"No pensé que tú fueras más inteligente que yo."
Translation:I did not think that you were smarter than me.
Than me is correct, but less formal, than than I. My reaction to than I is theat person lacks confidence in themselves, and is trying to make up for it by using hyper correct speech, or - that person is a non-native speaker who got stuck with a prescriptive grammaian for a teacher.
The "than I" isn't hyper correct. It's a correct form from when grammar was more stricly enforced. The "than me" is so common it should also be accepted as correct. Most of the time it doesn't matter, unless you have a transitive verb.
My wife loves Bon Jovi more than me.
My wife loves Bon Jovi more than I.
One is about who is a bigger fan; the other means she might leave me. These situations are rare, but it's helpful to remember the difference to be sure your reader understands you.
Just got dinged for leaving out the word 'that' in the middle. Perhaps that's why your answer was rejected as well.
All of our answers should be accepted.
I did not think you that (optional) you were smarter than me.
OR ....more intelligent than me/I.
could is in fact wrong, as far as I know. There is no 'pudieras' o 'pudieses' in the original phrase. (Spanish is my native language)
"Would" was accepted for half the sentences and not the other half . With no clear info as to why. This lesson is all over the place.
"no pensar" is one of the uses for subjunctive. "I do not think that/que..."
In Spanish, creer and pensar use the indicative, because if you believe something, it's true for you.
No creer and no pensar use the subjunctive because you are introducing doubt.
I would like to know that too ie why not eras or even fuiste? Do you think it is because "que" is used before the verb? i.e. if the sentence was just "You were...." it WOULD be "Tu eras...."?
yes, it is because NO pensé que is followed by the subjunctive. Since you don't think something, you don't declare it by using the indicative. You don't declare it, you just "mention it with the subjunctive" so people know what you are referring to, but you don't want to give the statement any legitimacy . You don't agree with it, so the last thing you want to do is to say the statement as if they are your own words. Understand?
This aspect of using the subjunctive when you don't want to declare / confirm / assert something is often not taught very well in beginning Spanish grammar books, but is actually a very helpful way to think about the use of the subjunctive in general ... it can often unify the many explanations of why the subjunctive is used. It is way more helpful, in my opinion, than the traditional explanation about the existence of doubt or uncertainty.
There are many situations when there is significant doubt or uncertainly and the subjunctive is NOT used. Conversely, there are situations where there is NO doubt or uncertainty and the subjunctive IS used.
I am a fluent English speaker and think it should more than accept "I didn't think you'd be more intelligent than I."
Don't say 'would'. DL hasn't been accepting that form. DL seems to prefer the tense/mood of 'if it were true', for example. As in this sentence -- 'I did not think that you were more intelligent than me/I.'
Actually DL has been inconsistent on whether or not to use would and there is no info as to when or why it accepts it.
Thanks! In danish we translate clever to "klog" and that means, that you have a lot of knowledge :)
and "clever" in the sense of "sly" - a slightly tricky, unpredictable or unorthodox mental quickness would be "ladino"
I think the translation with the word "could" in ti is wrong. Spanish is my native language.
What is wrong with "i thought not that you were smarter than i" ? (I am no native English speaker)
If you were writing a poem it might be OK, but it isn't a typical English word order. We would use I did not think instead of I thought not here ( I thought not would be used only as a tag answer or comment in a conversation.) Did you do your homework? No. I thought not.)
so earlier you were arguing that we should follow how shakespeare wrote know you don't like poetry?
I wasn't arguing that we should speak the same way Shakespeare did, I was arguing that than me is OK because of it's long history in the English language. The "change" here isn't because people changed the way they spoke, it's because grammarians ignorant of how language really works tried to make the language logical. It isn't. And forcing people to use an artificially logical form only is just plain pedagogically wrong.
That was fine in 1600. You can hear a construction like that with clauses e.g. "I thought, not that you were smarter than I, but that I was sleepy that day"
Shouldn't an imperfect subjunctive be used here? It seems like you being more intelligent is an ongoing/recurring/incomplete thing.
Please somebody point me in the direction of where to find the differences between era and fuera.
I think, the difference between era and fuera can be explained/understood by the difference between the indicative mood and the subjunctive mood in general, as explained in this lesson: http://spanish.about.com/od/verbmoods/a/when_to_use_subjunctive.htm I've found also this explanation from a native spanish speaker: Con "fuera" se expresa mayor sorpresa, es decir, mayor diferencia entre la realidad y lo que se creía.
Are you sure? I'd rather say: era=I were/I used to be and fuera=I was, was being, were. On the other and: I have been=he sido and I would have been: habría sido. IMHO
I just checked my notes from Spanish grammar (university course):
"era" is in "imperfecto de indicativo", which is similar to the English past progressive. This tense is used to describe environments and giving background information in a story. eg: Cuando era (imprf de indic) niña, yo tenía (imprf de indic) muchos peluches. Pero a mi hermano eso no gustaba (imprf de indic). Un día, dijo (pret perf simple) ...
"fuera" is in "imperfecto de subjuntivo", is used for conditional clauses (phrases that start with "if..."). eg: Si fuera (imprf de subj) inteligente, no dudaría (imprf de subj) en hablar con ese guapo. Desafortunadamente, era (imprf de indic) idiota porque se burlaba (imprf de indic) del coeficiente intelectual de mujeres.
I agree with your explanation. It corresponds with my grammar course. 1 minor remark though: the subjunctive mood is not only used in conditional clauses, but I'm sure you know that. And ultimately, what is your translation of era and fuera,? (I'm not a native English speaker)
Bedankt voor de aangename verrassing. Ik heb je er een lingot voor gegeven ;-) (Kan niet replyen op je laatste melding, dus dan maar hier)
dankjewel para la canción. I think I learned more from that than this whole confusing section.
Because it is about a past thought that is not fact. Imperfect subjunctive in Spanish fueras, the act of thought is a certain thing so indicative; but the belief is not certain hence subjunctive mood. Very often an expression with que, like "Esperé que tuvieras un coche" will be subjunctive mode in the clause.
"...smarter than me" is incorrect. English grammar should be "...smarter than I" since the hidden ending is "...smarter than I am/was".
Still convinced after reading this Merriam-Webster's explanation? http://www.learnersdictionary.com/qa/better-than-I-or-better-than-me
Wow! We never knew people speak sloppily .. the best answer should be the correct grammar in a lesson, but the common usage ought to be accepted.
The problem with DuoLingoly correct English is you spend more time in guessing what will be accepted on the English side, which is time inefficient.
Can anyone comment on why this is "pensé" in the preterite instead of "pensaba" in the imperfect? Imperfect would make more sense to me here since we're talking about an indefinite period in the past during which the speaker didn't think this.
What do you mean? Are you referring to “than me” instead of “than I”? I looked it up in Merriam Webster http://www.learnersdictionary.com/qa/better-than-I-or-better-than-me . In Dutch, my native tongue, we have the same discussion. I prefer the “than I”/“dan ik” version. Maybe I am too formal? Do you mean that DL rejected the “than I” version?. In that case you should report it.
Both are correct. Than has been used prepositionally for a good hundred years now. The only time using it this way lacks clarity is when a transitive verb is used and, even then, you have to search for a situation where it really matters.
My wife loves Michael Bublé more than me.
This sentence probably means my wife is a bigger fan of Michael Bublé when compared with me. However, it can also mean she's planning on leaving me for him. ;)
No, "me" is not correct here.
To check this for yourself, the thing to do is to continue the sentence, and see if it makes sense:
"I did not think that you were smarter than I am" is correct.
"I did not think that you were smarter than me am" is wrong.
You didn't read my post. "Than" can be used as an preposition in English and has been for well over 100 years. As a preposition it take an object, hence me. If you want to join two sentences, like "I did not think that you were smater" and "I am", then you're using the adverb form. Of course, strict grammarians argue against using it that way, but that means breaking the rule about using objects with prepositions. None of them would dream of saying, "give it to I"
Languages change, including English. Let's not hang onto rules that never really fully applied.
This is an example of a much wider phenomenon in English. When there is no following verb, the object form of the pronoun is preferred by most SPEAKERS of the language. Those who are uncertain of their English prefer the subject form. This, he is bigger than me (no following verb), but He is bigger than I am (following verb.) I think we got this from French, which uses a similar form. This is especially true of first person, singular or plural. We also tend to use the object form after any verb. It sounds funny, and overly formal to say it is I. They are bigger than I sounds strained, They are bigger than we sounds downright wrong.
Indeed. It's just one of many trends in the evolution of English.
If we insist the usage of than doesn't change we should probably insist on keeping the spelling thanne, or þanne, and not allow the to stand in for þ!
Those who know English grammar and learnt correctly, prefer the subject. The object form is a sign of confusion, even though it is a very common native speaker error. In Dan's Buble example I would be wrong with than as the accusative object pronoun is correct. Saying both are correct does not help anyone be less confused. Saying "than me" ought be accepted because it is such a common native mistake, would be pragmatic.
In the article you mentioned I found this remark and example, Examples :
You are a better swimmer than she. represents You are a better swimmer than she is. therefore You are a better swimmer than her is a solecism.
Isn't this the proof that DanaS is right?
Both are right. That was my original point. You can't declare one version wrong when it's been in common use for 100+ years.
In Dutch we have the same discussion. We use the same rule as you mentioned, nevertheless the discussion does not end just like in English as I can see here ;-)
As far as I am concerned, it is clear that in this type of sentences 'than' is used to connect 2 sentences and for style reasons, the second one is reduced to avoid duplication.
So I am also in favor of 'than I' in this case. Here you can read an interresting article on this topic http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/than-i-versus-than-me