183 Comments This discussion is locked.
I don't know why anyone voted this question down. I came here with the exact same thought. I suspect this was just an oversight, and that, indeed, a female speaker should use "enojada" to describe themselves. It's just that this wouldn't prevent a speech synthesizer of any gender from saying exactly what you tell it to say, even if it isn't correctly paying attention to gender agreement. I think this is all that's happened here. I might be incorrect, but I think I've seen this addressed in other discussions, and some comments noted that occasionally they missed some of these. Hope this helps!
Josrossi2, try thinking of it this way: what if a woman Spanish teacher needs to teach you the Star Wars sentence, *Luke, I am your father." The voice of the teacher does not matter in the learning of putting a sentence together at all.
Funny little sentences used to be in the older version of the app (before the change to crown system) that said things like "I am a penquin," but I'm sure the teacher did not have to go get a penguin to do the speaking!
The Oxford dictionary lists the term "mad at" as informal and gives examples where it can be used with both prepositions _ "with" or "at". But just because you can say "mad at", it doesn't necessarily follow that "angry at" is correct. Replace "angry" with "happy" and it's clear that it's not right. Happy at my father? Don't think so. Happy with or happy for, depending on context. For what it's worth, my opinion is that "angry with" is if not more correct, then definitely more commonly used than "angry at".
In the USA, it has become acceptable to use “angry at” though “angry with” continues to be slightly more common. To me “at” sounds more aggressive. I wouldn’t say it about my father, but maybe if I were really angry with my brother.... No, I am really rather a pacifist. We must keep on reporting it. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/43671/angry-with-vs-angry-at-vs-angry-on
Please remember that English dictionaries are descriptive and not proscriptive. A common usage may be rare without being wrong. Where I am from (Midwest) being angry "at" seems as common as being angry "with." As for "happy," I've been "happy at" all kinds of things. It may not be common where you are (or "you are at" or "you are from"), but that doesn't make it wrong.
Both are correct in the USA and both are accepted now. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/43671/angry-with-vs-angry-at-vs-angry-on
Well that is the difference between “talking with” (two-way conversation) and “talking to”. “Angry with” was the original version and the Oxford dictionary does not show any examples for “angry at”. In America “mad at” is another popular expression and over time “angry at” has come to also be accepted though it was originally considered wrong.
No, in Spain “enfadado” means either angry or annoyed, but “enojado” means angry and “molesto” is used instead for annoyed.
I definitely am not a native speaker or anything, but SpanishDict, Word Reference, and Cambridge Dictionary say that "annoyed" is a valid translation of "enojado" (http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/enojado, http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=enojado, & https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/spanish-english/enojado). What do you think? Are these bad dictionaries to rely on?
Don’t be confused with English adverb placement: https://www.thoughtco.com/adverb-placement-in-english-1211117
Spanish has its own rules: https://www.thoughtco.com/keep-adverbs-close-what-they-modify-3078169
In Spanish, the adverb that modifies the verb is more likely to come after the verb than before it, unless it is a negative adverb which must come before the verb.
This adverb modifies the entire sentence, so it can go at the beginning of the sentence. We actually can do that in English also.
You are correct. Another example is I'm going to have "a coffee" w/my father. 99% of the time we just have coffee in America, not 'a coffee'. These are some quirks DL needs to work out. Just as they push that in Spanish you never say this or that, or you always say this or that. Well, the same is true in English! Even the British don't say "a tea". They just have tea. :- )
It doesn’t mean “you see”, “a veces” is literally “at times”.
The verb “to see” is “ver” and “veces” is not a conjugation of that verb though it is a present subjunctive form of the verb “vezar”.
“veces” is the plural of the noun “vez”.
Earlier in the lesson the words for "the father", "el padre" is offered... and yet "el padre" is so easy to translate. I'm not sure about the science of offering such simple translations, you are the experts. However, I think that many of the students will value more challenging phrases... so that we may better tune our ears to your beautiful language.... as an example, one of those challenging phrases is the rapid annunciation of "yo estoy enojado"..... Please, Please, Please, Duolingo editors. Offer up more really hard to understand alliterations of spanish words or phrases, so that we can better atune our inexperienced ears to these most challenging phrases. Thank you. I love Duolingo.
Never say never, though I myself prefer “angry with”. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/43671/angry-with-vs-angry-at-vs-angry-on