"Ustedes tuvieron un perro."
Translation:You had a dog.
It is a contraction of you+would but you would need (you'd need) to follow that with more because there is no verb in that sentence. It can also be a contraction of you+had but not had, in the sense of possession. This is had used as an auxiliary verb so you still need another verb. So, you'd a dog is not a sentence, but you'd is a legit contraction. So, you'd better put some verbs in those sentences :)
You'd better get back by midnight.
Or...christmas song: "you'd better not pout, you'd better not cry.....santa clause is coming to town." You'd be better off admitting it. you'd gone to the mall and did not have permission to drive that Porsche!!! fess up. you'd better tell me the truth.
I wouldn't say it's a real contraction, more one that occurs because h is a softer sound that can get cut out if you're saying it fast. so more i'ad a dog is how it would be pronounced, but never written. Like how i'm from the south and often drop g's in gerunds (ex. i'm goin to the store), but I would never write it out that way
You'd can mean 'You had' when using in the perfect tense (with another verb following it) but not alone to mean to have something. i.e. You'd spent all your money, you'd been there already. NOT You had a picnic, you had no money. It can also mean 'You would' which doesnt need to be in the perfect tense necessarily. i.e. You'd have spent all your money (perfect), You'd never believe who I met today (not perfect).
Exactly. (Kind of) in your first example, "spent" is not a verb but rather a past participle. But I think it's obvious what you meant. And don't forget about "would" being used in the conditional tense: I would go if I knew he weren't going. This also brings up subjunctive, though. :/
I just didn't want anyone who wasn't familiar with parts of speech to get mixed up. Trivia: In Ireland we commonly use PPs in place of normal past simples in slang. Just like in your example "I seen it". Especial with "done".
No, in this specific case it should not be listed as a correct translation (you'd a dog), at least for US English. We contract To Have if it is used as an auxiliary verb, but not when it's used for possession. I think I see where duo was trying to go, though. They're not trying to trick you.
"had" is often contracted when it is an auxiliary verb and this helps put the emphasis back on the main verb, but you don't see this done when it is the main verb. "You've" is also used that way, what part of the country do you live in, because where I am you would get a stare if "have" were not the auxiliary verb.
Maybe because the dog is no longer there, so not using the personal a creates that distance. "You had a dog." implies that you no longer have it, maybe it died or maybe it was given away. If you gave it away, perhaps you were not that attached to it. If the dog were named, I think you would have to use the personal a, but here it is not a specific dog since you are using the indefinite article "un".
Yes, the verb form "tuvieron" can be used for "Ustedes" which means "You" plural form or for "Ellos" or Ellas" which mean "They". This sentence currently has the pronoun "Ustedes" which specifies "You", I don't know if in the past the pronoun was not included in this sentence, but I am glad it is at this time.
Why are you using ser all of a sudden when the verb you are mentioning is ver? Yo vi, tú viste, él/ella/usted vio, nosotros/as vimos, vosotros/as visteis, ellos/ellas/ustedes vieron.
Fue is from ser and has nothing thing to do with your example. Also, tuvieron is the plural conjugation of tener- in the preterit. It doesn't work for singular. It can only mean they or you all (both groups of more than one person) had.
None of the lessons I have learned up to this point have taught me how to use any of these verbs correctly in the past tense. I understand the present tense but nothing about past tense. This is the first time I've ever seen the term "tener" so I certainly would not know how to use it let alone as a "plural conjugation".
Believe it or not, the past perfect would be "had had"! "did have" is simple past emphatic form, negative form and interrogatory form.
GinoSamethini "did have" is used to emphasize that it is true when someone has said "You did not have a dog." You could then say "Yes, I did have a dog." This past construction is also used in questions "Did you have a dog?" as well as in negatives. "did" is not used in regular positive declarative sentences, when you are just telling someone something.
I am not sure, but I think that the preterite puts emphasis on the fact that you no longer have a dog (You had a dog, but now you don't.) while the imperfect puts emphasis on the time that you were with the dog. (You used to have a dog.)
This is really starting to become a pet peeve of mine. "You-all" sounds horrendous in English and can be served with the word "you" which is the same in English for both singular and plural. "You had a dog" can be talking to one person or two or many, and "you all" with or without a hypen is hard both on the eye and the ear and brings to mind such butcherings as "y'all" or even "youse".
Keep you lingual prejudices out of DL please. You all is perfectly acceptable English. Just because it isn't used all over the U.S. doesn't make it less valid. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_'you_all'_correct_grammar
I'm not saying it's incorrect.
I'm saying it's laughably superfluous, and it's pretty obvious that it wouldn't even be used if it wasn't perceived as an easier way of explaining "ustedes."
PS. I don't live in the US, so for all I know it's used all over the damn place :)
And yes it is used all over the U.S. It's also hardly superfluous. It is used to better communicate to whom you are speaking in oral language and in written. "I want you all to go to sleep" instead of "I want you to go to sleep" or even "I want all of you to go to sleep". The last is adding an unnecessary word "of". Also "you all" is exactly what usted mean in English so what better way would you have them explain it?
You both have participated in a dicussion in my opinion "not worthy of your obvious intellects" agree to disagree, move on, but above all keep the discussion board a friendly place to improve every visitors goal , that is to be able to communicate in spanish at what ever level they choose. KEV.
In English the word "you" is both plural and singular. In fact, before it became used for singular, the word you was solely plural.
If you're speaking to multiple people, saying "you" will be understood as plural by virtue of the fact that you're addressing more than one person. It's superfluous because of that, because "you" by itself already means, in the proper context, "you-all".
I'm not saying I wouldn't use it, but I would reserve it for emphasis. When simply addressing multiple second persons, it's 100% extraneous and unnecessary.
Don't let that stop you from saying it, of course. It's a free world :)
No it is not used all over the U.S. It grates on most of the nations nerves. You yell at someone else for their opinion then you incorrectly state it as fact that it is normal throughout the nation. Complete B.S. It is a southern area thing and it is only a SMALL portion of the U.S. that uses it.
I agree with you lago, 'y'all' and even 'you guys' isn't British English, but I've come to terms with the fact that Duolingo teaches South American Spanish and also American English, it's obviously an American company, so there's nothing we can do about it really. We gotta suck it up...unless of course you fancy starting a Europe based one with me where we can kick out the 'z's' n put the 's's' back in ;) X
"Ustedes" means "you" plural form (formal plural you form in Spain) and not "they"
"Ellos" and "ellas" are the masculine and feminine forms of the pronoun "they". The masculine form "ellos" is also used for mixed groups of males and females with at least one male in the group.
Who are 'we'? Are you Spanish? In Spain the plural 'vosotros' would only be used in informal speech between a group of people who know each other, or by a younger generation which is more informal. Any older generation would always use 'ustedes' when speaking to a group of people they do not know. 'They' is 'ellos/ellas'.
Now do you usually use the pronouns though? Don't you mean "Tuvisteis" for plural "you had" and "Tuvieron" is commonly used for "they had" ?
Andreaja69 - yes I agree with you, that's why I was confused as to why when I answered with the presumption that they were using ustedes as the 'they', I was marked as wrong.. I live in Spain and as you rightly point out it can be used as both formal plural 'you' and also as 'them'.
allintolearning - Whether one uses the pronouns or not, one must still know the possible meanings of a particular verb ending. For instance, 'tuvo' could mean, he/she/it/you had (usted). We have no way of knowing. 'Tuvisteis' is indeed plural 'you had . It is the ending for 'vosotros', which is the informal plural of 'tu'. 'Tuvieron' is certainly correct for 'they had', but also translates as 'you had' when referring to 'ustedes', the plural form of the formal 'you, 'usted'. The pronouns 'usted/ustedes' are quite often added to the verb to clarify that the subject of the sentence is not he/she/it or 'they'.
MarieBarcelona - Don't forget that 'ustedes' means 'you' , not 'they' in both Spain and Latin America. 'They' would be 'ellos/ellas', although the verb ending is the same. It is only when the pronoun is omitted and you have to depend on the verb ending that there can be some confusion. In this sentence they have included 'ustedes' to make the subject quite clear. Had the subject been 'they', they would have added 'ellos/ellas'. What they do not use in Latin America is 'vosotros' as the plural for 'tu' - they use the verb ending for 'ustedes/ellos/ellas'. All very confusing!
It does advertise itself as teaching Spanish as used in Latin America, so I wouldn't consider it an error on their part. It would be nice if they offered a course for Spanish as from Spain as well. The same is true for English. They advertise as offering American English, but it would be nice for folks to have the chance to choose between American and UK. Maybe someday. Then we could possible have UK English for American English speakers. :D
FULL DISCLOSURE: Native English speaker - US, Southern Appalachian dialect. Other uses of English may vary. Advice about Spanish should be taken with a grain of salt.
"Tuvieron" without a subject pronoun can mean "they had" or "you had" (plural form). "Ustedes" means "you" plural form and not "they". https://www.thoughtco.com/using-subject-pronouns-spanish-3079374