Spanish language Q&A Forum

en el text dice que Paraguay tiene comidas tipicas. que es eso comidas?

Does "al ser" in this exercise mean "being"?  Is there a document/lesson that talks about that?  Thanks!

I thought gustar was modified by the thing being liked (vs the person/people doing the liking), but when I chose gustan for liking the horse races I was marked wrong. 

I'm having trouble understanding circumstances when I need to insert definite articles (i.e., los, las, etc.) when translating a phrase in English that does not include the articles. Below is an example of what I'm referring to from this translation exercise:

[English sentence] "However, it is important for governments, companies and people to work together ..."

[Kwiziq Spanish translation] "No obstante, es importante que los gobiernos, las empresas, y las personas trabajen juntos..."

Why was it necessary to insert the definite articles "los" and "las"? I notice that sometimes they are included in the Kwiziq translations, and sometimes they are not. Please explain the grammatical rules that govern use of definite articles in such circumstances.

Thank you,

Pati Ecuamiga

Hi Inma, I read your response below to Anna’s question “en vs sobre” and noted that there are three more examples of the use of “sobre” in the lesson.

 ¿Qué pensáis vosotros sobre este tema?  

Nosotros pensamos sobre la situación política del país.

 ¿Qué piensan ustedes sobre esta candidata? 

It seems to me, as you indicate in your response below, that “pensar sobre” es associated with an opinion, but I’m not sure about the details.

 “Qué + pensar + sobre” seems to be a construction to ask for an opinion, the same as we would in English. “What do you think about…” 

I’m not sure about the example that begins with “Nosotros pensamos sobre…” but it seems to indicate that they are forming an opinion.  

Is this correct? Thanks.

Hello!  Por or para: the eternal question, right?  I'm wondering about the phrase "for future generations" in the final sentence.  If that phrase were interpreted as "for the benefit of future generations" or "for the sake of future generations," would "por" be correct?  Or is "para" the only correct option regardless?  Thank you!

This topic requires a better explanation.  There is a question where one person talks about the condition of another’s car.  Both speaker and listener know the car’s condition.  According to my reading of the lesson (perhaps mistaken), this means the subjunctive is used.  So, I chose funcione but funciona was the correct choice.  So, doubt or uncertainty does not seem to be the deciding factor when considering the use of the subjunctive after aunque.  Thanks.