1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Portuguese
  4. >
  5. "Eles vão colocar a mão aqui."

"Eles vão colocar a mão aqui."

Translation:They are going to put their hands here.

March 17, 2013



Couldn't this also be "They are going to put the hand here"?


Your answer makes more sense.


How would you translate, "They are going to put their hands here"?


In English, the possessive form must be used when referring to parts of the body. I.e., "their hands", "his hand", etc. Your sentence would be correct if, say, a group found a severed hand and were going to put it in someone's bed as a prank". Or something :)


Well, aren't we in the "Medical" section? To me this sounds a bit like Dr. Frankenstein and his team sewing a body together.


Ha, I didn't think of that.


This would make sense if, say, they were dissecting a corpse and were considering where to put a severed hand; or they were composing a painting. Otherwise, we always use the possessive adjective with body parts of specific persons.


It's literally possible, but the most natural is "their hands".


Why must it be hands (plural) in English, while the Portuguese has it only in singular?


It is common to use the singular in Portuguese while the plural is used in English. ex:

Shake hands = apertar a mão


Should mão be in the plural here, since the context has more than one person, and since the translation has 'hands'?


here using mão or mãos keeps the same meaning =) they should accept both.


are we talking about one separate hand here or their hands (one each)?


I think its like this: "Honey, we have put the clening products somewhere away from the children, or else "eles vão pôr a mão aqui" (meaning that one of the children could go there and it may be harmful)


ok yes that sounds reasonable. Thanks Paulenrique. But the English translation is incorrect. Parts of the body always have a possessive pronoun, the logic being that they belong to someone. So it should be ´the children are going to put their hands here´. Children is plural so hands are plural too.


right we need to report it


I´ve reported it now


Yeah.... in portuguese, french, spanish, its not necessary to use the possessive, bur its not gonna be he first time you'll find this mistake. I've seen other sentences not using the possessive and making people confused :(


In this sense the English should be "or else they'll get their hands on them." The idiom means to take or gain possession of something. Does that fit this sentence? "They are going to get their hands on this/it/them"


So it sounds as if it means "They will get their hands on it." If this is a common expression in Portuguese, then there should be a more idiomatic English version because "The are going to put their hands here" doesn't work.


I went with the possessive "their" with the singular "hand", thinking that "they" were each going to put a hand in an X-ray machine or something. And of course it was wrong.


How about "They will set their hands here"

Shouldn't this also be accepted?


I don't think and English speaker would use "set" with "hands" in a normal sentence. To take possession of something, perhaps in an unauthorized or aggressive way, is to "get their hands on this." If it means metaphorically to intefere, meddle, or attempt to influence, it could be "They are going to put their hand in this."


Hmm...I have to disagree. As a native English speaker, I can think of a number of sentences in which "set" and "hands" could be used together, for example: "He set his hands on the table," or "She set her hands to work."

The primary definition of set (to put, lay, or stand (something) in a specified place or position, synonyms: put (down), place, lay, deposit, position, settle, leave, stand, plant, posit) would also make sense in this situation.


The verbs most associated with "hands" are "put" or "place" as seen in ngram's Corpus of English (AmE 2009).



I think it is "Eles vão colocar as mãos aqui"


Is the conclusion of this discussion that the sentence is literal? I think we have to go with Paulenrique's definitive reading from 5 years ago: That is, it means "they are going to get their hands on it/them (get hold of, take, mess with).

Can it also mean"They are going to put their hands here (e.g., on the steering wheel) [and put their feet there (e.g., on the pedals)]. Is this right? The point then being that in Portuguese They have a singular hand, whereas in English hands must be plural. Unless you say "one hand"--as in a situation where they put one hand here and the other somewhere else. I doubt that is the intention here.


Does this mean more "They are going to get into that" as in "keep your hands out of that" or "he will pitch in" as in "he will lend a hand". Or neither... It is difficult to master without understanding.


Neither in my opinion... The Portuguese sentence sounds to me as someone's words describing an equipment operation (how to properly take x-ray from hands for example). In spite of this, "não ponha a mão nisso!" means something like "keep your hands out of that!", "ele dará uma mão" like "he will pitch in" or "he will lend a hand" and "ele põe a mão na massa" like "he gets personally into that"... :)


Could this sentence mean that they will "give a hand" as in helping someone with a chore, etc.


I don't think so. We also have a similar expression for "to give a hand" = dar uma mão/mãozinha.


The équivalent idioms I’m English are « get my/your/his/our/their hands on something or someone » or « get ahold of something ». is always plural. Hands is always plural. It’s an expression and doesn’t vary. That’s just the way it goes. It usually has a negative connotation, expressing anger (e.g. desire for revenge) or fear.


Commonly-used idioms with "hand:"

Would you give me a hand? / I am going to try my hand at it. / The crowd got out of hand...


"They will place their hand here." should be accepted.


That would be okay if ‘their’ referred to one person, as in ‘When someone wants to get into this office, they will place their hand here and the door will open automatically.’ If it’s really plural, then we need hands to be plural also.


Conversely, they might write in their own hand, or in adverse events, see the hand of their enemies. A charitable group might offer a helping hand to those less fortunate. A performer might get a big hand from an audience. An exceptional athlete could find that none of his or her competitors could "lay a hand" on him or her. A handful of examples should be enough to show that this is a tricky area of language. One more. A group of people might "show their hand" even if they weren't playing cards.


I'm sure we have other examples at hand that we can hand over to the hands working for Duo, who really should get their hands on some native speakers to whom to hand off the handling of translations.


You deleted my comment? After you walked away from your goal of making learning language fun and free, now you're deleting comments? This comments section is now a requirement because your teaching methodology is fundamentally flawed. Of course the comments are going to blow up when you have sentences that don't make sense. I hope you're praying the people here who answer the questions well, since you're no longer interested in your goal of fun and free.


'They are going to put hands here.' If it's they're going to put their hands here, shouldn't it be mãos deles aqui?


It's implicit in Portuguese that the hands belong to the person being discussed.


But shouldn't it be mãos? Why is it wrong when i use the plural of hands?


Very often spoken BrP uses the singular when the plural might be expected; esp, when each person in a group is performing the same action. Another example:

Vocês todos vão lavar a cara.
You are all going to wash your faces.


The correct translation should be "They are going to put their hands here"

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