'You can control me" ..........saucy ;).
I'll definitely need to remember this one
It is 100% acceptable. It has no effect on the grammar of the sentence if you say "me puedes controlar" or "puedes controlarme"
You can always put a pronoun on the end of an infinitive verb (but never on a conjugated one)
You can't say "controlasme" for "you control me"
It needs to be "me controlas"
Just to clarify i think in the imperative conjuction you are supposed to attach the pronoun... But i think that is just oneexception to your statement that pronouns are not attached to conjugated verbs.
For example. Tell me is digame. And you tell me is me dices. Similarly vayanse is telling you all to leave...
In general your statement is right but there are times reflexes and pronouns are attached to a conjugated verb
You are also mostly correct. But you have to add an accent to most commands in order to maintain the stress where it goes in the conjugated verb. So it is dígame and váyanse. Also negative commands do not attach the objects. I don't know if it is considered a conjugated verb or not, but you can also attach pronouns to the present participle (and/windows form)
You are right - I forgot to put the accent - mostly because I was too lazy whilst typing to make sure I put the accented vowels - just as I did not capitalize "i" in my first sentence. However, you are right to point out the missing accents so later others are not confused. Thanks!
Duolingo isn't teaching this. Or commands. Why? And there's no way to come back here to check for an answer. firstname.lastname@example.org
Duolinguo doesn't really teach. I started Irish just to see what my experience would be from scratch. If you can put up with some nonsense sentences it is a great way to keep drilling, and the insights from the users is wonderful. But if you haven't had at least some exposure to the grammar and vocabulary of the language, it is difficult. Other resources are better for learning for the first time.
I respectfully disagree. I think that Duolingo teaches like you learn an language via immersion, or as a child. You don't study grammar tables when you're learning your first language. You just start speaking, and learn to infer grammar from being told you're incorrect and what the correct response is.
As for the "nonsense sentences," I think that that's part of the charm of the site. Instead of learning Berlitz travel phrases that you can get from any pocket guide, you're learning on something that engages your brain, precisely because they're different and strange and striking. Again, if you think back to how you learned as a child, the phrases that make up nursery rhymes are just as weird but wonderful: "Hey diddle diddle the cat and the fiddle, the cow jumped over the moon." That's not going to show up in your Lonely Planet guides, but it helped me learn English as a kid.
Anyway, just wanted to offer my two cents. Good luck with your studies.
I actually agree for the most part. But I wouldn't call it immersion. I went to Germany with only the most basic phrasebook German and became fluent. That was immersion and the most important element was context. After I had been in Germany for about 5 weeks my father told me that he had read that it takes about six weeks to get to comfortable basic fluency. When he wrote me that,I was feeling lost and didn't believe that, but I swear that it as if I woke up at six weeks speaking German. I do appreciate some of the randomness about the sentences and extrapolating rules and meaning but although it is not memorizing rules it is not what a child does. But it is quite useful. If Duo would provide a little more context it might clarify some ambiguities so we would learn which construction for which circumstance. Of course user imputs helps here especially native input.
I view DL as a quirky phrasebook. And if you think about it, it is pretty much that. Although I doubt I would ever say "soy un penguino", this phrase became a "base sentence" for me. I don't know what the actual terminology for this is, but all I needed to change was the noun in this sentence and I could communicate. This is one of the fastest ways to learn another language. Add the community with it and you have a pretty kick-donkey language learning resource.
Commands is later in the tree, and I think it is trying to teach us the most difficult way to talk so we don't rely on our native grammar. It's good that they teach us this way over the other way.
If someone responds to your comment, you'll get a notification about it both on the DL home page, and in your e-mail, assuming that you haven't unfollowed this conversation.
If by order you are referring to the imperative than the command would either be contrólame in the familiar or contróleme in the formal. The imperative is one time that you can attach the objects to a convicted verb in effect Of course in a negative command, the tú form would also use the subjunctive, but then the objects are not attached.
Please only downvote if you really think there is a valid reason. Let's keep Duolingo a kind and friendly environment, rather than being at each other's throats.
Agreed. I've had to delete comments because they just collect negative votes when I'm just asking questions. It can very frustrating.
I thought that monitor is observing,checking (in other words passive) vs control which implies influence or intervention- in both English and Spanish.
I came here wondering about the same thing. To control is to cause action in something else. To monitor is to observe action in something
I think the Spanish verb can mean both, unlike the English word Monitor. But Spanishdict.com lists both control and monitor as well as regulate.
A good dictionary is always essential. That's especially true for cognates because in many cases not all the meanings are the same. It is important to know the denotations and connotations of the new word as well as the English one.
You can't change the translation just because you don't like the message of the sentence. Controlar is a pretty synonymous with the English word control. That is probably true for most cognates, although it is the false friends and partial cognates that can mess you up. I would strongly recommend that you check a dictionary like Spanishdict.com when you are questioning a cognate or any translation. Relying on Duo is at best gaining less information and at worst being subject to Duo's acceptance which can be misleading at times or outright wrong.
If you look at the items listed under item 2, check on looks close. But if you look at the example sentences, check on is used like monitor and control. If I asked someone to check on the soup I was cooking, I would mean to check on the soup and take any needed action to ensure that it was cooking appropriately like raising or lowering the heat, and the person I asked would understand the same thing. But checking on a person can mean a lot of things.
Your answer could be correct, but it takes a special set of circumstances. But reading all the definitions gives you a broader understanding of the word without having to consider Duo's task of being understandable to the most people.
I'm starting to get creeped out by how often it's asking this question. I'm starting to wonder if it's a little bit of neuro-linguistic programming to make me submit to the overlord of duolingo... es posible
I think it's actually something to do with 'bin' being the UK equivalent of the US 'can' (as in 'trash can')...still a very odd mix up haha
It was a joke around JFK and his "Ich bin ein Berliner". People tell me a berliner is a kind of donut or something.
Oh, I see. I'm doing a little German too, so I could understand what you said.
"Me permite?" is often translated as "May I?" so I think it would be "Te permito controlarme" (although literally it translates to "I allow you to control me")
I got the same, I have no idea why "can" and "may" are not both considered correct answers.
May should be accepted as correct. Poder = can, be able to, may, in the sense that you are authorized to do something. You may monitor me. Of course, without context, it can be difficult to know what Duo is looking for as a correct answer.
Hmm...typed You can check me,but was correct You can check ON me...?? (Non-native English speaker)
I don't think check can be used in this sentence because it can't be used as "to control" in any way that I can think of. Except in livestock, and even that is a stretch.
"You can check me" mean means you can verify a piece of information that I have given you or look up my past (in regards to criminal behaviour - a police check is very common in careers such as child care or banking). We very rarely say this. In fact, I don't think I have ever said it.
"You can check ON me" is when someone is sick, or hurt in any way possible (physically and emotionally) and you are inquiring about the person and how they feel. It is to make sure that they are ok. You can also use "check in" as well, but it isn't as commonly used. I hope that helps. :-)
I don't hear it often myself, but the usage does exist. "Check" actually can be used as a synonym for "control". See definition #2: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/check?s=t
to restrain; hold in restraint or control: "They built a high wall to check the tides."
Keeping someone in check is another way of saying that a person is being controlled. It's also used in chess, of course. If you have a piece that is in a position to capture your opponent's king, the king is "in check".
Well, I stand corrected. Thanks for clearing that up! A lingot each!
But please be aware that "check" to mean control is quite rare and the average English speaker wouldn't understand you if use it in everyday speech.
That is true. I suspect these definitions were more common in the past, but have fallen out of favor. Like I said, I haven't heard many people use the word that way myself.
Check is used for a very specific type of control. It's about placing limitations on another or somethings actions.
Check him/me. Used in sports when controlling an opponent. This should be ok s a command from a coach to his player.
Oooohhh. I didn't know that. Just shows how many different ways vocabulary can be used. Is this usage for any particular team sport or does it encompass all team sports? The last time I played a team sport was at least 15 years ago (netball) and I don't remember my coach saying that.
In hockey, you check a player by slamming into them and knocking them to the ground. That being said, you wouldn't substitute "control" in this case.
If you read the thread you will find this answered a few times. Puedes controlar is a verb phrase. You NEVER separate the verbs in a verb phrase in Spanish. You can either say, Tü me puedes controlar or Tú puedes controlarme. You can attach the pronoun(s) onto the end of an infinitive, a gerundio (ando/endo form) or the imperative form. Many English speakers like me prefer that form as it feels more natural but either place is correct. But only those two are correct.
Multiple choice included 'monitor' and 'check' which can be synonyms but check was rejected. Reported.
I think "You can monitor me" would be the more common usage in English, such as in a situation where there is high security...then it would make sense.
I'm into it.
I am not sure where you get test from controlar. Controlar is a pretty good cognate of to control, although it can also be used where we say watch or check on where the implication is that you may need to take some action to affect an outcome. In other words if you ask someone to watch your kids or check the meat on the grill, you are assuming that they will act to correct any problem or issue.
There are several words that can be translated as test. Probar is probably the most generic.
Spanishdict.com or another dictionary should become your new best friend on learning Spanish.
it's not about 50 Shades but it's just an instinct of Duo; he just wants to live! "You can control me, officer! Just don't shoot!" - Said Duo.
Because monitor does not fit in the ways which it is synonymous with observe, only in the ways that it is not. To observe is to watch only. When you observe you can note settings or readings, etc. but you are not supposed to intervene in what is happening. Monitor can be used for the same thing. But often when someone is tasked with monitoring something or someone they are expected to intervene if things go off course. Definition 4 of monitor as a verb on Dictionary.com shows
to watch closely for purposes of control, surveillance, etc.; keep track of; check continually: to monitor one's eating habits.
This dovetails well with the cognate controlar.
Anyone else get this question a few times in the same lesson? after getting it correct repeatedly?
That happens from time to time when they don't have enough exercises demonstrating a particular point. You should see the German course. The German tree is almost twice as long as the Spanish one, and they routinely have one exercise three or four times a lesson, more if you get it wrong