1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "He took his car to the house…

"He took his car to the house."

Translation:Él llevó su coche a la casa.

March 17, 2013



Tomar wouldn't work here?


I think tomar should work here, mode of transport: tomar un autobús, tomar el trén etc.


There was a discussion on another page, where it was asserted by some knowledgeable folk that "tomar" cannot be used for "taking the car" somewhere, even though it can be for "taking the bus/train". For "taking the car" it is llevar, apparently.


Just a guess, but perhaps the difference is that he is driving the car, but only riding on the bus or train?

[deactivated user]

    Makes sense. I believe you also "llevar" small items (suitcase, letter, etc.).

    The bus/train takes you more than you take it.

    So....taxi? Tomar or Llevar? Uber? Self-driving car?


    Great to know, thanks!


    For trains / buses etc, the verb 'coger' is also often used ie. voy a coger el tren.


    makes good sense as in "to catch" :)


    Llevo is i take (in this case llevó he took) and llego is i arrive (or llegó is he arrived)


    This two verbs always confuse me. I am glad that DL finally gave us a difficult múltiple choice with them.


    Please Duolingo Team,

    CAPITALIZE the first letter of every single sentence in the multiple choice question. Otherwise, looking at the only capitalized letter is enough to find out the right answer ...

    Thank you.

    Reported: 2015-05-20


    Yeouch. I guess we have had some improvements over the years....


    when can you use sacar?


    el llevo su coche al casa......................al = to the , why is this not correct ?


    Al is a contraction of "a" and "el." Because "casa" is feminine, you can't use "al," which is for a masculine noun. It must be "a la" instead.


    Thank you, I had the same question.


    oh yes , that was it, thank u.


    Is there a slight difference between tomar and llevar?

    I kind of get the impression that llevar means to take something to somewhere or someone, while tomar means more along the lines of to take something from somewhere or someone.


    Tomar means take: take a pill, take a vacation, to drink. Llevar means take in the sense of to carry or wear: llevar ropa, llevar un nino, etc. There is overlap between the two, but for many meanings only one is correct.


    Tomar is also used for giving directions the same way it is in English: Tome Diamond Causeway para ir a Skidway Island y siga las senales del Mercado de las Pulgas. (Take Diamond Causeway by way of Skidway Island and follow the signs to the flea market.)


    Okay, why is it not "le llevo"? I put "le" in, and it told me it was wrong, but I thought indirect pronouns were required whenever there is an indirect object? In the pronoun lessons, that's what it seemed like, and I've seen explanations online which said as much. Why isn't it "El le llevo su coche a la casa"?


    Yes, it's true that the indirect object pronoun is required, but there's no indirect object here. It gets confusing because in English we can either use the indirect object itself or make it into a prepositional phrase. So you could say

    I gave him the car


    I gave the car to him

    Those have the same meaning, but not every "to" prepositional phrase is replacing an indirect object. Here you can't say "I took house the car," like you can with the above example. It's tricky, but it helps to remember that the indirect object will usually be animate, not always but usually.


    In southern American Spanish you can say "Carro" instead of "Coche" :)


    Why doesn't coche and carro both work? They both mean car!


    I also chose: "Él llevó su vehículo" a la casa. My choice was not accepted. Any reason why?


    I did this too, cursospan. I guess vehículo just doesn't match well enough to car. Here's the wordreference page for it: http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=veh%C3%ADculo


    "llevó su carro a la casa" is wrong? Can someone please explain? The only thing I could think is that without the "Él" you don't know for sure it is a "he"?


    why can't it be: E'l saco' his car to the house?

    [deactivated user]

      "sacar" does mean "to take" but more in the way of "remove".

      Él sacó la pluma fuera de la mesa. [He took the pen out of the desk.]

      I suppose you might use "sacar" if you were taking the car out of the garage.

      (Btw, you might wanna check out keyboard options so you can type accents. I don't like the built in one, myself, so I wrote a little application:



      Mesa = desk ?

      [deactivated user]

        Sorry, "la mesa" is "the table". "el escritorio" is "the desk"


        So could one say "Él sacó su coche"... "he took the out" ... as in went for a drive? Also... isn't Mesa is more 'Table' and escritorio would be desk?

        [deactivated user]

          Not entirely sure on this (still learning too!)...however, I think:

          "Él sacó su coche" = "He took out his car." (Maybe, pulled it out of the garage into the driveway.)

          "Él sacó con su coche" = "He went out with his car." (Went for a drive.)

          Clarification/verification from someone more skilled would be appreciated!

          Re: table/desk......yes. My mistake. :-)


          Would "para" and "hacia" always be acceptable replacements for "a" when it is movement to a location like this?


          if you want to emphasize the movement yes, I would say this is quite similar to English to and towards


          Yes, but I wrote para and it didn't accept my answer...


          vitor- para goes with a recipient, the car is certainly not for the house.


          "Él llevó suyo coche a la casa." option was marked as a wrong translation for this sentence while "Él llevó su coche a la casa." option was marked as a correct. Can someone please explain why? How would you translate the sentence with "suyo" into English?


          Hi Stfods, I think I could help you. I´m spanish. I was born in Spain Possessives before the noun: mi, tu, su,nuestro ...."Él llevó su coche a la casa" Possessivs after the noun: mío, tuyo, suyo, nuestro... " Llevó el coche suyo a la casa" If you want, see at this link: http://borgniet.be/espagnol/gram/GramEspa2.3.html Espero que te sirva.


          Gracias por explicación tuyo


          Stofods, tienes que decir: " Gracias por tu explicación"


          También "Gracias por la explicación tuya"(soy chica), pero es mejor lo que te he escrito arriba.


          Como nativo (nativa si quieres) sabrás que tuya se refiere a la explicación, que es el sujeto, y no a tú (tí) que es el OI. En cualquier caso, el orden es un tanto extraño: Gracias por tu explicación o gracias por la explicación sería mucho más correcto.


          Hi Raul thank you so much. Veo que dominas la gramática (por desgracia yo la tengo bastante olvidada, ni te cuento cuando terminé mis clases en el Instituto). Me gustaría que le explicaras a Stfods lo que comenta un poco más arriba por favor, yo lo he intentado pero creo que no se lo he explicado bien. Me refiero a este: "Él llevó suyo coche a la casa." option was marked as a wrong translation for this sentence while "Él llevó su coche a la casa." option was marked as a correct. Can someone please explain why? How would you translate the sentence with "suyo" into English? Te doy las gracias por adelantado.


          Como bien dice RamosRaul, no es correcto lo que escribo respecto a "Gracias por la explicación tuya" (ese tuya se referiría a la explicación, nada tiene que ver con ser chica o chico) y además la frase es forzada, no es habitual, por tanto: "Gracias por tu explicación" o como dice Ramos "Gracias por la explicación" es lo correcto. I'm sorry


          Yes, this is how I remembered it from Spanish studies many long years ago. To my ear it sounds more consonant to put the possesive after the noun since adjectives usually come after the noun also However, I don't think DL likes the "tuyo, suyo" form. When possesives first came up I used them a few times and was dinged for it every time and so I just stopped using that form. --got the same translation a couple of minutes later and tried "Él llevó el coche suyo a la casa". DL still marked it wrong.


          Suyo means yours, his, or hers as in: el coche es suyo. You wouldn't use suyo to replace su, or vice versa.


          Thanks, after your comment I read web on that topic and got the point :)


          I'm really confused about why you wouldn't need an indirect pronoun here. Is 'Él le llevó su coche a la casa' wrong? I thought you would always need the 'le' and the 'coche' part was optional???


          Coche is the direct object here. This sentence doesn't have an indirect object.

          Think of the sentence "I gave him the car."

          I=subject, gave=verb, him=indirect obj., car=direct obj.


          so couldn't it be " el LO llevo su coche..." in that "coche" is the direct object and he is bringing IT ( the car) to the house? I put this as a translation and DL rejected it but I think I have seen DL do this in the past ( even though the "lo/la/etc." aren't really needed)


          That makes sense now haha! Thanks for explaining it :)


          él lo llevó a su coche a la casa Is this wrong?


          Why is "Él conduje su coche a la casa?" not accepted?


          Could someone explain why llevaba is not right? I understand llevo makes the most sense, as this is most likely a singular event, but we don't know that. Wouldn't llevaba make sense if this was some frequent thing that occurred in the past, or wasn't a singular event in question? Perhaps the broader issue is when exactly imperfect vs perfect applies and why couldn't this sentence be either. Thanks


          Duo is pushing us to understand idiomatic Spanish. I've commented before how some unfortunate English learner would understand "He CAUGHT the bus(!).


          not quite what I saw for reply "Quio" su coche a la casa . and hovering over the words in the question do not show "quio" I'd like to know where this come from thank you.


          it should be el lleva .. why it is el llevo.. llevo is for first person..


          It is in a past tense.


          yes.. you are right.. I was thinking present tense .. thanks for helping :)


          Why isn't "traer" acceptable here?


          Traer is to bring. Someone above further explained llevar in more detail.


          It seems to me for this context they are usually synonymous - bring & take, llevar & traer. There's a subtle difference in perspective in English - "take" is moving away, from the speaker's perspective, while "bring" is moving toward. (I wonder if this subtlety is also true in Spanish.) But for this context the subtlety would likely mean little.


          I got all of the same sentences so i checked all and it said i got it wrong......


          Él llevó su coche a la casa. Él trajo su coche a la casa. Él condujo su coche a la casa. All those might be correct depending on the situation.


          They're different verbs and mean different things. You may be able to use all these words to refer to the same situation but traer and conducir aren't translations of the verb that Duolingo is looking for in this instance.


          Yes, they are different verbs and mean different things, as the translation that 'dulingo' gave. That's why in the limits of the sentence exposed, with no further information on the context: All those might be correct.


          Errr....I'm confused then, what was your point?


          Why can't i use llevarse here? Isnt he doing it himself? For himself? "El se llevo su carro..."


          Can anyone please answer my question?


          Because the sentence didn't say he took himself and his car to the house?


          why is it "a la casa" and not "al casa?"


          The word for "house" in spanish is "la casa"...because the noun is feminine, it must be "a la casa" ("to the house").


          The reason is because it's perfectly easy to pronounce a la while a el blends together phonetically into "al". Same deal with de la & de el»» del.


          Would "hacia la casa" (towards the house) also work? I didn't select it and got the question right, so I'm just wondering...


          This is probably basic, but why doesn't "a la" become "al"?


          "a el" becomes "al" because of pronunciation issues and as far as I know it isn't optional, it is a must, but "a la" doesn't have the same pronuncitaion problem, so it is not combined. The 2nd answer below also mentions the same thing (c;


          why not coger instead of llevar? I'm living In spain atm and they use coger a lot, "coger una guagua", "coger un taxi", ...

          [deactivated user]

            llevó vs tomó

            I think I understand why it's the latter, but not the former, here.

            However, would, "Él tomó su coche a la casa" make sense if it were a tow truck driver towing the car away?


            so why not "auto"?


            I may be totally out of place for asking this... Why not "Él su llevó coche a la casa"?


            Why is automovil wrong? Isn't automobile a car?


            Hint says "de el" for both su and sus but it told me I got the gender wrong when I used sus. What's up with that?


            I thought llevar was "to bring" (towards the speaker) and traer was "to take" (away from the speaker). I guess we don't know if the speaker is in the house or not.
            Although, I guess taking a car usually implies driving it unless you own a tow truck or it is a very small car. I have gone down the rabbit hole with this question.

            [deactivated user]

              I think you have it backwards.

              Podrías traerme una cerveza? [Could you bring me a beer?]

              Claro, después de llevar esta cerveza a la mesa cuatro. [Sure, after I take this beer to table four.]

              [I learned it by thinking of the similarity between "deliver" and "llevar". Now it's kinda/sorta instinct.]


              Why doesn't sacó work here

              [deactivated user]

                I don't think it's quite the same. I think of "sacar" as "to go out", usually, but it seems to be generally used to refer to extraction or removal. (Leaving the house, sticking your hand out a window, having a tooth removed, getting juice from a fruit....) So, you might say, "He went out with his car" (Sacó con su coche.) but this sentence isn't saying that. In fact, maybe he was already out: saw the doctor, picked up some mail, and then, took his car to the house.

                That is, this sentence is about the destination, not the departure.

                [Disclaimer: First language English. Todavía estoy aprendiendo español.]


                I'm still confused about tomar, llevar. we say yo tome el vino. To take/drink wine, which is a small thing. Based on a previous discussion I thought llevar was to take people, tomar to take things, but now it is much more complicated. Can anyone explain.

                [deactivated user]

                  I think "llevar" is more like "take away" or "deliver"

                  "Tomar" is more like "acquire"

                  "Yo llevo el coche." (I had it, and took it somewhere.)

                  "Yo tomo el coche." (I didn't have it. Now I do.)

                  In both cases, in English, we'd say, "I took the car."

                  Depending on the object and context, the meaning can be "adjusted", so "Tomo vino" means "take a drink", "Tomo tren" means "take the train". Since it may not be clear (as in the English) whether you're acquiring or driving the car, "llevar" is more clear.


                  Both autómovil and cocho mean car why is 1 wrong?


                  Can i write Él llevó a su coche en la casa???

                  [deactivated user]

                    Normally, no. That "a" (....llevó a su.....) is know as the "personal a". It's used with people and pets.

                    Llevó a su perro. (He took his dog.)

                    Llevó su coche. (He took his car.)

                    I suppose, if you also wanted to also express his obsession with his car....it'd work? (Not sure about this.) "This is Vanessa, his car." Llevó a su coche en la casa.


                    The correct answer I got was: "Él llevó su coche a el hogar." Why isn't that "Él llevó su coche al hogar." instead? I.e. why is it "a el hogar" instead of "al hogar", given that hogar is masculine.

                    [deactivated user]

                      I think it should be correct, and would likely be accepted as a correct. I've noticed that the answer given in response to a mistake is typically a variation of what you tried. That is, a corrected version of your answer rather than "the best" answer.

                      A recent one I had suggested, "She plays an important paper in government.", which is VERY clearly nonsensical in English.....but the Spanish word "papel" also means "role". She plays an important role.

                      Most of DuoLingo is automated, and considering the complexity of language....it does a pretty good job. Glitches like these are inconvenient, but they do make us think. :-)


                      Thanks Peabianjay! OK, good to know. I agree with all you said. I was just not sure if there was some obscure rule that I'm not aware of :)


                      When the ending of the sentence is changed, in multiple choice, it is easy to guess the answer even if you don't know it!! I think it would be more helpful not to make guess work possible!

                      [deactivated user]

                        They don't come up all that often, and it's a good way to learn. Sure, sometimes guessing is possible....but that's YOUR choice. Read them all, even those that are clearly incorrect, and try to figure out what they are saying, anyway.


                        When do you use al?


                        I don't understand why "to the house" isn't translated "al casa".....can someone please enlighten me?


                        "al" is an abbreviation for "a el"

                        "el" is the masculine article "the"

                        "casa" is a feminine noun, so you must use the feminine article "la"

                        "a la" is NOT abbreviated

                        If, however, you took the car "to the building", "a el edificio" IS abbreviated to "al edificio"


                        Thank you, PBJ. I must have missed that at some point, and you've cleared it up for me. Have a lingot. :)


                        I do not have a hyphen on my keyboard that will allow me to do what you need me to do please correct


                        In the multiple choice, one of the wrong answers was "Él llevó su coche al la casa."

                        I had to look at it for a really long time to figure out why it was different from the correct answer! Only one letter!


                        Im really confused what deos llevó mean?

                        [deactivated user]

                          Llevó is the past tense for llevar which is "..to take..."

                          In English, "..to take from..." and "...to take to..." are the same. Spanish splits them up, "tomar" and "llevar".

                          "tomar" is acquiring something (I took a cookie from the plate: Tomé una galleta del plato.)

                          "llevar" isn't. (I took a cookie to Joe: Le llevé una galleta a Joe.)

                          Note that other meanings for these same verbs follow from these basic interpretations. "...to take a coffee..." (drink = tomar) "...to take a shirt..." (to wear = llevar) "...to take a car...." (llevar)


                          Don't tell me we have different verbs for 'to take' for different modes of transportation. How about a donkey, or as it's called a Juan Deere.


                          The 'correct' answer wasn't in the possible interpretations, so I guessed what would be most logical. Yay!

                          Learn Spanish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.