usted sabe que lo amo. Vayamos al cine, hay una película nueva que quiero que veamos. Me muero por que usted la vea”. It was partly my frustration that there was no explanation of the use of usted here that led me to look for another course. Can anyone here explain this to me? Is this a regional peculiarity? Maybe Colombia? Thanks.

Puedo decir,  “para conocer a uno de mis actores preferidos”, también?

Could I say "era" instead of "fue" as it is a part of description?