Spanish language Q&A Forum

There is a hole in your explanation.

You say: 

"In sentences where the indirect object is represented by "a + pronoun", and it is at the beginning of the sentence...."

but you do not explain what happens if "a + pronoun" is at the end of the sentence.

Is the indirect object pronoun required or optional in that case?

eg: Can "Me lo ha comprado a mí." be written as "lo ha comprado a mí."?

Regards,

Fred.

In the last sentence  "Fueron unos días muy felices."

Isn't "fueron" the third person plural (preterite) of "ir"?  It should be followed by "a"

It seems to me that it should be "fueran" instead of "fueron"

Hi Inma, this is one of the most difficult things for me to grasp, especially in the body of a sentence, please could you put this near the top of your list for new lessons?

"

Hola,

Is there a lesson which develops this theme, and discusses when the definite article is used with the noun in the body of a sentence - and if there are times when this is not the case?

Thanks. John"

Hello Inma,

I have been having difficulty choosing between the two above, I have read the lesson and the questions here.

In the lesson it states "

If we use debido a que, it can never be followed just by a noun, it needs a phrase."

But in your answer to a question here, you mention "debido a que" needs a CLAUSE, which is slightly different from a phrase in the text book I use to understand these things.  In my book it says a PHRASE is any two or more words that don't contain a verb, but a CLAUSE needs to me able to stand by itself and be understood.  Would you take a look and see if PHRASE or CLAUSE is the most appropriate for this lesson?  Gracias.

However e > i verbs are different as they keep the e > i change all they way through their conjugation in El Presente de Subjuntivo.

The combined verb with pronouns now has an accent [´] even if didn't have one as a simple imperative with no pronouns, this is to maintain the pronunciation of the original verb.

I am trying to sort out the tenses in the following example from above:

Dejó el trabajo porque quería mejor sueldo.He left his job because he wanted a better salary.
The first verb (dejó) is preterito indefinido indicating a complete action in the past.  
The second (quería) is preterito imperfecto.  

I think this is because "he" probably had been wanting a better salary for a while before he left his job and it was an ongoing action.  Is this the right way to think about this sentence?

I keep getting these questions wrong and I think it’s down to not being able to differentiate between whether a word is an adjective or a noun. Is there any way to tell of a word is a noun or an adjective without knowing the direct translation for that word? 

I shared this example with my Spanish teacher, as I have never heard the conditional used in this way. She said that this form is not commonly used in Mexico. Is it more specific to Spain and/or other countries?

As an English speaker, it is very difficult to learn and apply indirect objects in Spanish.

I understand why you need les in the following sentence.  It is because you are making dinner "for them."   However is there an easy way to remember this construction when you are actually talking.   I seem to understand it when I read it, but don't seem to be able to apply indirect objects when I try to speak.  Is this common?   How do I overcome it?  It is like you are saying for them twice.  Once as the pronoun "les" and once as "a nuestros invitados.

Nosotros les preparamos la cena a nuestros invitados.We are cooking dinner for our guests.