does foram always require 'para' after it to point to where they went? would "meus amigos foram naquela praia" 'they went to that beach' be ok? or would it have to be "meus amigos foram para naquela praia"?
Do people talk so fast that you can't here the article 'a' in person? Or is it just me not being used to the language? I only knew to put it there from habit, I just heard 'para praia' on the audio, after listening multiple times. :S On the slow version, it is clear though.
Yes, it is hard to grasp the letter A. It is connected to "para". You need to have a sharp ear. You get it over time =)
were = estavam (meus amigos estavam na praia).
went = foram (meus amigos foram à praia).
but you translate "meus amigos foram (to be/ser) na praia" as "my friends were at the beach", right?
If so, does it mean "meus amigos estavam na praia" = "meus amigos foram na praia"? However they are not exactly the same because you use the former to say "my friends were at the beach" instead of the latter. But why?
I thought "estavam" meant "used to", but you also translate it to "were" in another discussion. It is confusing...
No. Meus amigos foram à praia = my friends went to the beach.
My friends were at the beach = meus amigos estavam na praia.
"estavam" can be both "were" or "used to be", it depends on the context. =)
ok, pensei que o were funcionava tanto pra 'estavam' quanto pra 'foram'... Thanks.
Yes, also, when it is the past of "ser", which does not fit here. =/
They were my friends = eles eram/foram meus amigos.