Mavry, a native speaker, posted under a different sentence that ir/a/infinitive verb constructions are used far more often. I guess the purpose of this section is just to make us aware of the simple future, but in reality it is not that commonly used from what I understand.
Eta: more info here. http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/future.htm
It's a fair question. I believe the reason is because that is not "natural" English. Rarely would we say "let's go to walk". I suppose if someone asked, "Why would we go to the shopping mall?" one might answer "let's go to walk" - to indicate the purpose of going there. Normally we would say "let's go for a walk" (to mean going nowhere in particular but just to get away from the present location) or "We are going to walk" (indicating the means of transportation). I hope that helps.
Yes. Here's an interesting discussion on what that phrase means: https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/to-go-on-a-walk.2688381/
I am uncertain about the exact meaning of your sentence. Do you mean "you are acting out?" If so, I still don't understand, and could you please explain a bit more?
Additionally, "Let's go to walk" is an archaic English sentence construction that is nevertheless still syntactically correct. Nowadays, native speakers typically use "Let's go walking."
The reason why "Let's go (to) walk" is still syntactically correct is because both the infinitive "to walk" and the gerund "walking" are verbals that can often be substituted for each other.
"Vamos a" DOES mean "we are going to." Also, because the infinitive "to walk" starts with the preposition "to," a sentence with a similar meaning is "We are going for a walk." Both of these sentences (We're going to walk/We're going for a walk) use prepositions in an adverbial way (i.e., use "to" and "for") to relate the noun "walk" to the compound predicate, which is "are going." NOTE: Strictly speaking, (one must say that) the word "walk" is considered the root verb in the infinitive "to walk," while it is the object (and thus a noun) of the prepositional phrase "for a walk." This is a perfect illustration of how English words regularly function as more than one part of speech.
OK. I guess we all have to pick our battles. Personally, I'd happily let this one go if the world would stop using "their" when they mean "they're" and vice versa. And don't get me started on the wholesale substitution of "I" for "me," whether used as subject or object.
To me, the only important lesson here is that "vamos a ..." can mean either "let's go ..." or "we are going ..."
I think this is one of those cases where a translation for learning is not the same as a translation you would use in real life. The "Wrong" translation is what the words actually say. Knowing that is helpful. Also, i makes walk into a verb and it's not grammatically incorrect. It's just not what we normally say.
I have found that translating prepositions–in this case "a"–often requires a connotative translation rather than a literal one. In other words, even though "at" literally translates into "to," the substitution of the English preposition "for" makes it sound more colloquially English to native English speakers: Brother, let's go for a walk.
Alternatively, interpreting the infinitive "caminar" as the gerund "walking" also makes the translation sound more colloquially English: Brother, let's go walking. Also, from a syntactical perspective, both infinitives and gerunds can function as noun substitutes in both Spanish and English.
Brother lets take a walk is accepted but lets go for a walk is not. Wow.
My understanding is that "vamos a caminar" can mean EITHER "we are going to walk" or "let's walk". In English, one can see very different notions in "Will we take a taxi? - No, brother, we are going to walk" and "What will we do this afternoon? Let's go for a walk!". Can someone with a better command of Spanish please chime in here to clarify whether "hermano, vamos a caminar" can mean either one, and the context is the king? Muchissimas gracias!
Hurrah for you, iggyl. I was going to ask - why are we having tedious discussions about what is correct or natural in English? What we want to know is - what is correct and natural in Spanish - and most importantly - what does it mean? I suspect "vamos" is used to mean let's go as an idiomatic phrase. And if so, then I wonder how it is different from the imperative "vayamos". Wish there were some Spanish grammar experts to enlighten us.
I'm no expert but if you look here http://www.wordreference.com/conj/ESverbs.aspx?v=ir and scroll down to the nosotros for the imperative and you will see that both vayamos and vamos can be used to mean 'let's go' for the affirmative.
I totally disagree. I can see "let's go walk" or "let's go walking" or "let's go for a walk". All have identical meanings and sound perfectly natural to me. Imagine a heated discussion among several people, and one says to another "let's go walk" in order to get out of that place and calm down. It seems perfectly reasonable to me and I think it is foolish to think that one should not say "let us" in place of the contraction "let's". But - in spite of all this discussion, I still am not convinced that "vamos" is accurately translated to "let's go". We are practicing future tense here, and "let's go" is not future tense. I think the most accurate translation is "we are going to walk."
Part of the difficulty I have in all of these "translate the following" is that I am an interpreter by profession (not English/Spanish) and I will often use an equivalent that would be an acceptable interpretation, but there are nuances left out that I should have included.
I agree that "let us go walk" is a very poor translation, since this lesson is focusing on "venir a" being used as a form of the future tense, translated as "going to" or "will". Nov 2014 I am reporting this and will also ask that the translation "brother, we are going to walk" and "brother, we will walk" be accepted.
You may write what ever you want and you can report it. It is my belief that there are many people on this site trying to learn regular English. So, it is unlikely that Duo will add a lot of slang. It is best to concentrate on the Spanish and not the English.There are English speakers world wide who would not use 'bro'.