- Forum >
- Topic: Spanish >
- "Esta autora va a lograr much…
85 Comments
['s] "this author's" "going to achieve a lot" This is a perfectly valid statement, wtf.
DL thinks that "author's" is a possessive adjective and not a subject-verb pair.
I said "This author is going to achieve much" and it was not accepted. why isn't that correct?
It is correct. Did you report it? Duo seems to have this thing for replacing "much" with "lots" or "a lot". It's maybe trying a bit too hard to be colloquial and verging on poor speech.
Can I get clarity on what this means? I put "This author is going to earn a lot," since I assumed lograr here meant to make a lot of money. Does it instead imply getting awards? How would a native Spanish speaker understand this sentence?
431
Maybe that she's going to write a lot of brilliant books which will give pleasure to thousands and be considered classics?
Make means "Hacer" Achieve means "Lograr" Win means "Ganar" Although each word is different. They all can be used as positive achievements.
- 1437
Hello lizsue: I think ganar can not only mean win but also earn, which would be about money.
Finally, a sentence in this lesson that I can actually imagine I might hear one day!
I don't agree with the comments that "authoress" is outdated. It is still grammatically correct.
I would never use ‘the authoress’, but Duolingo should still accept it to translate ‘la autora’ (but not ‘el autor’).
I do agree that "authoress" is outdated, and it's still grammatically correct despite that.
- 642
As a native speaker of British English I would most likely use author for male or female. However, I am surprised the use of authoress is marked wrong when the Spanish clearly uses the feminine and use of author does not demonstrate that the translator has picked this up.
As a native English speaker, I've never heard anybody use the word “authoress.” It may be a perfectly valid word, but I've always heard female authors just referred to as authors. While the use of a lot of words ending with “-ess” is declining, I doubt it will ever completely go away since people aren't going to argue that a “prince” and a “princess” should be the same word.
No suggested translation is listed...... The best I could do that it would accept is: "This author will achieve much," but that doesn't sound like natural English. Is there a better translation?
I see it now. It seems to be in what context you're being tested whether or not it shows up.
this author will achieve plenty. Can't understand why this wasn't accepted as 'mucho' means a lot or plenty
I said "This author is going to achieve much," but was marked wrong. Why? (It wanted me to say"lots" instead of "much," which I think is a less valid translation and almost slangy in English.) Sometimes I just don't know where Duolingo is coming from!
this author is going to attain a lot. Should be accepted they even have it in the drop down
"This author is going to go a long way" - a little colloquial maybe, but it should still go through.
this author is going to attain much should be accepted. It is a legit translation of lograr
- 488
"this authoress is going to accomplish much" was marked wrong. dl did not like the word "authoress"
"This author is going to achieve much" is a proper translation of the Spanish and is also perfectly good English. Why is it not accepted? Mucho is not a false cognate for much; that's what it means (although much comes from Old English, not Latin, like mucho).
Like others, I think "This author is going to achieve much." should be accepted. It's a more formal construction but it is still used and is correct.
- 220
Authoress is also an outdated term, no longer in use. The term 'author' is now gender neutral rather than referring to a male. I suspect this isn't the same in Spanish language where most words have different gender forms anyway.
Because authoress is considered sexist and insulting in English. La autora does not have the same sexist and insulting connotation in Spanish, so translating it as authoress would add a level of meaning that it doesn't have in the original.
Yeah, it's like the Spanish people have some how remained sane in our crazy modern times where men and women are considered the same. Wonder how they managed to do that.
Just curious, what do you think about job postings that don't specify a gender instead of the employer specifying whether the job is for a man or a woman each time?
IRL men and women don't have to be exactly the same 100% of the time to have a lot of overlap.
The word is just a distinction between male and female. It is society and the way the word is used that is sometimes sexist. If you change the word and society's view of women remains unchanged you have achieved nothing except for causing more confusion. The same is the case with other words like actress - if women are still paid or respected less all you do by banning the female form is to impoverish the language - fortunately in Spanish the reverse is happening. Words that are masculine if not being changed themselves are being used with the feminine article when referring to women doing the same job.
It may be considered sexist and insulting by you, but it is not considered sexist and insulting by society as a whole. Nor is it an outdated term...Merriam Webster's says that authoress is a female author and it does not say that it is an archaic word.
But what would you expect other than attempts at forced redefinition of what is acceptable language on a website that uses a picture of HRC for politician and Rahm Emanuel for mayor, and that for president shows a presidential seal with the word CULT overlayed in large type?
I just wish that they would spend more time making sure that all valid translations are accepted, and less time trying to SJW strongarm language into the form they think it should be.
- 1969
Dan Goodman, I don't want to clutter the forum with further commentary about that topic, but would you please respond to my profile? I have a question about it. Thanks.
skepticalways - I do not know how to respond to a profile, only how to reply here. Tried the other, but no success. Is it something you can ask here? Because, don't ask me why, I am still getting all the replies to this thread, both crazy and not crazy.
And not that I am trying to hide anything here, as I am quite proud of what I have accomplished re: la lengua española, but I am sure there are people here who would prefer to remain known primarily by their DuoLingo name instead of there IRL one. I know such info can be discovered with some digging, but no reason to "brak the fourth wall" when corresponding here. At least none that I can see. So either please post your question here or post another way that we can have a one to one conversation if you feel that that is necessary.
Gracías.
/f/ El Capitán Alatriste
It should be accepted - changing these words does nothing but cause confusion. There is also an annoying tendency to make women's names more like men's and we already know that that ends in the presumption that those who achieve great things are men. Women end up being thought of as men or missed out of history all together. The opposite of what those who seek to abolish these words desire to achieve.
Whats wrong achieve and succeed have the same meaning. My answer should have been correct.
My response was: "This author is going to be able to do a lot", but it was not accepted. It more or less says the same as "This author is going to achieve a lot". I wonder.
The ie pair isn't directly after the c and that rule is very poor. It is broken all the time.
Why does it say attain is wrong when it is even in the list of translations? This authoress is going to attain a great deal/go a long way.
"this author is going to win a lot". This should be correct. Such as if he won a Pulitzer Prize
These answers are very awkward and not common or useful in American English. The phrase use is this author is going to be very successful.
Wow. Very literal translations. Shouldn't we be aspiring to colloquial comfort and equivalent to speak more naturally?
How do you tell the difference between the Spanish forms of this and that eso or esto?( I don't know which is which)
Are you kidding me? It accepts "this author is going to achieve a lot" but not "this author is going to achieve lots". Duolingo, you really need to allow multiple exceptions on certain phrases.
i know man...but come on, it's just an english grammar thing.. i fixed it though
- 1437
Hello Nolan.Reh.24: Thanks for fixing it! To illustrate- think about the word exception-(a person or thing that is excluded from a general statement or does not follow a rule). And look at except: (not including; other than). So now look at accept: 1.(consent to receive (a thing offered). 2.(believe or come to recognize (an opinion, explanation, etc.) as valid or correct.)
So in a very real way if duolingo excepted something, it would not be accepted.
"this author is going to attain a lot" and I still got it wrong? that makes perfect sense though...
- 411
Yes, My answer was counted wrong for using attain instead of achieve... This needs to be fixed...
I said, "This is author is going to do much" My answer is consistent with the dictionary definition of lograr.
I wrote this: This author is going to have much success
This should be considered a correct translation, imho
Craig, I put the instead of this as a typo in error. My actual point was that a lot and much are the exact same thing, which they are
- 1437
Hello Mammy175017: In that case, I certainly feel that it sounds more adult to say "This author is going to achieve much" than "....achieve a lot". (Estoy de acuerdo).
I said "This author is going to achieve much" and it was not accepted. why isn't that correct?
