In the U.S., we often hear "That remains to be seen". In scientific endeavors, or legal matters we might hear "That remains to be established", but the common idiom is "That remains to be seen". It's a often used, and dramatic idiom. So we see the duolingo translation indicates the past tense of the verb, but the form in Spanish is the infinitive form, so to translate the idiom completely, "That remains to be seen".
Not in the context of creating something, "setting/establishing a boundary", say which is what the spanish verb establecer is... you are talking about finding something out, say, "discovering/determining"
This is not a question of what the Spanish is, but what the idiomatic English usage is. As a native English speaker and as a college professor, I would argue that when the intent of the phrase is say that the validity of proposition has yet to be established, "That remains to be seen" is perfectly correct. And if usage dictates, it would be preferred to "that remains to be established" which sounds stuffy and legalistic.
The verb can be quedarse or quedar, reflexive or non-reflexive (many verbs are like this) If "we remain behind at the club" it is reflexive, but here the subject, "eso" is not acting on itself, it is an inanimate thing, so there is no reflexive object pronoun, se.
Rule: when followed by an infinitive, to express an action that remains to be completed, use por + infinitive
Model: La cena está por cocinar. (Dinner has yet to be cooked.) http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/porpara.htm
I'd recommend this site for extra help with grammar.
I also wrote "that remains to be set up". DL said I am wrong and should have said, "that remains to be set". "Set up" was the first of the drop-down hints. I don't rely on the hints, but thought it seemed more natural. I will report it.
Ouch! One of those grammatical but weird sounding sentences. That still has to be established would be better, but I was afraid to try it.
If you report that the English is awkward, they may consider pulling or changing it.
It's really only awkward because of the word established. Just not a phrase I would expect. That remains to be seen would be fine. I think it's because It remains to be seen is sort of a stock phrase that anything else used with it remains to be sounds slightly off.
I don`t have a problem with the sentence. How about...
That remains to be done.
That remains to be tested.
That remains to be graded.
He worked all night grading papers but that stack still remains to be graded.
Sentences that duoLingo gives don`t have to match some phrase we are used to. They simply have to make sense.
I'd use "still has to be" in all of those sentences. But I see your point.
I wanted to say "that remains to be established" but that makes establish in past tense. So trying to stay true I thought change the word order "to establish that remains" not great but only thing I could think of. Now I do understand 'to be' sounds like future but are we then saying the infinitive can be said in past tense.
Establecer means "to establish"
In English, "that remains to be seen" is a common phrase, but Duo will not always give us sentences that make sense, you just have to translate what you're given.
how does the infinitive "establecer" become translated to the past tense of "establish (established)"? Thanks
My first thought was, shouldn't this be "Eso queda por establecido." Is that the case?
No "establicer" is the infinitive meaning "to be established." One Spanish word is the equivalent of the three English words.
It's understandable, but just not standard English. Similarly, "That remains to be determined" is normal, while "That remains for determination" marks the speaker as an English-second-language speaker.
"To be" is ser or estar. I'm a bit confused as to the why they are missing here. Can someone explain the breakdown of this sentence?
Going to do a word-by-word, in the most basic way:
Eso - that
queda - remains (English 3rd person)
por - for
establecer - establishing (infinitive in English)
However, "that remains for establishing" isn't correct at all in English; the closest grammatically correct sentence would be "that remains to be established".
Unless you are talking about Jello or concrete, who says " That remains to be set" ?
"That is yet to be established"- its the subtle differences that virtually mean the same thing that kill me.....
No, this doesn't sound correct to me. I would say that remains to be established. It is a fairly common phrase.
"That remains to establish" is saying that "that" will, but has not established something. "That remains to be established" infers that an out side force or person will establish whatever "that" is. It would be rare to see the first form because some noun would usually take the place of that. For example: The Army remains to establish the peace; The Senate will establish the laws, The science team will establish th limits of the search. However, the sentence we are looking at is a response to a prior statement. For example, DETECTIVE: "This man was holding the gun and obviously committed a murder." THE ACCUSED'S ATTORNEY: "That remains to be established."
I agree with wazzie. " ... remains to be done", not " ... remains to do." Another example: "That custom continues to be practised"; not " ... continues to practise."