"¿Quieres queso en tu pescado?"
Translation:Do you want cheese on your fish?
I actually had fish with cheese on it in Lazaro Cardenas, Michoacán 2 weeks ago. It was, surprisingly, pretty good. I thought of this question when my friend ordered it.
Google "chocolate mayonnaise cake" sometime. (And find another case for the "en = in or on" conversation in the process.)
i agree, they usually say in your fish or in your dish as a way to describe something that needs to be added
I don't think a verbal answer is necessary in any language in this situation. Gag face.
"in your fish" should be accepted, you definitively can put stuff inside fishes
I don't think anyone here has argued that you can't physically put cheese in fish.
I put "in", ugh, how to know if it is "in", "on" or "at" if it is only "en" in Spanish -_-
how can we differentiate "in" and "on" in spanish?
la carta está en la caja - the letter is on the box
la carta está en la caja - the letter is in the box
I think that context wouldn't even help in such cases.
Will this crazy man please stop trying to feed my fish cheese!!! My fish does not like your cheese.
It definitely seems like "in" should work here, but if I were you, I wouldn't assume that I'm right.
You definitely could be (I think you probably are), but just because "en" can usually be translated as "in" does not mean it always can.
There is also the possibility that Duo will accept "in" here, but you had some other typo and Duo corrected you poorly. That does happen.
Tl;dr: You're here to learn Spanish. So am I. I wouldn't presume I know Spanish better than the teacher unless I had some evidence.
No, there was the only issue with what I wrote. Unlike you I tend to question even what my teachers tell me. If you are willing to accept whatever people tell you I'm okay with it.
I never said don't question them or what they say. I just said don't presume to know more than them. (If you recall, I even mentioned that I suspected you are correct.) Even if you in fact do know more than them, assuming you do from the beginning will not help you at all.
And I'm not sure how you can be confident you had no other errors, but if that's the case, then I return to the previous. Perhaps it simply shouldn't be translated as "in". Why are you so confident it can be? Once again, I suspect you are probably right. But being so sure about it without having evidence to support it is detrimental to learning.
I don't always assume I'm right, in fact I question my own opinion just like anyone else's (that's called critical thinking). But in this case, as I said, there's no clear context. Japanese people eat fish stuffed with cheese. I live in Japan. I, as I said, assumed due to the lack of context that it's the case. Nevertheless, I'd prefer if you weren't questioning my motives since you are not an acquaintance of mine. If you're giving me some advise even if you don't know me, I'll tell you this. Don't always assume that other people assume they're right.
Point 1: I'm not assuming, or questioning your motives. You said it yourself. "Sick of losing points even if I'm right."
Point 2: There is no clear context. But there may be cultural context. That exists in language, as I pointed out.
Point 3: What does knowing someone have to do with giving advise? There's no connection. But since you've made it clear you don't want it, I'll stop trying.
As for cultural context, I told you that in Japan fish stuffed with cheese is quite common. And then you say, don't always assume you're right. I don't do so. You're advising me on things you're not aware of.
Dude I don't see your point. There are ambiguous sentences in any language. And if the sentence is ambiguous like in this case (we have no picture of the fish, we don't see the cheese) we can only assume what are we given. Since both in and on are correct, then both versions should be accepted. That's what I say.
I'm just saying that we don't know that this is ambiguous. If for no other reason than the fact that it could be cultural convention dictating what it means. Sort of like "what's up" never actually means "what is up from here" even though it might technically be allowed to mean that strictly word wise. Would you think Duo should accept "Qué es arriba" as a translation for "What's up?"
But all of that said, the point was always that you shouldn't approach it assuming you are right.
Yes, because you know that "en" can be both "in" and "on". Both versions, "cheese in fish", "cheese on fish" are correct. If they're both correct, then my version is too. If it is, then I'm right. I'm not saying that "cheese on fish" is wrong. They are both correct.
I asked my husband (a native Spanish speaker) about this. He said that "en" sounds like in, but it's almost never used as "in" (the one example he could come up with is "en la casa", which does mean in the house). So en = on is the rule, with en = in the exception and not the rule. Also, I LOVE Japan and have been several times. The only cheese stuffed fish I've encountered there is taiyaki. Delicious, but a unique case.
The sentence could literally be translated "cheese in your fish," but that makes no sense; maybe they do that in Japan, but they definitely don't do it in Spanish or English countries, and those are the two languages we're using/learning, so your point about "cultural context" in Japan is moot. From a purely literal translation, you're right; it could be "in." But what makes more sense is "on."
Jonathan, that's my point. Grammatically my translation is fine. If I say: "El teléfono está en el bolso", you will most likely translate is as "The phone is in the bag". But it can totally be "The phone is on the bag". Probability isn't that high, but it is possible. Same with this example. Last time I checked, this app tests your language knowledge which includes vocabulary pronunciation and grammar, not your cultural knowledge. As I said, if there were some contextual details, I wouldn't say anything. There aren't? The phone is on the bag, the cheese is in the fish.
Because "en" can be translated as both "in" and "on". I don't know what does this sentence mean without the context, maybe this person likes eating fish with cheese inside it? I've seen so many bizarre foods by now I won't be amazed. No context - I translate what I see.
Like I said before, just because it can usually be translated one way does not mean it always can.
For example, "por" can often be translated as "for", but sometimes must be translated as "by".