Spanish language Q&A Forum

In this lesson, peninsular Spanish is specified (however I am in the US and speak Spanish with Cubans, Mexicans, etc., so not only is this sort of new to me, it's not clear how useful it is). From what I've heard & read, there are many differences in the Americas in how the simple and compound past tenses are used (e.g., https://www.scribd.com/document/148697440/El-sistema-verbal-del-espanol-de-America-De-la-temporalidad-a-la-aspectualidad-Quesada-Pacheco-Espanol-actual-75-2001). If we include both peninsular and American (and other world) Spanish speakers, this is quite a range of variants. English speakers have a parallel set of past tenses in went/has gone. Obviously this is a false friend when compared to a specific dialect of Spanish such as the peninsular dialect (although I wonder how perfectly consistent this is across the peninsula). But is the English parallel any more “false” than the Ecuadorian, Peruvian, or Mexican one, relative to the peninsular one? How would a Spaniard respond if an American Spanish speaker consistently used the false English parallel to these tenses, compared to their response to an Ecuadorian, Peruvian, or Mexican speaker who consistently used their own native variant?

Thanks,

Greg Shenaut

I had never heard that before.So, I can retract my question. 

Just a suggestion:  I feel that the question set for this lesson could be more challenging.  Could add 4 or 5 questions with more room for error rather than translating from Spanish to English.  Choices in Spanish where we could easily go wrong.

¿Tienen el mismo significado "está por llover" y "está para llover"? ¿Hay algún matiz?

I wondered what was meant here in the English?

Él estuvo en su equipo de fútbol.
He was on his football team.

Thanks

Hola,

The question was ¿Vas _casa de Inéz? Both "para" and "a" were given as correct answers but in the lesson above, the use of "a" is given as also acceptable when associated with the verb "Llevar." I would have used "a" instinctively when talking about a destination but was put off using this because of the instruction.

I think there is something about "destination" that I am not understanding. Can you help?

Saludos

John

Good morning Kwiziq team, 

As always I love your content. 

I’m not sure if this is covered in another lesson, if so feel free to direct me to it! Just sometimes struggle to remember when the verb in the yo form of the preterite indefinido for “ir” verbs end in í or e. 

I think it’s verbs like introducir that threw me off; is it because that one is an irregular verb ending in ducir? Just that you highlight the consonant change, but not that the ending changes too? 

Kind regards, 

Fran 

I feel that the translation of the sentence into English was incorrect for the tense requested and confused me. The clue was pretérito perfecto as well as the translation saw. Pretérito conjugation of ver for ellos is vieron or “saw”, but pretérito perfecto would be Han visto or “have seen”. Please don’t make it confusing for us!

So, "hay" is used for both singular and plural? And not "han bares in mi varrio"? Can "ha" be used in such a case?