I used singular "current" as I've never heard, in English, of a river having multiple currents but just one.
Though come to think of it, I've never heard of a river with no current either. That would strike me more like a pond or swamp or something :þ
I've rarely heard of singular rivers described as having "currents," usually regarding rapids, where the direction of the current can be very different in different parts. It's rare enough though that I put "current" in my translation too.
I agree. But I translated it as "currents" because "corrientes" is plural. Go figure.
Iago, I am going to ask you an off-topic question. What does your emoticom mean and where do you find it on the keyboard? Gracias.
Ah, the letter thorn (or þorn).
If you use Windows and have the United States-International keyboard enabled, you can type "þ" with right-alt t (hold down right-alt while hitting t).
Otherwise, you can use alt 0254 (hold down alt while entering 0254 on the numeric keypad). If you've got United States-International turned on, then it has to be the left-alt; but, since they numeric keypad is almost always to the right, that's not too big of a deal.
It looks a lot like this one: :P which to me is like a person sticking his/her tongue out. It must be a different key that lago has on the keyboard.
If you have an android with Google keyboard set your keyboard language to Esperanto and hold down the ŭ key then you will have it
The only exceptions I can think about are rivers that dry up and transition times for rivers that flow in both directions depending on the tide. I'm not sure if they technically count as rivers but people think about them that way. Another person posted here that this word refers to rapids.
Umm that's pretty much the definition of a river... "a moving body of water.."...."with currents"....
If a river is tidal, then there is no current when the tide is turning. If a river is wide and has islands and sand bars, then multiple currents will move around these obstructions. To be honest though we do tend to refer to the current rather than a current.
The program doesn't accept "streams" as a possible translation. Why? I'm not a native English speaker.
Currents are flows of water within another body of water. Streams are usually considered to be a smaller form of rivers, with their own internal currents. Saying a river has no currents doesn't make a lot of sense, but it might be trying to say there are no eddy currents or cross currents.
Now the words el río and corriente(s) will stick in our minds because Duolingo came up with such gramatically correct yet nonsense sentence. :)
Could you translate this as "This river does not run"? It seems a more natural English expression.
That would be a completely different sentence, and would mean something different in English.
In American English, we say, "this river doesn't have any current" or "this river has no current at all" or "this river has no current whatsoever." I could understand someone technical, not a common person, but an aquarist, saying currents of they were studying types of current flows or something.
"Corrientes" looks like it could be translated as "runs." What do you know? The etymology for "current" goes back to Latin "currere" for "run."
I listen to the fast and slow text and can't hear "rio", I hear grigo and grio. But I remember to next time.
'Rapids' and 'currents' are not the same. The Spanish word for rapids is similar to English 'rapidos'.