1) THE DEFINITE ARTICLE (THE) WHEN GENERALISING
For this very common mistake, which affects communication, see "Omission of 'the' is generalizations" in this blog. An exercise - and its key - is provided. One of its labels is "grammar", of course.
2) FOR, TO, FOR TO?
For this one, see "PURPOSE: FOR + NOUN PHRASE, (IN ORDER) TO + INFINITIVE CLAUSE, ETC."
Typical mistake: * My father was in hospital during six weeks.
During is used to say when something happens; for is used to say how long it takes. So, curiously, it is for that expresses duration. Any tense is possible in both cases, depending on the idea we want to express.
There was a storm during the night: it rained for three or four hours.
My father was in hospital for six weeks during the summer.
Durante is the word in both cases, but this clue may help you as well: when English uses for, we can say durante, but we can also leave out this preposition:
'Estuve alojado en este hotel (durante) tres días' - I stayed in this hotel for three days.
During is usually the same as in, but there are sometimes differences. For example, they are not interchangeable in the following sentences:
We usually go on holiday in July, but last year we went in September. [exactly when]
He had some amazing experiences during his military service.
[an activity, rather than a period of time]
The most difficult use of for for Spaniards is in connection with the perfect tenses. Here, we use very different structures to refer to an action or state that started in the past and continues up to the present (Present Perfect in English), or one that had started at a previous time in the past and still continued later at a certain time in the past (Past Perfect in English). If we express the starting point rather than the duration, since, not for, is used.
I’ve been here for two hours / since 11.
Llevo aquí dos horas / desde las once.
Hace dos horas que estoy aquí.
Estoy/Llevo aquí desde hace dos horas /desde las once.
(...)
I’ve been waiting for your call for a week / since last Tuesday.
Llevo esperando tu llamada (desde hace) una semana / desde el martes.
Espero / Estoy esperando tu llamada (desde) hace una semana /desde el martes.
Hace una semana que espero / estoy esperando tu llamada.
(...)
When we got home, she’d been playing video games for eight hours / since midday!
Cuando llegamos a casa, llevaba jugando con videojuegos (desde hacía) ocho horas / hacía ocho horas que estaba/llevaba jugando... / llevaba jugando con videojuegos desde las doce. (etc)
The thing is, Spanish is making increasing use of the English structure these days because of so many literal translations on the media, in books and so on. Thus, paradoxically, we end up using the English structure when speaking Spanish and the Spanish structures when speaking English (the latter being completely wrong). An example of the English structure in Spanish is:
Los Masai han vivido en ese territorio durante más de tres décadas.
(This used to mean that they do not live there any longer, but now one simply does not know.)
Don’t confuse for and ago. They are quite different. The only reason why students sometimes confuse them is, again, Spanish (the word hace, actually - so it is ususlly confused only with perfect tenses). Ago clearly says when an action took place. I has nothing to do with duration (how long). It is only used with the Simple Past. The phrase with ago ‘measures’ time from the present to the past.
Compare:
Hace dos meses que nos vimos. (= Nos vimos hace dos meses.)
We saw each other two months ago.
Hace dos meses que nos vemos. (= Nos vemos desde hace dos meses, Llevámos viéndonos desde hace dos meses, Llevámos viéndonos dos meses, etc.)
We’ve been seeing each other for two months. [See is not normally used in the progressive tenses, but this is one of the cases in which it is - it means ‘meet’ and does not really refer to having the sense of sight.]
More examples with ago and for:
It is now 9 p.m. and I finished work at 6 p.m., so I finished three hours ago. I’ve been reading (for) all this time. [This is one of the few expressions in which for is usually omitted, as in (For) how long?]
I bought my house a long time ago - in 1983, I think. I had to pay the bank for twenty years, but now the house is legally mine.
4) AS / LIKE / SUCH AS / THE WAY / HOW
Typical mistakes: * It is exported to countries as Germany and Poland.
* He can’t speak English as you.
* He was talking to his employees like a boss.
* Do it how the others have done it.
* He saw how she was crying.
One or two correct alternatives for each of the previous sentences:
It is exported to such countries as Germany and Poland.
He can’t speak English as you do / like you.
He was talking to his employees as a boss.
Do it the way the others have done it.
He saw her crying / He noticed she was crying.
Como has a great deal of meanings and is rendered in many different ways in English. We are not dealing here with all its translations (e.g. when como is conditional, as in “Como te muevas, te la cargas”).
As is used to talk about the job, function, use or role of a person or thing.
I used to work as a taxi driver.
(Like here would suggest a comparison with a taxi driver, not an identity.)
She went to the party dressed as a traffic-warden.
As a lawyer, he advised him not to take the old lady to court.
I’m talking to you as a colleague rather than as a father.
When we want to say that people, things, actions or situations are similar to each other, we can use as or like, depending on the grammar of the sentence.
Like is a preposition - it is followed by a noun or pronoun.
I’m very like my brother. My sister isn’t much like me.
As is a conjunction - it is followed by a clause, with a subject and verb.
I’m no orator, as Brutus is. (Mark Antony in Julius Caesar)
She’s a fine singer, as her mother used to be.
As is also used before prepositional expressions.
In 1939, as in 1914, there was a great surge or patriotic feeling.
In an informal style, especially in American English, like is very often used as a conjunction instead of as.
Nobody loves you like I do, baby.
Like is also often used, informally, instead of as if, as though.
She sat there eating cream cakes like there was no tomorrow. (como si)
Another use of as is in expressions like as you know, as we agreed, as you suggested. The meaning here is not really ‘comparison’ or ‘similarity’, but ‘identity’. (As you know does not mean ‘You know something like this’; it simply means ‘You know this’.) In an informal style, like is possible in some of these expressions, but it is unusual in educated English.
We can use such as and, more informally, the very common like to exemplify. Try to use the latter only in speech; the former and including are very good options in writing.
She likes dangerous sports like bungee jumping, mountaineering and boxing.
She likes such dangerous sports as bungee jumping, mountaineering and boxing.
She likes dangerous sports such as bungee jumping, mountaineering and boxing.
She likes dangerous sports, including bungee jumping, mountaineering and boxing.
Way (meaning ‘method’) is often used without a preposition.
Do it any way you like. (Hazlo como quieras - ‘de cualquier forma que quieras’)
When it is followed by a relative clause, that (or no pronoun) is much more common than in which. The idea can be translated as el modo en que, la manera en que... and, usually, como.
I liked the way (that) she organized the meeting.
The way (that) you’re doing it is completely crazy.
With perceptive verbs (watch, notice, hear...), Spanish sometimes makes use of como while English prefers other kinds of subordinate clauses, especially an infinitive preceded by its subject.
Vio como [rather than cómo] el animal pasó por encima de la niña.
= Vio al animal pasar por encima de la niña.
He saw the animal walk over the child.
La vi como / que cruzaba la calle. = La vi cruzando la calle.
I saw her crossing the street.
How is only used in questions - direct or indirect - and exclamations. In the former case, cómo (not como) is the Spanish typical equivalent, whereas in the latter, another stressed word is used in Spanish: qué.
How did you do it? Tell me how you did it. I’d like to know how you did it.
How are you? He asked me how I was. He wanted to know how I was.
How beautiful! How marvellous the trees are!
How well she plays! How she’s grown!
Notice that there is a related kind of how-clause in which former Spanish used cuán and contemporary Spanish uses lo ... que ... , qué or (rarely) cómo de ...
It’s incredible how well you dance. - Es increíble lo bien que bailas.
I don’t know how old this book is. - No sé cómo de viejo es este libro.
I can perfectly see how good you are. - Veo perfectamente qué bueno eres.
I don’t know how often she goes swimming.- No sé con qué frecuencia va a la
piscina.
piscina.
5) COULD / WAS ABLE TO / MANAGED TO / SUCCEEDED IN
Probably, the one difficult thing about can/could that you need to know is this: could can be used for the past, of course, when it means a general ability and similar things in the past (this is the most common verb form for this usage), but not for onespecific occasion. When you are talking about one thing that you were able to do - often despite difficulties and/or with effort - you must use was/were able to / managed to / succeeded in. Look:
a) I could swim / I was able to swim at a very early age. [past ability]
b) (After many unsuccessful attempts,) we were able to persuade her /
we managed / to persuade her / we succeeded in persuading her. [one
specific occasion, an achievement, a specific successful occasion ...]
we managed / to persuade her / we succeeded in persuading her. [one
specific occasion, an achievement, a specific successful occasion ...]
In Spanish, (a) can be 'podía, sabía', whereas (b) can be 'logró, consiguió, pudo'. The 'only' problem is that, on Spanish TV, you also very often hear 'pudo marcar' when the idea is 'podía haber marcado (pero no lo hizo)': might/could have scored. But when 'pudo marcar' is really 'pudo marcar' (= 'lo consiguió'), then you render it like this in English: managed to score (and the other structures), but not *could score.
Easier: couldn't is for both cases, so the following sentences are both correct:
a) I couldn't speak / wasn't able to speak any English four years ago. (past ability)
b) I couldn't find / wasn't able to find the English word for that at that moment, although I had
it on the tip of my tongue. (specific occasion)
it on the tip of my tongue. (specific occasion)
6) SINGULAR OR PLURAL? COUNTABLE OR UNCOUNTABLE?
People is the usual plural of person, and has therefore plural agreement with the verb (people are, people were, people have, people don’t say, etc), as well as being referred back with the pronouns (or referential words) they, them, their, theirs, themselves.
Another Spanish interference.
Correct: I like all kinds of sports.
- people
People is the usual plural of person, and has therefore plural agreement with the verb (people are, people were, people have, people don’t say, etc), as well as being referred back with the pronouns (or referential words) they, them, their, theirs, themselves.
Remember
Barbra Streisand? She used to sing ‘People – people who need people …’ Not *‘People – people who needs people …’
Typical mistakes:
*The people in Berlin was very friendly. When you talked to her, she always spoke
English to you and tried to be helpful.
Correct
version:
The people in Berlin were very friendly. When you talk to them, they always spoke
English to you and tried to be helpful.
- police
Exactly
what has been stated about people is also true about the word police.
Look at
the correct usage:
The police don’t have any clues yet. They
seem to be puzzled by this new
serial killer in the area.
If you
need to refer to one person belonging to the police, use police officer, or – less common nowadays – policeman/policewoman. Of course these words have another kind of
plural, and you can say, for instance, the
two police officers – or the two
policemen/policewomen.
- all kinds of
Another Spanish interference.
Correct: I like all kinds of sports.
Incorrect: *I like all kind of sports.
- Some uncountable nouns which cause problems
Advice, news, and furniture
are probably the nouns most frequently mistaken in this respect, one of the
reasons for the high frequency of its misuse being – apart from the fact that
their typical Spanish translations are countable (e.g. in un consejo, una noticia, muchos muebles) – that they are precisely
very frequent English words. So, instead of the idea of ‘consejo / noticias / mueble’, you cam always think of ‘asesoramiento / información nueva /
mobiliario’.
All
three are uncount nouns; therefore, they have no plural form, cannot be used
with one or a(n), and can, instead, take some,
any, no, much, (a) little … As they are singular, you can’t use many, several, these or any other plural words. And the verb agrees in
the singular, of course. Because of its final s, news is especially confusing!
Typical
mistakes:
*Would you like me to give you an advice?
*The news are really horrible.
* Please
take all these furnitures out of the room, will you?
Correct
versions:
Would you like me to give you some advice?
The news is really horrible.
Please take all this furniture out of the room, will you?
If you really
want to refer to one or any other number of specific items, use a
piece of (even in the plural, of course). Examples:
You’ve given me two good pieces of advice
concerning my marriage!
Anyway, no news is good news. Mmm – actually, he
has told me one important piece
of news: he’s getting married!
This gorgeous chest of drawers is the single
piece of furniture I want to keep.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario