- Forum >
- Topic: Spanish >
- "Esto no tiene ninguna consec…
"Esto no tiene ninguna consecuencia."
Translation:This does not have any consequence.
49 Comments
2114
I put this has no consequence and got it "right" but I sure wouldn't use that as a translation. I'd say either "This is of no consequence" or "This doesn't have any consequences".
Yes, AND these two possible translations have quite different meanings. Hence the question: which is the correct translation of the Spanish?
I agree that gernt's solutions are both more natural, but can you explain the different meanings? They seem the same to me.
- 117
Of no consequence - not important (not worth doing). doesn't have any consequences - there will be no repercussions (I could get away with it)
Of course! That makes sense, thanks. Some day, I will learn my native language.
Hola gernt: Your first one would not be correct, the second, yes. Feliz Días de Fiesta.
I wrote:
"This is of no consequence."
I was marked wrong, and I reported it.
Can anyone confirm that I provided a correct translation?
This is entirely different from the given phrase.
To understand Esto no tiene ninguna consecuencia. it needs to be read like so:
- Esto no tiene "This has no"
- ninguna consecuencia "no consequences at all"
What I see you reading it as is
- Esto tiene no/ninguna consecuencia
Essentially I believe that it is how you are reading through the double negative that is leading you astray. In Spanish the negatives are placed and required to demonstrate of what there is none, and so multiple negations are used, and each of those negations must be understood apart from the others.
In addition, the word consecuencia does not usually share that casual meaning of importance as does the English cognate; and when it does, it carries a meaning of importance in addition to an intention that something can or cannot make something happen as a consequence of its importance.
In short, your phrase cannot be devolved from this sentence because of the placement of the negatives, and definition of the words, and I would expect instead to be most naturally be written in Spanish as Esto no tiene importancia, which is a positive statement of what it lacks.
Different verbs/words.
"This does not matter" = Esto no importa
Importar = to matter
Tener = to have
- 924
"This hasn't any consequence." Should also be accepted, because no tiene, also translates as "hasn't"
What about "this does not have any significance?" Not close enough in meaning?
Isn't it: He/She/It HAS smt? I understand that 'have' is becoming more popular in 3rd person singular, but "This has a consequence" even when negated, should still be proper grammar, no?
- 2114
It's not the "not" that changes it - it's the "does". He has. He does have. They have. They do have.
I think some uses of got are bad English in the United States but not in England. "This has got no consequence" would surely be replaced by "this has no consequences" in the United States. "I've got it," on the other hand, is an idiom deeply rooted in both places.
It seems like it should be, "This doesn't have no consequences." (In other words, it looks like a double negative to me, which would mean, "This has consequences.")
Yeah... You can use "no" and "nunca" in the same sentence and it still has a negative meaning.
Double negative is different in Spanish. It is merely emphasis of a negative compared to our rule.
Traditionally 'got' was considered improper English in the UK but not these days - definitely is used more than 'have' verbally but generally not when writing. I wouldn't use it in a business letter for instance or job application as it's colloquial. I have heard New Yorkers saying 'I don't got it' but think that's more 'downtown' vernacular maybe? Never heard 'I don't got it' in the UK though.
Could one also say "esto no tiene consecuencia"? What are the rules concerning double negation?
"Esto no tiene consecuencia" would mean "this has no consequence"
Similar, but slightly different than "this does not have any consequences" and you would be omitting a word "ninguna" (any) and Duo does not want you to omit words.
Rules about negation: http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/neg.htm
http://www.spanishdict.com/topics/show/27
http://spanish.about.com/od/sentencestructure/a/double_negatives.htm
http://spanish.about.com/od/sentencestructure/a/negation.htm
I'm learning quite a bit about American English as well as about Spanish. I hadn't realised that 'got' is used less in the US than in the UK
- 2114
I wouldn't place a wager on that. We only use it in every other phrase. Babies say "I gah ih ma" (I've got it Mama).
The sentence, "This does not have any consequence" is a peculiar one indeed. One has to wonder what context it would be used or what it means, it would have to be very specific. It means in English that something happening currently has no result. A typical thing to say in English is, "This is of no consequence, " meaning that something is of no importance. Is the phrase, "Esto no tiene ninguna consecuencia" a colloquial way of saying the same thing that just sounds odd with an overly literal and didactic interpretation? There are plenty of examples of that in Spanish to English translation. It may be reasonable to assume so since the sentence has no context and is just a peculiar and awkward thing to say otherwise. If it's just a strange sentence, I have to wonder what benefit there is to learning a construction one would be highly unlikely to use or hear. If it is something of a colloquial expression, then it makes sense to include it in lessons so one could understand it as such if they heard or read it rather than be left scratching their heads over a phrase that doesn't quite make sense when literally translated.
I put "This is of no consequence." I think the meaning is there although i know it may not be a literally correct translation. Any thoughts?
There's a really good answer to this point near the start of this thread.
I take spanish classes and then over the summer i do dolinglo they are different dolinglo does not put thewords write it is like i am trying to do two different words that mean the same thing dolinglo has some words that are the same as in spanish but some of the words i just cant get wich is weird to me because i have been now doing spanish for 6 years going onto my 7th
- 2114
What country is your teacher from? That can make a big difference. That piece of your car that covers your engine is a hood in the US but a bonnet in the UK.
I question that the exact translation would be correct. Best said as "This is no consequence."
"this has not any consequence" i put this and i think it's correct but he told its mistake . plz help me
- 2114
Google translate understands "This has not any consequence". I'm not sure that a native English speaker would understand it on the first attempt. It seems like it should be correct, but it is not said like that. If you add "got", it sounds right. Other forms that work are: This hasn't any consequences (this is the same thing you wrote abbreviated. I realize that makes no sense, but languages often don't make sense) / This hasn't got any consequences / This has no consequences / This is of no consequence. In the US, we usually say consequences except for the last form. I don't know why. BUT - the reason it was marked wrong is because it isn't in the computer database.
This hasn't any consequence.Marked wrong. Not exactly the King's English. When will DL update the answers and stop changing the rules in the middle of the game?
what about "this has no consequence whatsoever"??. It is a bit stronger than "...does not have any consequence", but feel it should be Ok. It was rejected by Duolingo.
Duo refused "This hasn't any consequences."
I still believe it is a reasonable translation.
How would you say "this does not have no consequences" (as in, it does have consequences) ?
