1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "He never eats rice and beans…

"He never eats rice and beans for lunch."

Translation:Él nunca almuerza arroz con frijoles.

June 19, 2018



Would "El nunca come arroz y frijoles para almuerzo" not work?


that's what I wrote too and would like to know why it's marked wrong


You probably forgot the article before 'almuerzo'. "Nunca come arroz y frijoles para EL almuerzo" was accepted (febr. 2021)


In this case, "almuerza" is the verb and not a noun- as you put it. But what you said should be correct


why is the double negative not used here? "Él no almuerza nunca arroz con frijoles"


My question too. I thought that was what we were practising in this skill. It was rejected.


I don't know why - and I'm more confused about this bit than I should be, I think. Any answer to the question above is appreciated! What if instead of nunca he'd used ningún? So: "No almuerza ningún arroz con frijoles" - which is what I put, but it's still wrong.

ETA: I'm pretty sure people have probably unsubbed from this thread b/c of all the "rice and beans" comments, so we may never get an answer here...I'll try another one.

ETA: One day later & I've already gotten one of these annoying 'and v with' emails, so I can completely understand why nobody is answering - they've all unsubbed.


I asked six months ago and still no answer here. Still confused too!


I don't know if this is really a rule, but Duo uses 'nunca [verb]' to mean 'never [verb]' and 'no [verb] nunca' to mean 'doesn't ever [verb]'. So it wants 'nunca almuerza' for 'never eats lunch', and would translate 'no almuerza nunca' as 'doesn't ever eat lunch'.


I wrote the same thing 'el no almuerza nunca arroz con frijoles' and it was marked wrong. why, can somebody tell?


That would be, "he doesn't ever eat rice and beans for lunch".


I think the double negative is the equivalent of "he doesn't ever eat" while the question was about "he never eats." Just a slight difference, but that's DL for you.


I wrote "Él nunca almuerza arroz y frijoles." and was marked incorrect. Any reason that shouldn't be accepted?


As hjh414399 stated somewhere below, "arroz con frijoles" (or "arroz con porotos") is the name of the dish, it's idiomatic. In English, it's "rice and beans", and in this case, literal translation doesn't work.


That's the answer they said i should've given..


That was not the mistake youve made because i wrote arroz y frijoles as well and i was marked correct


The correct answer is wrong. The question was rice and beans, not "rice with beans"


'Nunca come arroz y frijoles para el almuerzo' was accepted


not for me. they must have changed it. :-(


I only put en instead of para and is marked wrong


I think that "arroz CON frijoles" is idiomatic almost a recipe!--something like "bacon and eggs". If someone says "eggs with bacon" it sound odd. but the meaning is clear.


"Él nunca come arroz y frijoles para almuerzo." Why is it incorrect?


Wouldn't accept almuerzo... wanted almuerza even though Èl is masculine.


Verb conjugation! It has nothing to do with genders.

Yo almuerzo, tú almuerzas, él/ella/Usted almuerza, nosotros/nosotras almorzamos, vosotros/vosotras almorzáis, ellos/ellas/Ustedes almorzan.


Same question. Can't you order rice and beans. Rice with beans sounds like a mix.


It is often a mix.


so what's the rule about when to use no... nunca and when just to use nunca? i put 'el no almuerza nunca... and got it wrong. like a lot of people below, it seems.


"El no almuerza nunca arroz y frijoles" - Why is this not accepted? does the nunca need to go to the end of the sentence in this structure?


Él nunca come arroz y frijoles para el almuerzo was accepted. I forgot the el in front of almuerzo the 1st time which is why it counted it wrong.


Why "con" and not "y."


I agree with el-Canguro, his structure makes more sense


The sentance says rice And beans. Not rice with beans. Y or con? Please explain..


So 'almorzar' is transitive. I didn't know--I thought it just meant "to have lunch."


Yes, it's pretty neat - and the same applies to the other meals like desayunar and cenar. Spanishdict gives the examples: voy a cenar un filete buenísimo / I'm going to have a delicious steak for dinner and suelo desayunar huevos y pan tostado / I usually have eggs and toast for breakfast.


Why not 'El almuerza nunca arroz con frijoles'?


If you're going by the way they wanted it the last time, almuerza should have come before nunca.


I wrote "Él nunca come arroz con frijoles para el almuerza". Why is this wrong?


The first time I submitted an answer for this question I put: Él nunca come arroz y frijoles para almuerzo. When I submitted this^ answer it was marked wrong.

The second time I submitted an answer for this question I put: Él nunca come arroz y frijoles para el almuerzo. When I submitted this^ answer it was marked correct.

I personally think both of the answers should be accepted as correct. I asked a native speaker and he said that he personally says the first one. (the one without el almuerzo) So I think it really comes down to what you want to say.

One last thing, in the past DL has had us put an article (El/La) before most nouns, even when we may think that they don't make sense. (for example, El Señor Rivera come la comida) As native English speakers, we wouldn't say: The Mr. Rivera eats the food. We just say Mr. Rivera eats food. So I don't know if something similar is going on here or not with the articles.

Anyway, I hope this helps in some way! Good luck to you all!!


"el nunca come arroz y frijoles por almuerzo" should be accepted????


Where is in answer "for lunch"


The infinitive/to be verb almorzar means “to have/to eat lunch.” So when you conjugate (change it’s form) the infinitive almorzar into almuerza, it means he has/eats lunch.

Hope this makes sense and was helpful! Good luck!


There is NO DIFFERENCE between rice with beans & beans with rice. PLUS the sentence DOESN'T even say either...it says beans AND rice!!!


Why don't you use "A" infront of el? You're spreaking about another person


The personal a is only used for direct objects when the action of the verb is carried out on that person, eg: she saw him / ella vio a él. Here, él is the subject of the verb almuerza so it's not used.


The correcct answer should be nunca come arroz con frijoles el almuerzo


Why you have to write:yo no almuerzo nunca con mis hermanas.and you must write: el nunca almuerza arroz con frijoles.what is the differens????


your first sentence means, when you are having lunch it can be with your friends, your parents, but never with your sisters

the second sentence ; you like to eat everything for lunch, but never ever rice with beans.


"arroz con frijoles" would be "rice with beans", not "rice and beans".


The spanish sentence says and, yet the answer says with. Clearly wrong interpretation for us to make?


Rice with beans :arroz con frijoles; isn't correct response- Rice and beans: arroz y frijoles.


why almuerza and not almuerzo


Should not él no come nunca arroz y frijoles para el almuerzo" be correct?


I put EXACTLY the same answer they show; why am I marked wrong?


This is so frustrating. Sometimes Duo wants a literal meaning and sometimes not. Why?


Él no almuerza nunca arroz y frijoles.

This does not work?


arroz y frijoles should be correct.


I think "Él nunca almuerza arroz y frijoles" is correct.


él no almuerza arroz y frijoles nunca What is wrong with this translation?


I do not eat rice with beans. I do not order rice with beans. I sure do not say "rice with beans." I eat rice and beans!


Qué bueno! Pero en español tú no comes arroz y frijoles. No pides arroz y frijoles. Definitivamente no dices "arroz y frijoles". Tú comes arroz con frijoles!


Why con and not y?


This is a rubbish question- none of the words available match the suggestions for 'eat'. You basically have to guess.


This is outrages......


The google translation is "he never lunches rice with beans" this is a poor statement to use. Duo needs to correct.

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