"Thank you for having come" IS a sentence. Maybe you want a paragraph that puts that sentence in context.
"We had such a good time chatting with you at our party last night. Thank you for having come."
It's sounds a bit stilted, just as "I am taller than he" sounds stilted, but that doesn't make it incorrect.
I imagine the "formal" sense of "thank you for having come" in scenarios like the host of a play, an orchestra, or any "stage" act.
Moreover, I think in any situation where a certain "etiquette" is expected (a la a formal party or someone simply wanting to be formal) this sort of phrase would be used.
If it's useless, why have so many people mentioned they say it? You seem to think that since you wouldn't say it, no one ever should. Coming from someone who cited descriptivism via popular vote as evidence that you were right in your other post, this is a decidedly prescriptivist position to take.
DonRua: "The 16 grammar Nazis that can't let this thread die?" Well now, that's funny, because it doesn't seem your implied admonition to "move on" applies to you. Moreover, as ErikBoyle says, the prescriptivist attitude does attach to you, not to those of us who accept the construct as valid and useful.
As to "the 325 who agree with" you, I hope you understand that it is only those most likely to have a problem with the sentence who ever enter this thread in the first place, and then, like you, do so in order to grouse about it. Invoking the number of "complainants" on the thread simply doesn't pass muster. To do so ignores the thousands of DL users who have gone through this exercise and continued on their way without ever feeling the need to inquire about the validity of "having come" or to register their disapproval. The thread itself, as are all these "nobdy would ever say" discussions, is heavily weighted toward those with a negative view.
You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is being a grammar Nazi. But aren't you the one pushing your rhetoric on everyone else? You have no logical reasoning behind this other than a distaste for the sentence "Thank you for having come", which many people (there are many, if you bother to read more than the first few posts) find perfectly useful.
Whether we constitute a majority or not, I and others on this thread have made a grammatically bulletproof case for why we should accept the wording of this sentence as well as the more common wording. Descriptivism argues that we should embrace all the forms as equally acceptable and useful wherever they are used. If you really shunned the prescriptivist label as much as you claim to, you wouldn't have any inclination to argue that a less common phrasing is "useless". It obviously has currency among some segment of the population, and that should be good enough for a descriptivist.
May I add to Erik Boyle's cogent and reasoned response: Every time someone uses the term "Nazi" to criticize something or someone they disagree with (see what I did there?), the probability that we (all people of conscience) will pass along our determination that the Shoah will never happen again is minutely diminished. Given the frequency with which the allusion occurs, those minute decrements are adding up. Please, donrua1, find another way to express your (incorrect, by the way) opinion.
And Mr. Boyle, have half a dozen lingots.
There are a lot of arguments about how this sounds "unnatural" (it doesn't to me; uncommon perhaps, but not unnatural) on this sentence and many others, but I think what everyone needs to remember is that the point of this style of learning is to present grammatical concepts and teach their uses without having to endure hours of repetitive conjugations, not necessarily to teach common phrases.
i guess it needs a context. 4 days ago it struck me as odd but now i have come to accept it
"Thank you, for having come ... to hold this position"
"Beyond that, having come here ( on duolingo) helped us learn the basics of spanish"
"I thank you for having come to my humble abode"
and the best probably
"Thank you for having come ... so far with me. te amo"
Some common uses of the phrase:
- Thank you for having come in such large numbers [to this event] or [to support us]
- Thank you for having come to [specify the event]
- I wish to thank you for having come to [specify country and event]
- Thank you for having come out to vote in the elections
- Thank you for having come to eat at [restaurant]. We are sorry that [you were unhappy with the service/the meal]
Examples with sources:
- "I thank you for having gone away, and I thank you for having come back."
From p. 189 of the English translation of The Burgomaster's Family: Or, Weal and Woe in a Little World By E C W.van Walrée
- "I wish you prosperity and thank you for having come here."
From p. 7 of the Appendix to the Journals of the House Representatives of New Zealand, 1886
- "Thank you, Ernesto, thank you for having come into my life ..."
From The Illegal and the Refugee: An American Love Story, 2014, by Ian Tremblay
- "I warmly thank you for having come to work with us. In the name of the Church, the Pope is counting a great deal upon you ..."
From The Holy Father's Addresses, 1983
And it should be pointed out that "having" in the English sentence is a gerund. Spanish doesn't distinguish between the gerund and infinitive form, so without context "haber" can be translated as "to have" or "having". Trying to put "to have" in this sentence doesn't make any sense, so "having" is the right translation.
Additionally, the gerund functions as a verb within its phrase, but the whole phrase acts as a noun phrase within a sentence. In this case, the phrase "having come" is treated as a noun phrase. Try replacing it with a different noun phrase and notice that it does make sense: "Thank you for your attendance," or "Thank you for the apples."
There are a few layers to this answer.
In the equivalent English sentence, the word 'haber' translates to is 'having'. 'Having' is the gerund form of 'to have'. (Duolingo also uses the term 'gerund' to refer to the -ando/-iendo form of a verb in Spanish, which also translates as -ing, but that is the present participle and it is used differently.) The gerund in Spanish has the same form as the infinitive, 'haber', and the function of the gerund (in either language) is to lead a verb phrase that behaves like a noun phrase in the sentence.
Let's look at the gerund phrase: "having come". 'Having', as I said, is a gerund. 'Come' is actually not an infinitive, it's a past participle that happens to be irregular in English. By substituting in a different verb, this is more obvious. "Having written" or "having walked" are equivalent. The second verb is in past participle form because that is how the perfect aspect (of the present perfect, past perfect, etc. tenses) is formed: 'to have'/'haber' followed by a past participle. Think of the sentence "I have written a letter every day this week."/"Yo he escrito una carta cada día esta semana." Usually this construction is the main verb phrase of a sentence, but in "haber venido" it performs a different role.
Therefore, "Thank you for having come" is grammatically equivalent to "Thank you for the cookies" because the gerund phrase "having come" has the same function as the noun phrase "the cookies".
Now look at it in Spanish: "Gracias por haber venido" is equivalent to "Gracias por las galletas" for the same reason.
Now why isn't 'haber' conjugated? Well, how could it be? A gerund is used essentially because the verb isn't acting like a verb. You can't say "yo he", "tú has", "él ha" etc. because the sentence wouldn't make any sense with a subject and verb in that position. "Thank you for you have come"? That could be grammatical, but only if you change the meaning of 'for' to the archaic sense of 'because'. There are a few rules which dictate why 'haber' can't be conjugated here, but the simplest one is that in Spanish, a conjugated verb can never follow a preposition. Prepositions act on noun phrases, not verb phrases, so the verb phrase 'haber venido' has to act like a noun. Solution: gerund.
Thank you Erik for this explanation! It was the most valuable contribution in all the comments.
I was still left wondering though, if this excercise and sentence at all belongs in this section, as Gerundium seems to be something other than the tense we are trying to learn about here (the use of he, has, ha, hemos, han...+ verb /-ido, -ado...).
But I am learning all the same, thanks to people like you!
I think it belongs. This lesson is about learning to use haber in its auxiliary role, and this is one potential way it can be used. As I said, it is a different role than being used as the main verb, but it is one you could encounter, and there's not a much better place to put it in the tree.
Would any native speaker ever say, "Thank you for having come?"
Well, there are these examples:
"I just wanted to take the opportunity to say Thank you again for the beautiful rose, but even more for having come in on your day off to do my surgery. – Letter from 'Heidi' to the Northwest Women’s Health Care Center
"Thank you so so much for having come to our home, we will never forget it and we recommend this company to absolutely anyone! Thank you again and we will never forget this experience!" -Mercedes, to Fairytale Events, LLC
"It would simply provide that there are consequences for having come illegally, for not having followed the legal rules, for not having waited in line...]" Re: Gang of Eight bill, 2013 .
"He said it gave him an entirely new feeling of confidence and he thanked me for having come to the [Potsdam] Conference and being present to help him in this way." Sec. of War Henry Stimson, July 21, 1945
"I went through security and became very emotional among the souvenirs, berating myself for having come through early when I could have spent another half an hour in the car with you. Mary McDonagh, who lives in the UK . . ., The Irish Times
"It's a pleasure to be here today and I thank all of you for having come and your interest in issues of equity in universities." -- Constance Backhouse, a university professor and university research chair at the University of Ottawa, CBC News.
"I hope I managed to make a good impression for you all and I thank you for having come at this last paragraph and thus take advantage to wish you all wise choices in any of your future decisions!" – Beatrice Manole, University of Essex
"I will wait a moment so that everyone has time to put on their headset. " Thank you for having come. "– Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ) : Hearing, Parliament of Canada
"I think I should quickly say goodnight to our CBC audience, and then thank you for having come to the studio tonight." – Music from the Films": A CBC Broadcast
“Thank you for coming tonight, thank you for having come for 10 years and thank you for coming, hopefully, 10 more years,” he said. – San Diego Uptown News, Taking the stage for 10 years, April 26th, 2013
After having been a lawyer in California for 21 years, I remember being late to Court a few times. Not unfrequently, the judge would sarcastically say "thank you for having come today counsel". For that reason, I would never say it like that. I would just say "thank you for coming". The other way brings bad memories.
The issue is that English doesn't value the present perfect tense, when we morph "having come" into "comming" it ceases to be present perfect. http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html this page shows it's proper use in English and it was new to me. We also tend to see it as have or has, not having. "He has come a long way from a freshman, but I'm so proud to watch him graduate college." "We have come for the package." "Thank you for having come over on such short notice, it means a lot to me that you are here."
I completely disagree. The present perfect is everywhere. I was in a Spanish class with a person from Italy and she once asked why we use the present perfect so often in English and when exactly it should be used.
The "having" intead of "have"/"has" is just because it's a gerund, which makes the verb phrase act like a noun phrase in the sentence.
Possibly, but we're here to learn Spanish, not English. In Spanish you can say either "Gracias por haber venido" or "Gracias por venir" (thankyou for coming). Both are perfectly fine and sound natural to native speakers.
Everyone needs to stop trying to translate word for word into English and worrying about how natural it sounds. Learn the words, learn how they fit together, and move on to the next lesson!
Responding to you here, because I cannot do so above.
Trust you? And you have conducted an in-depth analysis of the matter, exactly when? A survey, perhaps, "all over America?"
Yes, the expression is perhaps a little uncommon simply because the circumstances where it would be appropriate are somewhat infrequent. Perhaps you haven't been listening. But if you think it "doesn't make sense" or is somehow divorced from standard English, you are simply reflecting your own narrow experience in American society and haven't even considered the ample evidence to the contrary provided on this thread. Trust me – to return your catty little dose of sarcasm –, perhaps you shouldn't advertise it with such verve. ;-)
(By the way, that would be "it's".)
Being grammatically correct doesn't necessarily equate to having a reasonable sentence. The translation provided here can be understood, but it takes more thought than simply saying "Thank you for coming", which is a far, far more common turn of phrase.
"having come" may be used in other contexts, but it is still rather uncommon in this one.
It is only unnatural sounding because it may be uncommon in your circles, but there are plenty who will commonly use this phrasing in formal situations.
It is an important phrase for people learning english to be aware of.
I'm sure the english for spanish speakers have the exact same questions but in reverse.
I think Chogar got the point - As I have understood him he meant the translation itself is awkward, not the Spanish sentence. And totally agree with him that in English "for having come" sounds very awkward. By saying that, I just want to accentuate that those who contributed have just to correct themselves. As to Spanish, nobody pretends to change the rules of that language
@Jessica169003 No, that's a straw man argument. Do you think talk to is awkward? Probably not. So does that mean that you always say talk to instead of speak to? Not necessarily. Two constructions can exist in equilibrium, both correct and each used some of the time. That's how language works.
@Ross_Kramer: By whose edict is it that "in English all turns of speech must look 'English like,' or that "Duolingo is all about contemporary language learning?" And who is to set the bar for that criteria?
You, simply because you have never heard anyone utter a perfectly normal English sentence like this? You see, even if you haven't heard it, I have heard it throughout my life as have others on this thread. It is not "dead language."
I didn't not say that it is awkward in Spanish. However, I have never heard anyone in my life saying in English "Thank you for having come". Why to use the "dead language" in real life? Duolingo is all about contemporary language learning. My point is that in English all turns of speech must look "English like".
I feel as though it's more effective having both translations be as natural and correct as possible. And actually we are kind of here to learn English because if you don't have a firm grasp of English you won't be able to transate effectively. Duo has taught me a lot about Spanish as well as English.
I agree, to say this or that doesn't sound right in english is a moot point....because.....you wouldn't say that in english. Most of what you are learning would not sound right in english. "Me duele la cabeza".....I wouldn't say .."to me hurts the head" in english either, but thats how you say it in SPANISH.
Yes and No. It is good to learn a language carefully but not through errors. besides, Duolingo has been based on bilingual teaching ever since the beginning and your correct translation into english is part of your learning spanish. Having come is simply incorrect. It is correct to understand and feel the mechjanism of spanish grammar, but incorrect to expect the same thing to happen in english.
There is a difference between saying "coming" and "having come." The two are not interchangeable, in a general sense, nor is one more grammatically correct than the other. It is clear from the Spanish that the speaker/writer is using the perfect aspect (i.e., using the helper verb "have" - ha). An accurate translation, in my opinion, should maintain that aspect. If you omit "having," you are indeed changing the structure and meaning of the original sentence.
Most of us, most of the time, don't pay attention to such nuances when speaking or writing. That doesn't make such differences irrelevant. If you truly want Duo to encourage proper Spanish and English usage, you should not be so quick to discard these language distinctions.
@ mazdee: "Thanks for coming" may be an acceptable, loose translation, but if Duo agrees that it is a good translation, that is to say, an accurate translation, then Duo is wrong. As David Moore points out, there is a nuanced difference between the two, and it exists in both languages. After all, if you want to say "Thanks for coming" there is "Gracias por venir." The "languages are different" argument just doesn't apply here.
Secondly, if you find the thread is tiresome, please feel free to unfollow the discussion, but recognize that it may not be tiresome to those new to the exercise and compelled to express their outrage at a time-honored and perfectly legitimate English expression – one which, by the way, will have no one laughing at you who matters.
This discussion has gotten tiresome. Duo agrees that "thanks for coming" is a good translation, because these 2 languages have many differences in usage. If you want an exact translation from Spanish to English, just use Google! It won't be good English, but it will get the point across, even if people laugh at you.
More correct? More correct than what? The English? It just so happens that the given English translation is perfectly correct, and perfectly correct in any dialect of English – British, Canadian (not to leave them out), American or Australian, [etc., etc.]
If you take the time to actually read through this (admittedly long) thread, you'll find several posts explaining the grammatical basis for the phrase and several documented examples of its use. If you haven't heard it, do remember that the language has (at least) formal and informal registers where usage differs.
Quite the opposite, Arthur. It is very good grammar.
It is how we speak in formal situations. Or do you suppose the people in these examples don't speak proper Englsh? See => https://www.duolingo.com/comment/104059$from_email=comment_id=24510925
(Search "Would any native speaker" if the link doesn't work.)
I have to agree with mangledmatt. Present prefect is used for past actions that still affect the present. Therefore, 'thank you for having come' means that the people have already left but are thanked nonetheless in the present.
I would use 'thank you for coming' when people are still there, either at arrival or when they are about to leave.
"Thank you for having come" doesn't necessarily mean that they have come and gone, it just means that they have already come. "Thank you for coming" and "Thank you for having come" mean the same thing in my understanding, and the former is a more natural expression. (Generally, if two meanings mean the same thing, the more concise expression is preferred.)
Actually, no, they don't mean exactly the same thing. Although there is some overlap, there is a nuance to the present perfective version that is not conveyed by the simple past tense (or, as here, a gerund, which has no tense at all).
To oversimply: consider the possible implication of a sentence like (simple past), "He worked all his life to improve the condition of his people," and compare it to "He has worked all his life to improve the condition of his people." ( I leave you and others to mull on the implication of the former.)
:You are correct about one thing, though: generally, if two forms mean almost the same thing, the "more concise" expression is preferred — by those who don't know the difference. Overtime, the more nuanced language likely does fall into relative disuse, and when it has begun to sound "weird" to a following generation or two, people begin to say things like "No native speaker of ... would ever say that!" And so a language begins to lose just a bit of its ability to express things in fine gradations of meaning.
Is that good for the language? Be the judge, but in three years on Duolingo, I have been (and still am) astonished at the number of people who apparently think so.
Thanks for the grammar lesson. I agree that it it is useful to be able to convey the intended meaning. Present perfective tense is an action that started in the past and has continued to be performed through to the present (without interruption). Another example is: it has been raining today. Simple past tense is an action that began and finished in the past. For example, it rained today.
Ah, I suppose you meant, "Thanks for the response to my grammar lesson:;" but that's alright.
One small point, though: present perfect tense describes an action that started in the past and which continues to be performed – or the effects of which continue – through to the present. But while "It rained today"implies the rain has ceased, and "It has been raining today" suggests it is STILL raining, that distinction really doesn't apply to the choices here. "Thank you for having come" introduces a present perfect aspect, but "Thank you for coming" is neither PP nor simple past: it has no tense at all. ;-)
Tejano, you are absolutely correct, and the person above who said it does not mean the people have already left is correct, as well. They merely already had arrived, probably had a valet park their car, a doorman take their coats (in cold weather), and been shown to the receiving line before entering the ballroom. So they "have come" to the big soiree, an elegant nighttime party, at which they will dine and dance for hours in formalwear. (Think DIPLOMATS!) These kinds of things still happen today, just "way above my pay grade"! ;-)
It would be commonly said in more formal and polite society. I was told when first introduced to Spanish that Hispanic culture was very polite, so to be sure to say "please" and "thank you" so as not to be considered rude. (One can be polite and casual, but formal politeness should at least be known, even if not used often - might help on a job interview one day.)
A language doesn't lose its ability to to express things in "fine gradations of meanings". But rather, it expresses them in other ways. Relatedly, the previous comment said that in his understanding, the meanings were the same-- which can be true. Meaning is always a negotiation within communication.
I'm inclined to think that languages don't have the ability to express things in fine gradations of meaning, but rather people have (or don't) the inclination to express things in fine gradations of meaning. If enough people find it easier to forego nuance, the structures or words associated with nuance fall out of common use and eventually are considered awkward or unnatural.
That may be, but no native English speaker speaks this way. It's like ending a sentence with a preposition. Grammatically incorrect, but it can be totally acceptable to native speakers of English.
I think eschewing the way English speakers speak their language day to day in favor of being grammatically correct defeats the purpose of learning a foreign language. I doubt anyone is here because they just enjoy the grammar and have no intention of speaking this language with another person.
Actually, "Thank you for having come" is indeed grammatically correct. It is the present perfect in English. Just because it is unnatural for YOU to say, doesn't mean it is unnatural for OTHERS to say. It's the same form as saying "I have seen that movie" or "I have met him before". So why is this sentence any different? It's not.
"Those sentences all mean the same thing..."
So. You are someone who doesn't understand the difference. But do you understand the difference between present perfect tense and simple past tense? Do you think "He has lived here all his life" means exactly the same thing as "He lived here all his life"?
A good number of us enjoy good grammar as well as using said good grammar in conversation. I'm a native speaker of English. In my experience, this would be a perfectly natural thing to say. Perhaps in your experience, you are not used to hearing this phrase, which is fine. But there's no reason to make sweeping generalizations like "no native English speaker speaks this way". The trouble with generalizations is that they are always wrong in at least one case.
I see what you think you did there, but you may have been too clever by half. The phrase "you don't have to" actually refers back an antecedent of a sort, your admonition to "look it up." Not sure (and don't care to look it up) but that "to" at the end of "don't have to" may not exactly qualify as a preposition.
I thought the whole purpose of this lesson is to learn the Present Perfect tense. There are lots of times when native English speakers would use the past tense interchangeably with the present perfect. That doesn't mean we shouldn't take the opportunity to learn this tense properly, even if the phrase is not one that is used very often.
You might say "Elvis left the building", but don't tell me that it is the same as the famous "Elvis has left the building".
Too many people forget that they are here to learn.
In this case the present perfect tense.
Natural sounding sentences have always taken a distant second place. You would think someone this far into the tree would be used to awkward sentences by now.
(I actually do not think this sentence is awkward, just that there is no reason to complain if it was.)
It is still unnatural. No one would say that for last weeks party. They would say 'thanks for coming last week' or 'thanks for having been there' or even 'thanks that you came last week'.
At least in america, if you say for having come, people will understand, but will consider it an odd way to say it.
Don't speak for everyone who speaks English, or even everyone in America. I don't think it's unnatural, and neither do many of the people I know. That already invalidates your premise.
Secondly, you're willing to use exactly the same construction as this sentence with your example "Thanks for having been there," but you still regard "having come" as unnatural? There's no basis for saying that other than your personal taste.
And thirdly, you claim that "Thanks for having been there" or "Thanks that you came last week" are better options. (I don't think the second one is even grammatical) I have to dispute this, because according to Google, no one ever says those. "Thank you for having come", while not common, is used, which also invalidates that claim.
And if you want to downvote me, I think I at least deserve an explanation of why. All I've done is point out the statistical untruths and logical contradictions in a problematic argument.
"I appreciate their coming" is actually more correct grammatically because gerunds should always take possessive determiners, not object pronouns. "Them coming" is incorrect despite being incredibly widespread, and I struggle to say "their coming" even though I know it's correct.
Eric, you are correct about using a possessive pronoun with a gerund, a verb used as a noun. (The "action" is the object of the preposition in your example, with a defining pronoun modifier, "their.")
But talking "about their coming" is a gerund that could be set in the future, different from about their having come." If talking directly to them, "Thank you for (your) having come tonight," the pronoun is both possessive and "understood" (not there), and the person has come, and is still present.
Or, after the party, the host might say, "I don't know what happened to Joe Brown; he had been coming (not a gerund in English, but a past continuing verb) to our party six years in a row, until last night."
Example of future: "Honey, I'm not sure about their coming (gerund) to the party tomorrow, when we know that the Smiths are coming -- they hate each other.!"
Hope some of that helps show there are reasons that show nuances of meaning, although we don't use all of them casually. At a "kegger," guys might just say, "Hey! Glad ya came!"
I'm not a teenager and I wouldn't say that. I wouldn't say it because it sounds weird to me. Because no one walks around trying to make sure that they speak with perfect grammar. Even people who correct grammar for a living don't do that. We speak in a way that feels natural. We don't nitpick rules when we speak.
I wasn't implying that anyone above 18 would absolutely speak that way (though conversely, I do have my doubts that anyone younger would be likely to), nor was I demeaning anyone who doesn't. You seem offended for some reason, although we agree. I have no idea if this phrase is technically grammatically correct, but I do know that I've heard it many times, and in my experience it's been seen as an acceptable way to speak. I was just offering that piece of information since this debate has been about whether or not people actually say this...and they do. Because I've heard them, and I've said it myself.
I'm not sure what we're arguing about...
We're here to translate and understand the meaning of the words. Would you prefer that "gustar" were translated as "to like" or "to be pleasing"? "Me gusta" is understood as meaning "I like it", but a literal translation would be closer to "It is pleasing to me," or "it pleases me".
So, which sounds like a better translation to you? The literal one, or the one that conveys the intended meaning?
Actually, your example is a distinction without a difference. They both convey the same intended meaning. From the Studyspanish.com discussion of gustar::
"The first thing you need to notice is that both versions really mean the same thing. They are merely different expressions of the same idea"
But in this case, in terms of learning Spanish – and that is the point of these exercises even if DL is inconsistent about it – the one you call "the literal one" is probably the better choice. Why? Because thinking in that way helps to embrace the Spanish perspective with verbs like gustar, fascinar, interesarand others. Translations in the Immersion section are a different matter.
But in any case, the relationship between "to like" or "to be pleasing" is not really analogous to that between "coming " and "having come," which carry subtly different meanings.
Perhaps you should take your own quote into consideration: "The first thing you need to notice is that both versions really mean the same thing. They are merely different expressions of the same idea."
"Having come", by itself, is different from "coming". But in this specific instance the two expressions are exactly synonymous. You are simply arguing for your version because it's the one you use.
But if there is such a difference, as you have claimed, please enlighten us. You have made this claim several times but not provided any examples or explanations to back it up. Simply saying "It's different" is not good enough.
Hello Chogas: As of 1/1/2018 I have read all 444 comments to date. I think most people that complain that the sentence is awkward or "no one ever says this in the history of the world etc", are totally missing the point. This is a lesson on usage of the Present Perfect. "Thank you for coming" is NOT Present Perfect. "Thank you for having come" IS Present Perfect. I have used and will continue to use "Thank you for having come" and you will also if you truly want to learn and understand the lesson on Present Perfect. I am here to learn Spanish. As I do, Duolingo is helping me with correct English. Thank you for having come to this discussion thread. Please try the veal. Oh... and actually reading the thread before posting would be super helpful to others who are trying to help us. This would give one some time to consider what has already been answered repeatedly, and also lessen the burnout factor of those who are trying to help us. "Gracias por haber venido. "
I think that Spanish conjugations sometimes bury more meaning in sentences than English speakers require in day to day use, so sometimes the translations seem clumsy because of this. All the same, we need to recognize these nuances as we learn Spanish, so Duolingo gives them to us without dumbing them down to be pretty.
"Gracias por" is just how you say "Thank you for".
According to a reference grammar of Spanish By R. E. Batchelor, Miguel Ángel San José, certain verbs lead logically to the use of the perfect infinitive - among them: Gracias por haber venido. Which is translated as: Thanks for coming.
I think the problem lies is that we're being tested in a concept that wasn't clearly explained and we are coming from a culture that has a different logic to how we choose which words when and don't understand the Spanish logic of why the infinitive is supposed to be there. (section 13.1.2 Page 108)
It would be a little redundant to say: Gracias por has venido. or Gracias por ha venido because they would mean: Thank you for you have coming. In this case - it'll be added to my exceptions to the rule section - to always be aware of the logical infinitive here on out.
¡Gracias por su explicación! I've been relying more on the podcasts of "Coffee Break Spanish" for learning grammar and conversational skills. We haven't covered this subject yet. I use Duolingo mostly for practice. It's difficult to learn grammar here, but kind people like you really help!
1) Generally, it is used as an auxiliary verb. 2) It exists in all tenses and in all three moods (indicative, subjunctive and imperative). 3) It does a funky backstroke in the third person single present tense and morphs into hay when used impersonally. For example: Hay un gato en la silla. (There's a cat on the chair.) You have probably seen that verb hay everywhere and not recognized it as a conjugation of HABER. 4) yes, it is used like the English have.
No. That is not a gerund. This is a present participle used to create the present (tense) progressive (aspect). Gerunds are a non-finite verb form, which means they aren't really part of any tense and they don't take subjects. Gerunds are used to form verb phrases that act as noun phrases. To check if a -ing verb is a gerund, replace the verb phrase with a noun and see if it makes sense. You can't do that here.
To make it more complicated, there are also verbal nouns, which can end in -ing but act completely like nouns and not at all like verbs.
Here's another instance that makes its typical usage clearer: "We really needed people at that political rally we held yesterday. Thank you for having come!" The reason one uses it instead of saying "thanks for coming" is that it emphasizes action in the past, not current action.
This sentence is perfectly acceptable and herd quite often in high society and among those with impeccable English. Just because English is your native language doesn't mean you've come across everything there is to come across, Especially if you're a first generation native English speaker. They looked for a translation and that was the closest translation that fit. Do a bit of research before you spit out opinions.
People tend to forget THIS IS LITERALLY ITS OWN LANGUAGE, it's not coded english or anything, these trabslation are telling you at the best ability how its literally said IN ENGLISH. At some point you will have to stop thinking in english and ..."Learn" the culture of spanish, become it ...Instead of being too literally and critical all the time..This is just advice ^_^.
Lots of comments, uhh! I am not native English speaker. So that i can't judge you guys. What i can say is that Duo's translations give me the idea about the meaning of Spanish and what it implies. Duo helps me to learn Spanish and Comments make my English improve. Thanks for your all contributions
Thank you for being the first person who uses this phrase in english to actually say where they are from!
So many people have commented, but I was left wondering where "having come" might be a phrase that is in common use. I'm from california and it sounds odd to me. But English is spoken in so many places, so I couldn't guess whether British, Scottish, Welsh, African or Aussie speakers might use this phrase -- or even other States! Truly we share an amazing language, but in many small ways we use it differently :)
It is far more probable that YOU have a very poor understanding of spanish, and of the phrase "translate the following into english". It does not say "re-arrange the translation of these spanish words into a phrase that YOU would use when speaking with your friends". Just try to do what it asks you to do. If you get it wrong, don't blame your phone or your thumbs, just read the CORRECT answer and learn "sumpn". No-one is trying to trick you or lie to you, not even the demon that is duolingo.
If anything, 'coming' is incorrect (not present participle in the sentence), and 'having come', which is perfect English, is better. When you think about it, 'coming' is still going on and cannot properly be used to someone present, 'having come', as it were. A fine distinction, perhaps?
Well, not quite. Coming has two uses in English: the present participle and the gerund. You're describing the present participle, but the gerund is used like a noun to describe someone's state of being there—your coming = your attendance. It's not the best translation for this sentence, but it is grammatically correct.
As I understand it, the way duo works is that native speakers correct the errors in the use of their own language while they are learning another, and this assists those users learning their own language. Whilst this sentance will get the meaning across in English, and is perfectly correct and logical, it would sound very strange to a native speaker. The common usage would be 'thank you for coming', which is not logical, as the tense is 'wrong', but that's English for you!
Well, that;s a bit of a dilemma for everyone and there are tons of sites on the net addressing the question of "por vs. para." Here's one that has some rules for "por," and by deduction, it should help with "para"
But the first rule listed, you'll notice, is:
Rule: to express gratitude or apology
Model: Gracias por la ayuda. (Thanks for the help.)
Thank you for having come, is more like old English. Like the aristocrats of Merry Old England. In that context, it would be perfectamente logico. In our lazy modern day English filled with slang words and phrases it does seem a bit awkward, but I have no problem with that.
Hola Taghrid153! hablo Español y lo correcto es decir: "Gracias por haber venido" Ej: Recibes a un invitado a tu casa y le dices esta frase. También se la puedes decir al despedirse " Gracias por haber venido" (a mi casa, a visitarme,etc) The sentence "gracias por viniendo" it is like "I Tarzan" . Greetings
WHO SAYS "Thank you for having come"???
People whose intention is to convey the subtle and accurate distinction between the present perfect tense (and what it implies in certain situations) and a simple reference to an action and what it implies in other situations ("Thank you for coming" has no tense and could be referring to a past, present, or even future action.).
Duolingo's goal is to give us an opportunity to learn something about Spanish and for some, it appears – those who think certain example sentences are stupid – an opportunity to learn something about English.
In a way, I hate to add to the clutter here, but Yes, what EricBoyle said.
Also, the fact is that to say it "doesnt get said in english like that very often" simply demonstrates that you don't circulate at those levels of society where it would be and is said, and said with some frequency. Either that, or you haven't been paying attention.
'Thank you for having come' makes no sense at all! Shouldn't this be either Thank you for having me or thank you for coming?
No, there is probably an infinite number of people, "native speakers" who think that if something subjectively in their mind is "awkward, not natural, not heard often, not said that way, not correct grammar, makes no sense", then it must be wrong. It is not wrong, It is an option. I love English partly because there are multiple ways of expressing an idea. I think the goal should always be to increase and broaden our linguistic abilities, native language or not.
For me, the issue isn't so much that they want to say "Thank you for having come." Grammatically correct? Maybe. Used by some? Not in my experience. Weird? Definitely. Definitely sounds weird and awkward.
For me the issue is that they won't let you use "Thank you for coming" which is what I think the majority of English speakers (at least in America) would use.
Isn't : 'thank you for coming' completely right grammatically and common, and easier to remember for spanish learning english?? I've seen earlier also: tart, translated as acid or sour... I've been speaking english a loooong time and never heard of that translation, does it exist?
I get such a kick out of a cadre of grammar-anals lecturing in grammar purism, with 5 to 10 upvotes each, and arguing with the truly helpful statement that the phrase is unnatural to most native English speakers, while the latter has hundreds of upvotes. The people have spoken. Scoreboard
In my 34 years of speaking English on this planet I have never once heard a person say "Thank you for having come". It may be gramatically correct and I do not question the Spanish, but it is a poor translation to convey the meaning as no one, at least here in the US, speaks this way.
Read more of the comments here. It is not a poor translation, and if you scan this thread more thoroughly, perhaps you will find evidence that, indeed, people DO speak this way, quite correctly, and even in the US. What is it that makes you (and others) think that because YOU have never heard an expression, it is therefore poor English and used by no one? Have you conducted a nation-wide survey?
I have read the other comments in this thread and it appears that most people agree with me while you chime in with verbatim arguments and down votes like a child. I have not conducted a nationwide survey, but I have a lifetime of speaking English and have lived all over the country. So I can say with a great deal of confidence that there is no statistically significant portion of the US populace that says "Thank you for having come [STOP]".
Shall I chime in and add a third voice saying that, indeed, many Americans have said and continue to say "Thank you for having come"? I thought we were all done with this thread months ago, but the stubbornness of those who won't be told that there is more to the world than meets one man's ears is never-ending. Look, if you have never heard it, fine. But you can't go around telling those of us who have heard and use it that we're delusional, especially if you concede that it is, in fact, grammatical.
P.S. If you think "no statistically significant portion of the US populace" says it, how likely do you think it would be that you'd find three of us so quickly?
Well, Joe, there is also a great big wide world of English speakers out there, outside of the US. Many times even here on DL English speakers from other countries have expressed different ways of saying things native to their part of the world. Not poor English, in my estimation, just perhaps not something you have come across, and that is okay. Spent any time in Australia? You should hear what they say for many common words...
I've made a lot of very serious responses to posts like this over the lifetime of this thread, so let me just get this out:
If you are that certain of your authority on the grammar of a language which does not, in fact, possess a prescriptive authority, then boy do I have a bridge to sell you.
(That language being English. Spanish does have an authority, the RAE, and they're fine with this.)
Well, no, it is totally, absolutely, undoubtedly 100% correct. If you thought otherwise, then you have an opportunity to learn something new. Right? There's no reason for anyone to mislead you, so read through the entire thread and perhaps you'll gain a different perspective.
No, the English translation is, in fact, perfect. "Thank you for having come" is a legitimate English statement using, as the Spanish does, the present perfect aspect. "Thank you for coming," although also correct, actually has no tense. Please read through the rest of the comments.
OK: Most of the phrases in this lesson make sense in both English and Spanish: I have lived, have known, have read, etc. Fine. But this particular phrase is just plain wrong in English, and I don't care if it is technically correct, it is BAD usage. DL often lets us change the exact wording of a phrase to reflect how it would be expressed in English. For example, another phrase in this lesson is nunca he comido tomate. I translated as I have never eaten A tomato, because that would be proper in English. Of course it was accepted, even though I added the a. Saying "thank you for coming" and "thank you for having come" mean exactly the same. One is a good translation, the other is not! DL should just drop this example.
Okay, enough, already. DL should NOT drop this example. It is neither wrong nor "BAD usage," irrespective of what you "don't care."
It is, in fact, very good and proper usage for those (formal) occasions where it would be used.
I really don't want to be disrespectful, but, frankly, if you can make the assertion with such conviction that "this particular phrase is just plain wrong in English," it can only be because your own experience with English is narrow enough that you haven't heard (or read) it before.
Assuming that by "good" you mean correct, then you're right, one is a good translation and the other is not. But "thank you for coming" and "thank you for having come" don't mean exactly the same, so it isn't clear which you believe to be good. The number of comments and their detailed descriptions of proper English usage are persuasive arguments that DuoLingo should most definitely not drop this example.
Is it poor grammar? No. Are there people who don't understand the rules that explain why it is proper grammar? Yes. Does the fact that some people don't understand it mean that mean we should stop saying it correctly? No.
Think about this. Are there people who don't know apostrophe rules well? Yes. Does that mean Duolingo should stop correctly using apostrophes in their courses for English learners? Of course not.
Why do so many people feel the need to come to this discussion, disregard all the posts explaining how this sentence is grammatically correct, and make their own new posts which falsely claim that it is wrong? If you're going to do that, at least try to explain what you think is wrong with the sentence. A lot of people have said "It sounds awkward" and "Most people wouldn't say it." It's not awkward to me, and I would say it. Those aren't good enough to argue against the actual rules.
I appreciate your reply and do see your point. I was typing on my phone so I didn't realize this was a discussion forum and had no idea about the previous replies--I thought it was a way to flag problematic questions/answers only.
"Poor grammar" was a bad choice of words. I should have left it at "awkward". This question confused me because I never have heard anyone say it, it sounds cumbersome and too literal, and I'd argue that it is not really an ideal choice of words for anyone--even if it is "grammatically correct"--because there are clearer ways to express the same thought.
Just because it's not technically "wrong" according to the "rules" doesn't mean it is the best way that the answer could be written. If it was written "thank you for coming" it would be more effective in my opinion, because there would be no confusion. I saw it as a mistake, as did many other people, evidently...so it's probably not the best translation out there.
That's my reason. And I definitely agree with your apostrophe rule point. No, Duolingo shouldn't lower their standards to accommodate native English speakers who are ignorant of grammar. But that argument isn't really appropriate since I am not proposing a grammatically incorrect alternative Unless someone is going to argue that "thank you for coming" makes no sense to them...
I understand that "Thank you for coming" is a proper sentence and even agree that it is probably clearer to use most of the time. But it also has a perfectly good translation into Spanish: "Gracias por venir." The Spanish and English grammars work exactly the same in this instance, and the two versions do have different meanings.
"Coming" is pretty basic and straightforward. "Having come" includes the perfect aspect as well (to have/haber + past participle) so it indicates that the action or state being discussed is presently relevant at the moment of speaking. I could run into some guests who came to my party last week and say "Thank you for coming" because there is no particular time specified by the sentence. If I were speaking to all the guests assembled at my house right then, "Thank you for having come" would be appropriate because the people came in the recent past and that action is relevant at the present. If I said "Thank you for coming" in that situation, I could be referring to the last party I held or this one or anything else.
It's unlikely anyone would get confused about what I was talking about, but that's the difference. It's not huge, but I see it as being worth it to stick to the literal translation since there are nuances that both languages are expressing that would be lost with the more common phrasing.
No. We (and DL!) have to remember there is no such thing as literal translation. We don't use articles like Spanish, we just use a gerund (verb with -ing) half the time when they want a correct verb tense. I live in Spain right now and I get slammed all the time for being lazy in my language. Thank you for coming is the translation for Gracias por haber venido. But you can't say Gracias por veniendo - that wouldn't make sense....
Actually English is used in many places throughout the world-- it's amazing we can understand each other at all and no surprise that we speak it slightly differently. What amazes me is that both people who find it awkward and those who find it natural argue their way is the best or right way, and don't even say where they are from.