Translation:They got to where no one else had ever gotten to before.
164 Comments This discussion is locked.
They arrived where no one ever had arrived before( this seems correct to me)
I think they've updated the acceptable answers. They took this: "they arrived where no one had arrived before"
Where does the "else" come from because the other negation words seem to cover the existing ones we are supposed to translate. I say!
I also put "they arrived where no one ever had arrived before" and it was still marked wrong.
This was my translation also, word for word. Submitted on Jul 5, 2014 to be accepted.
Agreed - if "they went" is accepted for "llegaron" then "had been" should be accepted for "había llegado". I think it conveys the meaning better than "had arrived" which sounds unnatural - perhaps a native Spanish speaker can confirm that is the way this would be understood?
They went is simple past whereas had gone is past perfect which is the subject of the lesson and makes for weird sounding sentences in this case
This sentence sounds horrid: "got to" is not commonly heard except in archaic and badly written plays in any part of America I have visited...or Canada. I know regional. It is grammatical in some groups. but it's not what is typically said in America by FAR.
It may not be used often, but phrases like "You've got to be kidding!" or "You've got to have a special permit to enter." are perfectly acceptable American English. Perhaps not British English. I don't know about that.
You are right. Gracias. yet they mean "have to" . This sentence uses it more like : arrived at" . "Where has that boy 'got to'" with "got to" used for gone is what sounds archaic to me. I would use it for a kind of gentle humor when I can find something and don't want to get myself very concerned. A joke to lighten an annoying moment.
So what ? We say ''get to'' and ''got to'' but ''gotten'' is an abomination in the UK. Duo users this side of the Atlantic have to struggle with US-English terminology we wouldn't touch with a bargepole again and again.
"They got to where no one else had ever gotten to before." What??? When did this bit of bad English appear? I am sure it wasn't here before (Nov 14 2013)
agreed! 'gotten' really grates on the nerves
as a casual trekster :-) i recognize this phrase, or at least one like it.... ha
come on, there is nothing more frustrating than correct translations being marked wrong!
You could always pay a couple grand and take spanish classes at the local university. It's a free service part of that is the fact that you help improve it. I understand your frustration but I'm just sayin...
brbert, thanks for bringing us back to reality. There are lots of community centre classe, and city-run courses available most everywhere for a whole lot cheaper than university classes. I personally learn much better in groups where I benefit from others' questions and others' mistakes.
Not in Spanish. I suspect that is one reason why this funny sentence is here.
Nuestro misio'n de 5 an~os, con fin de explorar unos nuevos frases extran~os; hallar los nuevos idiomas y las nuevas culturas...
You are right in my opinion. Sometime Duo falls into a rut. I hope Duo will change or alternately translate the sentence.
this has got to be the most stupid translation I have come across so far. Why not 'They arrived where nobody had arrived before'. Gotten??????? what sort of word is that?
Linda, you are correct about "gotten." I think "got" as the pp is also accepted as correct English.
Must it be " got to" ? They got where or they had gone where without to sounds ok in my ears or.....
Another accepted translation: “They reached where nobody had reached ever before“.
It doesn't matter how many exclamation marks (exclamation points) you use, it does not make it true. According to The Oxford English Dictionary: "As past participles of get, got and gotten both date back to Middle English. The form gotten is not used in British English but is very common in North American English."
But 'gotten' is regionally diverse, used out of context in this sentence, and could have very easily been avoided. This is a site for a universal audience after all.
This is a very bad translation into English. British English would never use they got to... or " ever gotten to" Is this an American translation?
If llegaron means “we arrived”, then how do you say “we arrive”? I don’t get where the past tense is indicated. Oops, meant “they arrived” vs. “they arrive”. But reply still works, thanks!
We arrive = llegamos, we arrived = llegamos. For most verbs, the first person plural conjugation is the same for present or preterite tense. It's one of those instances in Spanish where you have to figure out in context which one is intended.
This is a messed up run on sentence that mixes tenses and prepositional phrases and runs on and on and was a waste of time for ...
I do believe that sentences in English should not end with a preposition, let alone two prepositions in a row.
I thought this was a terrible Americanism, it took me a long time to work it out. I wouldn't call it good English at all, and I don't think English people would say this - particularly "gotten"
I'm sure it should be "Llegaron a donde..." ?
Anyway, "gotten" is a bad choice. Even in American English where it's used more often, 'gotten' means 'to obtain' something (an object), not 'to arrive' at a place. I'm a little disappointed to find it here in this example
I feel like duolingo is both making my spanish better and my english worse
the word order should not be so sticky here... I translated it as "they came where no one had ever come before" and was counted wrong... I am protesting to the gods of duolingo :-) ha
Brendals, came would be wrong in English. One comes toward the speaker and these people have gone or arrived where no one is, not even the speaker.
It seems like this question is missing some translations. For me "they went where no one had gone before" was not accepted. I feel that is it acceptable to omit the "ever" and use a more idiomatic translation, and using both "ever" and "before" seems awkward and redundant in English.
A general form, which captures many ( but not all ) translations might be:
They [arrived (at,to),went (to),came to] where no one had (ever) [gone,been,come] (before).
where square brackets indicate mandatory substrings with multiple possibilities, and parenthesis indicate optional words.
They accept "They arrived where no one had arrived before." Come and go depend on the speaker's viewpoint, but arrived does not.
This one is kind of messy. I put stuff that was synonymous to the "correct" answer (I put "came to") but it marked it wrong.
They could have arrived in London and the speaker could be in New York. Then the speaker could not replace "arrived with came", because came means towards the speaker and went means away from the speaker, but arrived depends on a destination and not the speaker.
As a Brit I have to comment- 'gotten' probably hasn't been in popular use over here since the late C18th!
"they went to where no one else had gone before" . . . marked wrong due to a "missing word" - "ever". I disagree
Is it just me or is the audio on this sentence really crappy? I'm posting this here because I don't wanna file a report until I know it's actually an issue
Now I have sent a question to my son-in-law about Klingon. What does Qapla mean?
Again, just curious, but who comes up with these translations? One of the things I've noticed is that the same sentence in Spanish can be translated (and accepted as correct) in seemingly more than one way. But any OTHER translation (even though it might be more accurate) other than that given, is marked wrong. ??? ~Kat
'gotten' is American slang, not English and the response seems to vary - i tried to answer it previously using got and the answer came up with 'gone'. In view of the negative comments it might be an idea to drop this one from the test
They got to where no one else had ever gotten to before - certainly not an answer in English
I think I had a good translation: "They had arrived to where no one had ever arrived before." I suggested that my translation should be accepted. Sometimes Duo demands that I have exactly the same translation as it did.
Where does the 'ever" come from? My translation to They reached where no on had reached before.. was marked wrong (because I left out the word ever)
I think the translation should include: "The arrived where / when nobody else had arrived before." This could also mean: "They had arrived/come before anybody else had come before." Context is important: is Duo talking about landing on a new planet or just coming to a party early? Also using the lazy words "get/got/gotten" is a poor choice.
I put "arrived", and it was okay, but I also put "no-one", and it said I missed a space (between "no" and "one"). That's how you know you're dealing with an algorithm, not a person. And the "got to"/"gotten to" is not at all idiomatic, or any less awkward, for British-English speakers, it's just one of DL's clumsy little sentences.
I commented before and will quit after this on this subject. This is a sentence that I totally understand in Spanish, but the translation is the problem. A "correct" translation, IMO, is not so important as what the sentence means. We should not / cannot learn a language by translating it, no more than an infant can learn English by translating it into ... what? I give Duo great credit for trying to help us and I realize that the job is very difficult.
What a poor English translation .GOTTEN what sort of lazy word is that !.English English takes precedent. They arrived where no one had been before.
If 'nunca nadie' doesn't mean 'no one ever' then I don't know what does.
simply terrible sentence in english. even google translate of "They arrived where no one had ever arrived before." sounds so much better. like a normal sentence, you know...
"They arrived where no one had reached ever before." This is what was listed as the correct translation. This would never be constructed this way in English...
if you're going to have "got to" twice in a sentence, you may want to include it in the drop down suggestions; at least once.
Did Duo suggest "no 1" to anyone else (as opposed to "no one")? Well, I guess it's correct. Kind-of.
"Never anybody' and "nobody" are the same in English. Perhaps "nobody" is more concise, but as a N.E.S., both are perfectly correct.
By NES, do you mean native English speaker? If so, I'm also a native English speaker and "never anybody" sounds absolutely horrid and grating to my ears. Never in my life have I ever heard anybody use that expression.
There are numerous ways to order the words correctly in English on this one that are not accepted. it's trustrating tho we understand the issue for the managers of this question.
This one is very strange to me as few English speakers would ever say anything like that!
Binker 52 who said "This one is very strange to me as few English speakers would ever say anything like that! " I can only reply THINK IN SPANISH, NOT ENGLISH. Learn sentences as natives would use them, not as gringos would translate them. It does not matter what the sentence sounds like in English. You have to think in Spanish. Good luck!
"They reached where nobody ever had reached before" , woud this translation be correct?
This is very strange English for the UK. Perhaps some Americas speak this way? But it's not helpful.
I can confirm that it is strange for Americans too. But you're right... I do know a few people who speak with a thick Southern accent and could probably pull this off without raising any eyebrows. :) However, I'm sure this is just Duolingo going with a more direct translation.
I left out the word "else" and was marked incorrect. Should be optional, reported Sept 4 2018
Acceptable? Yes. Tongue-twistingly odd? Also yes. Just memorize what duoLingo says and move on...
Bruce, the "habia llegado" supports the subject "nadie," not "they." It says " "They arrived where no one had arrived before."
To me, "They went were no one had ever gone before" is the most idiomatic English translation. Accepted by DL!
wouldn't it be better to say: "they had gone where nobody else had gone before"? It may not be the exact translation, but it is more likely to say it this way in English, isn't it?