"I can't get this, I'm not getting this, Why can't I get this? My kids just don't get this/it! " Expressions I use all the time, and hear being used all the time, when I, my kids, or others have difficulty learning something. (An expression, incidentally, which I am applying as we speak, to the Modal Verbs skill!).
I have never, to my recollection, ever said "I am never going to achieve this." I am not saying that DL's translation is wrong in either meaning or grammar; all I am saying is that as an English speaker, it is more natural, if somewhat idiomatic to use "get this" to mean "achieve." Given that many comments in these forums talk about the need to not translate literally, I think this is just an another example of that. The sentence can have both meanings. :)
I feel your pain, but the safest bet is to try to use the top translation DL gives you for these sentences - even if it sounds stilted to you as an English speaker. At some point one of the DL people mentioned that DL had 112 different allowable translations for one sentence. They can't cover every eventuality, but there's no reason not to report your answer as one that should be acceptable. That's the only way DL could have gotten to the 112 number.
In response to your post below, stating that "fetch" is only applicable to dogs:
Using UK and at US dictionaries, fetch is a verb that is not only applicable to dogs.
British English: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/fetch For US English:
This is also my personal experience (in Australia)..
Well, if I listen to you, and everything you put in my ear I'll be living like woulda, shoulda, coulda, I'll be paralyzed by fear Huh, ain't that the truth, if I quit the only way I lose I got two choices when I do this - make moves or make excuses
I wonder if that would all rhyme in Spanish.
I dont know if they already teach that or not, but 'able' is more like this --> 'Capaz', that means "able to" so if you say "you are never going to be able to do this" it would be "nunca vas a ser CAPAZ de hacer esto". The good thing is that this verb or idk if its actually a verb, its more like an action, doesn't change with Ella/El/Tú/Yo/Usted, it only changes with Nosotros/Ellos/Ellas ---> 'Capaces'
Technically correct, but functionally not. The point of translation is to translate it into a natural phrase in the second language. Unless you were writing prose or poetry, you would never use that structure in English. I am finding that Spanish often "reverses" (I'm sure to a native Spanish speaker it is English that is "reversing"!) phrases and puts parts of sentences, such as subjects after verbs, in different places than we are used to in English. This is one of those cases. Nunca seems to come before the verb in Spanish, but we usually put it after.
In slow pronunciation I hear the word 'pas' in stead of 'vas' unless I use the headphone. As a musician I have pretty good ears, but the audio isn't always clear to me. Well I guess it's just another difficulty, like when you hear different people say the same word. :-)
Verbs in Spanish make a lot more sense than they do in English, because they have built-in meaning that specifies who is being spoken about. This often makes pronouns unnecessary.
Consider the word "talk." In English, the same verb form is used for many persons, and without the pronoun we would have no idea who is doing the talking: I talk, you talk, we talk, they talk.
In Spanish, the verbs are different depending on whether it is I, you, he/she/it, we, they/you(plural) performing the action.
I talk - Hablo
You talk - Hablas
He/She/It talks - Habla (you would specify this with a pronoun if it wasn't clear which person you were referring to)
We talk - Hablamos
They/You(plural) talk - Hablan
Because "hablo" means "I talk," for example, the "I" can be added for emphasis, but is not required.
On the case of the above sentence:
I am going - Voy
You are going - Vas
He/She/It is going - Va
We are going - Vamos
They/You(plural) are going - Van