Translation:This is going to support us forever.
I am not a native speaker of either English or Spanish ( but rather Dutch). As far as I can tell we would generally translate both 'sustain' and 'maintain' to the same word in Dutch: 'onderhouden'. From this perspective I'd say that ' to sustain someone' would be a correct translation for this instance. Is this correct? Or does this translation only work for something like 'Esto nos va a sustener para siempre'?
This is a question of usage. Each of the suggested meanings for mantener can be applied to us, but only in certain circumstances.
This is going to sustain us forever, would apply to food, or the Bible.
This is going to maintain us forever, is really weird since it implies work is being done to us forever. One possible use might be maintaining a standard of living, as in payments from an ex-spouse.
This is going to keep us forever, is a use more common in the UK, and means the same as 'support'.
This is going to support us forever, is the best answer because it is used for money. As in: If we buy this building/win the lottery/get the inheritance it (the income) will support us forever.
The use of "last" that you suggest won't work because it doesn't fit the meaning of <<mantener>>. So the answer to your question is that your preferred translation is wrong, because even in English to say "This will support/sustain me" is indicating something different from "This will last me".
"To last" implies a limit or fragility that mantener does not. This is why your use of "last" does not meet up with "keep".
For your translation (This is going to last us...) <<Durar>> is the Spanish word closest to meaning, and so the translation would be "Esto nos va a durar para siempre."
The first meaning that came to mind for me was "this" being an alien captor, or cage, which would eventually yield or give way to let us out. Nobody else here seems to have gotten that vibe, so I'm wondering if that's off base. Is there a better verb for keeping as prisoner?
again - really. if "maintain" is allowed, I don't know why it's wrong. Am I doing something wrong with these exercises? Am I missing a part of the cite that tells you this stuff before telling you to not confuse 'maintain' with 'support?' That's a real question. Am I missing something, or are the exercises meant to make you fail so that you do them again?
The issue with that is you will memorize that sentence. However if you move on and come back chances you will find the section easier, you can think your way through rather than count on memory and retain much better. This is a progressive learning tool. At the same time I am not suggesting doing it once and move on. Do it a 2 or 3 times. Move on, come back later when the sentences will be less familiar and you will have much more success. Get over the sense of failure should you lose hearts. Learning a language is about making mistakes. Make them here. The more hearts you have doesn't equate to better Spanish.
Identical or similar words in different languages do not necessarily convey the same meaning. Yesterday I learned that Spanish direccion can translate to english direction or address depending on the structure of the sentence. There are many more of them out there. I used to get frustrated with this too but I have learned to accept and move on. To be fair to Duolingo, it often gives the two or more instances within the same test session to explain just that.
This is a good explanation, pinkygreen. I'm not sure how much this will help, but word order also changes depending on if you use 'always' or 'forever,' with 'always' appearing before the action or state (state like, this light is always red), and 'forever' coming after (I've been sitting at this red light forever). You can stick 'always' at the end if you're trying to be poetic, but it's not normal usage.
I don't think "this will maintain us" makes sense grammatically, does it? I assumed "this will support us" was referring to something physical, like...a balcony, or something, idk. But then the "forever" part wouldn't make sense, lol. Typical Duolingo and their weird out-of-context sentences.
No, either is not acceptable-- "esto" is neuter while "esta" is feminine; "esta" is used when dealing with feminine gendered objects (i.e. estas flores, esta computadora) and esto is used more often, to my understanding, to refer to situations or generic "things" (esto es terrible, etc.)
Both could potentially make sense because we don't know what "this" refers to. I think what he's trying to say is that when you're doing the transcribe exercise and the recording is a little misleading (at least at normal speed), it would be nicer if both were accepted, or else it just feels like a cheap hit.
First, it sounds like you're talking about something that would not spoil or go bad. The correct sentence sounds like it is talking about livelihood, or financial support, like a business or a trust fund.
Second, the way you asked your question is not correct English grammar.
You meant to ask: Why is "this is going to always keep for us" wrong?
You are changing the subject of the sentence among other problems. So these are not equivalent sentences. To make it more clear I have made bold the subject of each sentence.
Esto nos va a mantener para siempre means that "this will support us forever", probably referring to an amount of money or a business.
[él] nos va a mantener esto para siempre really doesn't make sense, but I think you were trying for something like "[he] is going to support us this forever", and although it does make sense if you drop the masculine pronoun, it reads "we are going to maintain this forever". So you have changed the subject and moved the action from us in the original sentence and onto the unnamed object.
El coche nos va a mantener él para nosotros para siempre just doesn't make sense (the car we are going to support him for us forever), if you intended to use a pronoun for "the car" instead of "him" then it still reads "The car, we will maintain it forever for us" So again, you have moved the subject off of the unnamed pronoun (esto) and onto us.
Because the subject (esto) comes before the direct object (nos). This/esto is what is doing the supporting, us/nos represents the recipient of the support. In Spanish the subject is often not stated because the verb conjugation make sit unnecessary. So if it was "it is going to support us forever" then you'd drop the subject and say "nos va a mantener para siempre". "This" is more specific than "it", though, hence "esto" is stated.
"Forever" can be either an adverb or a noun, and as a noun, and a period of time, "for forever" should work grammatically. Sounds like something people would say, and it did take me a few reads to even notice the difference, but I would still probably skip the "for". Did you report it? I'd be interested to see if they accept it.
You could use por siempre instead of para siempre, but I think that would be unusual for this sentence. The definition of the two phrases suggests that por siempre means a time without end whereas para siempre means an indefinite time. Both can obviously be used to translate the English word "forever." However, which Spanish phrase you use can change the sense of the sentence.
My understanding is that Spanish speakers use por siempre to describe things or conditions that have no end or (especially in literary contexts) that the speaker/writer expects to continue, such as an undying love. In this exercise sentence, the idea is much more mundane, I think, and that makes para siempre more appropriate.
I think that English maintain / sustain are so close as to make little difference. i.e. " this amount of money will maintain /sustain us etc." I really think that "maintain" in the sentence should be an acceptable translation. in terms of the verb "mantener" my dictionary shows its translation as " maintain" to be the most used. Its translation as "sustain" is shown way down the track. it also shows the translation of "sustain" as being "sostener"