"Ella me esperaba."
Translation:She was waiting for me.
I think it would be "She was expecting me," which is what I put, but DL still took a heart :(
Two years later it still accepted. Curiously enough, that's what Google translates the phrase to. Duo blows.
I agree that Dúo has this wrong. But on average I accept Duo's translations before Googles.
They both use roughly the same technique for translation corrections. Google has more users, but duo's are more in tune with the languanges that they're translating between. I'd trust one as quick as the other.
I agree, I put "She was waiting for for me" and got it wrong. But esperar can be either I thought
She used to wait for me is correct only, right? I wish they would explain things first. I wonder how they teach their kids to swim.
Actually She was waiting for me should be correct as well because it can be a scene setting phrase. But Duo uses a tense for tense convention for the most part, and there are only a few examples of this on Duo.
The used to is my second least favorite convention after the temporary/ permanent distinction for ser and estar that misleads more people than it teaches. Used to is never really a required element in a sentence about routine past actions, and most translators would use the modal verb soler in the imperfect to translated used to into Spanish. But this sentence could be a repeated act. It also would probably be in the imperfect if it was one long wait, like she waited for me while I was in the army, away at school or in prison. The used to can become a crutch in translating the imperfect because it only works at all for one of the three possible uses of the imperfect and does not help students understand it.
Wow. I am such a beginner and remain in the dark on modal verbs and all the other units with no explanations. I really really appreciate the input of students who have Spanish backgrounds so I hope you won't be shy. I think the moderators must be overwhelmed and there are too few. One of the problems is we have no idea often which students really have some mastery in Spanish on the comment sections and also, guilty myself, it is chatter so reading 170 comments when most is chatter and there is no moderator, wow, I do appreciate explanations. I appreciate the students who write comments, their best, and then somehow find them again (not easy) to amend them if they learn they were wrong or learn more on a topic. The Spanish site needs more back up. I wonder if they run the technical part of DUO as well and are just overwhelmed.
That comment is a little hard to interpret. If you are saying that Dúo had a double for in a suggested answer, report it. Occasionally weird errors like that creep in when a program change is made but not adequately tested. If you are asking where the for is, esperar means to wait for or to hope for. It is built in.
It was simply highlighting why Duolingo marked Smileforawhile's answer as incorrect i.e. a double 'for'
And "She waited for me"... Curious why this is not correct. No specific start or end time. To me "She was waiting for me" indicates one specific time that she did this.
Imperfect can be used to describe states of being in the past that do not necessarily occur habitually (i.e., the "used to" translation in English). What is important is that the period of time is not fixed within the context of the sentence. For example, if "ayer", or "esta mañana" was included in this sentence, the period of time would be definite so the preterite, esperó would be used. Since this is not the case and the time is undefined, "was waiting" as opposed to "waited" is preferable because "was waiting" implies a less definite time frame as opposed to "waited".
Sorry if that was confusing.
Also since the imperfect is used to set the scene in the past it can have a somewhat more implied time frame. Something that was happening when something else happened. In English this is always past progressive. In Spanish it is more often imperfect. It is my impression that in Spanish if you said ella me estaba esperando that would put more emphasis on her action of waiting than simple setting the scene.
how would you say "she awaited me"? thank you very much in advance :)
I guess that would be a correct answer as well, although it was marked as wrong. I reported it (11.01.2015).
Actually I love await for esperar because it doesn't require the prepositional phrase. But await is a little out of use nowadays.
That's what I thought but Duolingo doesn't seem to accept 'waiting on' as meaning the same as 'waiting for'.
I've heard "waiting on" used to mean "waiting for", but it's not good English. It can be used in reference to a waiter "waiting on" as table, i.e., handling orders and delivering food to the table. But when we're talking about staying put in expectation that someone will meet you soon is "waiting for", not "waiting on".
Note to Duo Users: All of the replies and comments below are basically a useless back-and-forth about the merits of "waiting for" and "waiting on". You can skip it and not miss a thing.
Waiting on is not incorrect English usage for waiting for, but it is.less common and varies a little regionally. The Oxford English dictionary lists it a form since the 1600s. Here is a link discussing this.
One of the responses mentioned the third meaning that had occurred to me. Waiting on is used relatively more frequently when you are waiting for something you need to complete some task (ie I am waiting on my W2 so I can file my taxes.
Let me put it this way: If you're applying for a job, you will sound more educated is you say "waiting for" than "waiting on". Now some might take that as being a bit effete. There are some jobs where you'd be better received using "waiting on". It's only a small factor, but "waiting for" is better English.
I put "waiting on" in the same category as "I have got [something]". (Oddly, "I've got" is much better.) Not wrong, but English which is not as food as "I have [something]".
I'm not being judgmental about any of this - it's just the way things are.
Jeff, This is totally a regional usage. In the American South, we "wait on" people and things. What are you doing here, Jeff? I'm waiting on my brother. Very common Southern usage. We also "cut on" lights and appliances. Other places, turn on lights.
Nice try Lynette. Unfortunate then that the ESV says "but they who wait for the LORD shall renew their strength;", and NET says "but those who wait for the Lord's help find renewed strength;"!
I guess the message here is "don't believe everything you read." :-)
This is a response to Talca's comment. We've run out of "reply".
Again, let me preface this by saying that I am not making any personal judgments here. Saying "wait on" or "I got" some other colloquial phraseology is not a litmus test of any sort for me by which to welcome or reject someone into my circle of friends.
I agree that it's regional, but that doesn't make it better English. The American South happens to be poorer and less-well-educated than other sections of the country (something changing as we speak). I have several friends from the South and they don't say "waitin' on", but then, they all have college degrees. My father was born in North George in 1902, the son of a poor Baptist minister and dirt farmer. Neither he nor any of his brothers or sisters that I met said "waiting on" - but then, all of them got college degrees. (Surprising at the time, since 4 out of five of them were women and they all made it on their own.).
It's just better English to say "waiting for" and "isn't" and "I have" instead of "waiting on" and "ain't" and "I have got". Which one anyone chooses to use none of my business
Maybe as the Grandson of a Baptist Minister you are familiar with Isaiah 40:31 in the King James version. They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength. . Upon is certainly somewhat archaic but it has become on not for. This usage is old dating back to the 16th century. It is recognized and listed in the Oxford English dictionary. Now I am a college educated Northerner. In fact my degree is in English with a concentration in Linquistics and I can tell you with some degree of authority that, although waiting on is certainly more commonly used, there are no valid grounds to say that it is better English.
Can't reply below your comment Roger. I know the ESV, NIV and other translations have various different translations. There are many that say wait for some say say hope in (like esperar the original Hebrew word apparently also has both meanings??) . But I was not actually debating the correct meaning or translation. My point was that the 47 scholars who were commissioned by King James in 1604 (completed in 1611) were not uneducated Southern Americans. If in the 1600s wait upon was acceptable than it is reasonable that in some of the areas where English expanded to wait on would be used. There is no basis to declare it poor English.
Even your King James version isn't evidence: It says "wait upon", not "wait on". "Wait upon" is closer in meaning to being a servant, serving the lord, that simply sitting and waiting.
If you simply observe and listen to language usage in America, you will find I am correct. News anchors say "wait for", not "wait on". Political spokes-persons say "wait for". "Wait for" is used in an number of TV sitcoms, drams, movies, etc.
It is only when a character or person (in real life) is from a rural background and lacks higher education that you hear "wait on".
Again, that is not to denigrate any person or group of people. It's just an observable quality of speech.
Jeffrey you keep arguing current usage. My point is simply that the fact that usage has changed over time does not make the use of older expressions Bad English. The fact that only very few English speakers in the world still use the Thou form doesn't make Thou bad English. It is simply considered archaic. Newscasters speak a sort of sanitized version of American English (in America obviously) which is devoid of most regional variations. But that does not make those variations all bad English. Saying I don't got none is bad English. It is breaking a grammar rule about double negatives. That rule may someday be changed by common usage (though that's not a likely candidate) . But language changes over time. Even most newscasters don't say things in the correct case as the rules demanded. (It is I or Whom are you visiting) I actually mostly still do, does that mean I speak bad English. The is no rule that is broken in the expression waiting on, it has simply changed over time. The fact that waiting on is more common in certain areas of the Southern US is actually linguisticly significant as there are several somewhat archaic English elements that are preserved in Southern dialects. An historic review of language shows that waiting on USED TO BE more common but common usage has changed.
It is THIS usage that is reflected in the KJV not serving as you assumed. That is why more modern translations use waiting for or hoping in.
You keep saying you don't want to denigrate the people who use waiting on, but that is inevitably in a sentence right after you essentially call them ignorant hicks. As I have said, I personally use waiting for most of the time except for the waiting on A to do B usage mentioned previously. But I entered University somewhat of a grammar nerd but emerged a linguist with a greater appreciation of the process of growth, change and development within a language.
I never said it was bad English, I said it wasn't good English, especially if you were out hunting for a job.
Tell you what: apply for a good-paying job, use "waiting on", "thou/thee", "ain't", and "I have got", along with whatever archaic or colloquial manners of speech you care to use, and see how far you get.
There are a lot of people using this course who are not native English-speakers. They should learn up-front what good or better English is - and also what colloquial, less good English is, to see that it's OK, too, just not the best.
There is no way you can put "waiting on" and "waiting for" on the same level of quality of diction. The first is colloquial, the second is good English.
Just wondering, I used 'She waited for me' and it got accepted. However, why was it when duolingo suggests 'She was waiting for me'? I need to learn Spanish grammar so I need to know the difference between the various conjugation forms, can these be used interchangeably?
DL accepts both forms because the imperfect in Spanish (the -aba) does directly correlate to s single tense/mood in English. However, both the "She waited.." and "She was waiting..." can be formed with altogether different tense in Spanish, the simple past, and past continuous, both of which translate more directly between the languages than the imperfect.
Traditionally, people translate "-aba" verbs in Spanish as ".. Used to..." in English.
I thought that was an acceptable translation also. Probably not literal enough.
The problem with she waited for me is that esperar is in the imperfect. You will note that the given answer is in the past progressive. Normally Duo doesn't translate into the progressive except from the Spanish progressive, but this is one time it is needed. The imperfect in Spanish is used for three basic purposes. 1. To talk about routine or repeated acts in the past. This is where the "used to" comes in, although I hate that that translation is promoted so much as it tends to oversimplify and confuse some people. The second is for an event in the past without a clear beginning and end. This is why some verbs "prefer" the imperfect and a few even have slightly unexpected meanings if used in the preterite (verbs like querer, saber, etc) The third reason is to "set the scene" in the past. In English we use either the past progressive or the past perfect to set the scene and talk about things that were happening at the time you want to talk about in the past. But without something to indicate that this was a routine event (like that dreaded used to that I hate or another clause or a clue like "every day".) She waited for me would always be expressed in the preterite. Ella me esperó.
Thanks for the concise and complete explanation. I admit it is a bit over my head at this stage but well worth further study.
In Spanish, to expect is used in the context of waiting something from someone, i.e. to have expectations. (Tener expectativas). It's not used in the sense of awaiting for someone. For example a teacher would say: esperaba más de ti (I expected more from you)
I would have hoped that "She was awaiting me" would have been accepted as correct.
Just curious: Would "Ella estuve esperabame" or "Ella estuve esperaba por mi" mean "She was waiting for me"? I don't even think those are valid sentences but I thought I'd ask.
You are trying to form the past progressive tense, and Spanish does indeed have one unlike languages I Ike French and German. But it should be noted that in Spanish it is only used to EMPHASIZE the ongoing nature of the action.
To form the progressive tenses, use the appropriate form of estar and the present participle. And yes, unlike the past participle, the present participle is a form that accepts an appended object. So Ella estaba esperándome or Ella me estaba esperando would be She was waiting for me. Note that it is the imperfect of estar that is used and the present participle requires an accent if the object is appended to keep the original stress pattern.
Duo does teach these forms a little. They use a tense for tense rule, so for the most part if you see the progressive in one language you give them the progressive in the other. There are some exceptions because English uses progressive expressions so commonly that you can't always get around them in English. So it is important to note that most commonly in real life you will not use the progressive in Spanish when you see the progressive in English. But two cases are especially notable.
You will never use the present progressive to talk about future actions. The present progressive in Spanish emphasizes the ongoing nature of the action. So estoy trabajando means you are currently working (perhaps saying you don't want to be disturbed or you are working on the issue at hand but not done) . You can therefore never translate I am working tomorrow as Estoy trabajando mañana.
One of the major uses of the past progressive in English is to set the scene in the past for the action you are talking about. The sun was setting casting a glow all around as he arrived. This scene setting is one of the uses of the imperfect, so here that is what would be used. Of course you will see the past progressive if the ongoing nature of one action is significant to or interrupted by the action being discussed.
Yo esperaba algo was translated by Duo as "I was expecting something." I was marked wrong for translating it as "I was waiting for something" on 12/30/2016. Now I see comments that "She was expecting me" has gotten marked wrong in the past, and "She was waiting for me" is the correct answer one day later on 12/31/2016.
That seems completely arbitrary. Reported 12/31/2016
Yes it is arbitrary and wrong. Unfortunately Duo tends to get myopic about what it is thinking, and the computer program cannot correct the programming yet. It is an error that a human would not make.
She used to hope for me is pretty hard to come up with any context under which this would make any sense at all. Especially when a word has multiple different translations in different circumstances it is important to be able to correctly interpret what is being said. Since Duo provides no context, this can be difficult since I am the last person on earth to say that almost any sentence would never be said. But when you have a sentence that could be translated directly into a fairly routine statement, translating it as an unusual and awkward construction is certainly not going to help you understand and communicate effectively. Chances are that if this were the meaning, the context would make it very clear. If the context were not clear, even native speakers would probably misunderstand because they, too, would be most likely to interpret the sentence in the most common, easily understood way without a reason not to.
If you didn't make a transcription error above and Google came up with Ella me esperaba esperando it proves how bad Google is. Duo has issues to be sure, but Google is worse.
You are correct, - outsmarted myself with distinctions between wait, hope and expect by trying to put a Gerund behind. Google translate is either learning or I accessed an neural network not, Its. coming up now with - She expects me which is the same as - She was waiting for me.
Wait and hope have an old relatedness going back to the Hebrew word used in Bible passages like Isaiah 40:31. They who wait upon the Lord will renew their strength. Apparently the word meant something like waiting hopefully. Some translated it as wait, a few have hope, and apparently some have figured that waiting + hoping = trusting.
but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.
It sounds like the Jewish prophet had language learning problems as well: Initially age 7 one was put in a classroom together whit others who were identified as learning disabled the proofed their points by making one sound letters in words out backwards It was German Primary education that handed out pass marks. no chance to go to High School
In England, the idea was one could not learn
a foreign language without Grammar
After 3 month of not very useful grammar learning in I discovered Patterns and passed the Cambridge exams
With Duolingo we will run and not be weary we will walk and not be faint and with renewed strength soar on wings like eagles Duolingo does not even know what they have the audiovisual multilingual needs more development yet for the last generation of learning disabled and anyone over 65 doing it it guarantees a the delay of Alzheimer's for another 20 years -:)
Yes we all learned our native language pretty well without grammar for many years. It's the theory behind immersion language learning. But there is a chemical in the Brain that is at its height at 4 years old when language learning is at its most dramatic. It is thought that exposing kids to different languages early helps them learn languages better their whole lives. I suspect it is because they learn how to learn languages when it is easiest.
Hi Jovi, somehow there is no reply button on your most recent comment. Yes, I do love doing DL, its pretty much daily, otherwise you get behind, right.. I notice you and I are working on the same languages. I find the german really tough.. Happy studying..I am now about 2 years into DL, and I love it, it is a wonderful habit.
Hi Jovi, sorry you have lost me on your recent post about scripts and fluency patterns, and your language habits. Just not understanding any of that, sorry...
When you go into words on a browser you will see the amount of words and four categories. Still strong Pretty good Time to practice Overdue Duo does not give you numbers behind the categories, so it is difficult to check their algorithm for fluency.
Fluency must be calculated from to these numbers. I noticed a difference between my Spanish and French fluency indicator. While the Fluency in French is very responsive and higher, the Spanish indicator is besides twice the XP much lower for me and never moves. On the other side, I get little quizzes interspersed in my Spanish lessons but not into my French ones.
I think the two teams working on these languages are at different stages of course development. That is all what my reflections were about.
Do your fluency indicators show a similar discrepancy between Spanish and French?
Oh, well firstly, I rarely go into the words section, I used to, but somehow I am so busy trying to keep up with the units, I tend to forget about it. Yes, the Spanish fluency never seems to move, not sure why. I have been at the same percentage for a long time, and finished the tree ages ago.. Someone else explained that these percentages are not out of 100, or I saw that somewhere on the website. My french is higher in percentage, but the Spanish seems stuck..
Hi Shirlgirl, Thanks so much, I learned a lot from our exchange. The problem I had is that I just picked up French after going through the Spanish tree in 3 months. Then there was Christmas and I lost continuity.
Thereafter I just started French as well and noticed these discrepancies, thinking that things somehow were easier for me with French, than it was with Spanish. Initially I did it just as a test, but after a while I noticed that I did not mess up between the two languages. Usually I try to keep at least on hour distance between each language.
I think the reality is that the Spanish and French development teams are at different stages of development and that is reflected in these fluency marks.
I do not know if the same happens with you, but I get the occasional quiz within my Spanish studies blended in. They testing is all about conjugations. Since the Spanish tree is much smaller I think we will see a big expansion with the Spanish tree soon.
Do you use other apps as well? The problem I have with other apps is that they frustrate me, to the point where I want to throw the computer at a wall. I do not spend much time with Duo. Usually I hack myself through the lessons. I use android with gives me predictive typing and get it mostly right. I actually try to not to relearn words but use a multilingual dictionary besides the fact that it gives me, Asturian, Galician, Catalan, etc. you name it. The problem I have with both languages is that I do not speak them. I am working on changing that. Ecuador must give you lots of opportunity for speaking practice. I was thinking of either Costa Rica, Ecuador or Buenos Aires.
"She used to wait for me" is not acceptable as of April, 2018. Some of this sh*t messes me up. I also use Wlingua and it gives you a brief lesson before the questions. I do not see as many errors on that app. I only use this as a review.