Overcomplicating Using the Spanish simple future to express probabilities ...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.
The test answer is “conforme” but it should be “conforme a” según la lección. ?
Is it safe to assume that invariable cuanto más can only be used with masculine form adjectives? Or if I wanted to imply that I was just speaking about women in the following example, “Cuanto más rubios, más atractivos para mí” could I use feminine form adjectives?
Wondering the answer to the below question is. I noticed this too: me permitan hacerla
¿Porque?
¿Hay otros casos en lo que usamos esto?
Gracias.
Would it be "El vestido es tan hermoso como una mariposa?" for the dress is as beautiful as a butterfly?
and is this the same for comparing to multiple objects when the described object is singular: La luz es tan brillante como las estrellas.
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.
I was surprised that this sentence took "sido" and not "estado". As the speaker is talking about their emotional state over a specific time period, rather than their personalities more generally, would "estar" not be used over "ser"?
I don’t understand how the infinitive is less ambiguous than the gerund. Is it because the infinitive is directly associated with the verbal structure while the gerund could hypothetically be separated from the verbal structure by a comma? La escuché, (while I was) cantando en la ducha.
Regarding incomplete and complete actions: Let’s say you’re hypothetically talking to someone about Carlos.
He visto a Carlos fumar.
I saw Carlos smoke. (complete action) Does this mean, I saw Carlos smoking. (But now he’s back at his desk. (action complete))
He visto a Carlos fumando.
I saw Carlos smoking. (action in progress) While this means I saw Carlos smoking. (He is still smoking outside if you are looking for him. (action in progress))
Thanks!
can I use retorno instead of vuelvo for "I return"? I took a quiz and it marked it wrong because I did. does it matter which one you use?
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level