1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "Mornings with my family are …

"Mornings with my family are never boring."

Translation:Las mañanas con mi familia nunca son aburridas.

June 9, 2018



My interpretation was marked wrong because I wrote "son nunca" instead of "nunca son". Picky, picky.


Nunca is a negative adverb, the negation must always precede the verb in Spanish.


Ohh, good to know. Gracias!


Someone will hit a 300 day streak tomorrow


Falicidades por 300 dias


My exact words too.


Oh my gosh the previos reply said that you'll hit 300 tomorrow and I check and you're hitting 400 tomorrow xD muy bien


Gracias muchas


Thank you, Alezzix. This is a great tip and would be nice if Duo explained this!


Thank you alezzzix. You clarification was refreshingly clear and to the point. Please respond more.


Thanks for that quick and accurate grammar explanation. Although I already knew it, I had forgotten.


so if it had been siempre it would have been son siempre? I sometimes feel it is just guess and see what happens.


No. "siempre" is not a negation.


Because obviously they won't have a clue what you're saying.


Me too. I'd like an explanation of this. I'm going to guess that the adverb nunca needs to be placed before the verb rather than before the adjective, but I don't know the grammar rule.


That's what I've mostly seen. For instance, siempre always (accidental wordplay) appears before the verb, at least in duolingo. Whether or not that is the rule is another story


Wow! That's awesome! I've never thought about learning where adverbs and verbs go, I just thought I had to memorize them. Haha! I keep forgetting that Spanish has those kinds of things. :P


Yes - me too - and the comment was "wrong word" rather than "wrong word order". I think there is a distinction to be made here. A native speaker would understand what you meant even if the order was wrong but if you used another word they might struggle - it's all about the explanations.


Me too. Is this a general rule for adverbs?



It does make a difference though.


That not is picky.


Why is "Las" required here?


When making generalizations las/los is required before nouns. This is not done in english.


No, this is a major inconsistency. The sentence doesnt change meaning due to the lack of Las or Los. So many times duo accepts it but just a few times it wont. Very frustrating.


mexicans WOULD understand you if you didn't put los/las but duolingo wants you to say it right. And I want to say it right. I don't want to go to mexico and say everything wrong.


same as in French.


Yes, good question, is there some rule about that or? Can someone explain please


When a sentence begins with a noun, it needs an article (el, la, los, las) before it. In English, we say "Afternoons at the beach are fun." but in Spanish, because afternoons is a noun, it's, "Las tardes en la playa son divertidas."

The exception is when you are addressing someone directly. For instance, "Mr Sanchez is nice." would be "El Senor Sanchez es simpatico." When addressing Mr. Sanchez directly, you do not need the article. So, "Mr. Sanchez, you are nice." would be "Senor Sanchez, usted es simpatico."


This has nothing to do with whether the noun is at the beginning of the sentence. Your examples containe sentences that speak of things in general. The definite article would be used even if those nouns appear later in the sentence.


This is really helpful - thank you!


Great explanation, very clear.


I don't know why it is, but I just memorized it. (mostly)


I'd also like to know.


Because it is mornings plural


Yo también escribe aquí esperando una explicación. No quiero perdir un corazon si no aprendo nada.


When a sentence begins with a noun, it needs an article (el, la, los, las) before it. In English, we say "Afternoons at the beach are fun." but in Spanish, because afternoons is a noun, it's, "Las tardes en la playa son divertidas."

The exception is when you are addressing someone directly. For instance, "Mr Sanchez is nice." would be "El Senor Sanchez es simpatico." When addressing Mr. Sanchez directly, you do not need the article. So, "Mr. Sanchez, you are nice." would be "Senor Sanchez, usted es simpatico."


This has nothing to do with whether the noun is at the beginning of the sentence. Your examples containe sentences that speak of things in general. The definite article would be used even if those nouns appear later in the sentence.


Would "estan" not be more appropriate than "son", since it's being used with a variable condition {aburridas}?

  • Ser aburrido = To be boring
  • Estar aburrido = To be bored

Simple as that.


Great Clarification! Earns an lingot for sure! THANK YOU!


NICE. I already knew that but it's just SO SATISFYING when people do AMAZING explanations like that! XD


I also appreciate your clear explanation


That's a really good question. However, even though it is a variable condition, it is also a description of the way these mornings ALWAYS are (i.e. not boring). When you are describing a permanent quality of an object, "ser" is used more often than "estar." It is almost as if these mornings can never be boring, because not being boring is their inherent quality.


06/08/18. I wrote: "Las mañanas con mi familia jamás son aburridas." Counted wrong because "jamás" used instead of "nunca." I understand that "jamás" is "somewhat stronger and less common than nunca. [But] [i]t is usually indentical in meaning to nunca." Butt, John and Carmen Benjamin, A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish, § 23.5.6, p. 349 (4th ed. 2004). Have posted.


I hope you reported to DL that your translation should be accepted.


Is there a rule for using las in front of mañanas here ?


Hi ronkisimo!

Yes - Spanish uses articles in front of words that are used as a generalization. So, since mornings in general with my family are never boring, it's "las mañanas." As you practice Spanish, you'll notice they use articles very often even where English does not - generalizations are part of this trend.


The subject of the verb ser always requires an article, regardless of whether the subject is specific or general.


oh nice! Very helpful.


Why not "nunca son..."


Just look through these comments on here. Everyone's talking about it. There are many explanations. ;D


I did "son nunca aburridas" and DL rejected. Nunca needs to always come before the son. I will try to remember this.


Would a double negative work here? No son nunca aburridas?


You could definitely convey the same thought, but it would be in a different way: "No mornings with my family are ever boring" vs "mornings with my family are never boring".


That's really cool!

But now my brain hurts. HAHA.


This is what I was wondering as well. I typed something similar to what you have and it was marked incorrect, but I remember some instances in Spanish in which double negatives are the norm. What would those be, i wonder?


In answer to a question on another sentence, I got a primer on double negatives. Generally those work by putting a "no" before the verb and a negative adjective after the verb, as in "No veo nada". That's literally "I don't see nothing", but it means "I don't see anything". If you don't have the "no", then the negative adjective has to come before the verb. So you can say "no son nunca" or "nunca son", but not "nunca no son" or "son nunca".


When to use aburridos and aburridas?


depends on the gender of the respective noun. "mañanas" is feminine plural, so it is "aburridas".


Doesn't an Adverb modifying an adjective go before the adjective. I.e. Never boring


The adverb is negating the verb, not modifying the adjective.


Why must this sentence have las?? It makes total sense without it, and just to check, I put it into a popular translator and guess what...."mananas con mi familia nunca son aburridas!" Your reply pleas Duo??


The "popular translator" is misguided (and hence misguiding) by the approach to translate word by word, which doesn't work here, because different languages use articles differently. When referring to things in general ("any arbitrary morning", "mornings in general"), English does not use an article, while other languages , like e.g. French and Spanish, do. So the Spanish sentence has a "las" where the English sentence does not have a "the".
Translating word by word is wrong here. That's why many "public translators" must fail.


Las mañanas con mi familia son nunca aburridas. This is what I write and ut says it is wrong every time. Just curious as to why?


word order (position of nunca)


Yes. Put nunca before son.


Why dont use "esta", like another sentence that explain the condition? Why use "son"?


You need a 3rd person plural form of the verb here. For "ser" this is "son".
There is a second verb for "to be" in Spanish, which is "estar". The 3rd person plural would be "están".

There are rules that tell when to use which. Roughly speaking, "estar" is for conditions that usually change constantly, like the place where you are, and "ser" is for things that usually don't change, like the colour of your eyes. Here you talk about a condition that is said to never change.


Any way to remember when to use Las instead of los etc


las is for feminine nouns, los for masculine ones. You need to learn the grammatical gender of all nouns.


Would a Spanish/English dictionary have the information to determine whether or not a noun is feminine or masculine?


Any good dictionary should have this information.


if it is masculine and plural you use los. If it is feminine and plural you use las. If it is not plural and is masculine you use el. etc.


Why couldn't it be "no son abburidas"? Is it because that doesn't translate to "never"


Don't understand why sometimes it doesn't seem to matter if I put son nunca or nunca son. This time son nunca was marked wrong. Please be consistant Duolingo.


I said Las mananascon mi familia nunca son aburridas And got it wrong How?


I debated estar or ser here too. Native speakers..would we use ser because of the "never", so permanent situation?


I have learned that ser and estar is actually very complicated, and can be almost philosophical!

"Ser" is the only option here, and "estar" is incorrect.

Thinking of "permanent" and "temporary" can be misleading- "muerto" is always estar! Time/dates always use "ser", while location always use "estar". As an example- "El banco está en la esquina" or "Madrid está en España", most people will think of that as quite permanent, but location always uses "estar".

Perhaps thinking of time as a unique sequence of time units makes it easier to accept and remember. "Las mañanas son frías", if the mornings are not cold anymore, they are different mornings, because time moved on, but the ones that were cold will never be warm. "La cerveza está fria", because the same beer could become warm.


Helpful explanation! Though one could argue that the same morning could start out cold and then grow warm as the sun came out... But I see what you mean. :o)


I've noticed that. How places ALWAYS are estar instead of just "I am at the bank". lol


If I understand this correctly, it has nothing to do with permanency. It's more of an expressional translation. Ser + aburrido = to be boring. Estar + aburrido = to be bored.


But to be boring is permanent.


I think you would use ser. son nunca. :D


The word "con" was not in the selection for the answer.


Why dont use "esta" like in another sentence to explain the condition?why use "son"?


Why cant it just be mornings not the mornings?


Lot's of people say things like this on this discussion. Just look through the comments and you'll find the answer. :D


why does manana need a las proceeding. IF manana needs a Las, WHY is that not in the hints ???????


When talking about things in general, you usually need an article. Here by “mornings”, they mean mornings in general.


It may be wrong technically, but I bet that if I said "son nunca" instead of "nunca son", a Spanish-speaking person would have no trouble at all understanding my meaning may not even notice the mistake.


I know right. But, I still want to say things right, so I like it that duolingo does this. :D


I would still have to think about that one each time it comes up and probably get it wrong half the time.


"nunca son " is not correct? "son nunca" is correct? I am not seeing that.


WHAT? I am SO sure that nunca son is correct. Literally 100% sure. ;D


I posted the exact same thing and it said incorrect


Estar for temporary situations?


the "temporary versus permanent" is only a rule of thumb. For qualities you usually use "ser".
In this particular sentence you can additionally argue that it is not temporary if you say "never".


So mañana means tomorrow, and it also means morning ?


Why must you put las in front of mornings?


Because that's how itis done in Spanish (and some other languages, e.g. French). They use defonite articles when speaking about things in general.


Why "son"? Are the mornings with their family always boring?


The "temporary" vs. "permanent" thing is only a rule of thumb.
For characteristics you usually use "ser".
Sometimes the choice of "estar" vs. "ser" changes the meaning. This is the case here. "ser aburrido" means "to be boring", "estar aburrido" means "to be bored".


"Mañanas con mi familia nunca son aburridas." How is this incorrect? Is there a rule that I'm missing like when you're addressing a person versus speaking about them?


If you talk about things in general, Spanish (as well as French) usually has the definite article.


In English, my native language, you can say both, mornings never are boring or mornings are never boring, to the same effect. It's kind of a stylistic collation of words.

Is "son nunca" really wrong like nobody would ever use it? Or do native Spanish speakers say it, but it's just not as common or proper(whatever that means)? If you said it, would you still be understood?


As nunca is a neagtive adverb, it must precede the verb.


Why can't I use "las madrugadas" instead of "las mañanas". Is this really incorrect or it's just that Duolingo doesn't accept it?


"las madrugadas" is rather "(the) dawns". Not quite the same as "mornings".


"never boring" seems like an emotion or condition (therefore estoy). OK, "never boring" can also be permanent (Therefore ser) Any insights? Asking for a friend.


" aburrido" changes its meaning when you exchange "estar" for "ser". With "ser" it means "boring" (a characteristic of things), but with "estar" it means "bored" (a condition or state of mind).


Thank you - understanding the nuances is very helpful.


Why is it 'son' and not 'están' ?


Because it describes a quality (of the mornings), not a condition or state of mind. Using "estar", "aburridas" would be interpreted as "bored" instead of "boring".


This may be a silly question but: Why is it aburridas not aburrida?


Because it refers to "mañanas" ("mornings"), which is feminine plural.

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