1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Portuguese
  4. >
  5. "Eu não vim para defender o m…

"Eu não vim para defender o meu marido, mas meu filho."

Translation:I have not come to defend my husband, but my son.

May 9, 2013



I love how they randomly put the definite article before a posessive pronoun and then skip it further in the sentence.


i would not love it if it is at random ... which is highly unlikely; well as an irony-spot on


as far as I know it's required by grammar but often ommitted in colloquial speech, more so in Brazilian colloquial speech where almost no one uses it. Knowing this, dulolingo looks random to me)


Before possessives, its totally random indeed. No obligation at all.


On what planet is " I didn't come in order to defend my husband, but my son." not acceptable? It's the same thing, only more formal.


It should be, and I hope you reported it. Just now it accepted, "I did not come to defend my husband, but my son."


"I didn't come for defending my husband, but my son." was rejected too.


This would not be used in English.


"I have come not to defend my husband, but my son. " is marked wrong??? Come on Duolingo.


The "não" is before "vim", therefore it's have not come, which doesn't exactly sense (obviously the speaker did come). "have come not to defend" make more sense, but idk whether a Brazilian person actually would say "Eu vim não defender..."


Or "não para defender" either.


This is clearer than the "correct" version.


I would use the word "rather" in English here.


"but" is perfectly natural here in English


So is there no Portuguese equivalent to the Spanish "sino"?


I guess that makes a lot of sense. Thank you!


I feel like there is.... hrmm


Sorry..."sem" would be "sin" in Spanish.


why does "marido" take the definite article but "filho" not?

  • 2763

The definite article precedes a possessive adjective but it can be left out when speaking of close relatives. It is often omitted in Brazil. The possessive pronouns do not require an article except when emphasizing ownership. So I guess the question could have used 'meu marido' and 'o meu filho' and the answer would still be the same as the one Duo gives.


ohhh great explanation! I was super confused about the usage because I saw it come up sometimes and other times "nao" jaja obrigada


I switched them in my response and was marked correct. You can put the article before both, either or neither.


"I have come to defend not my husband, but my son" would be the best way to say this in English, but it was counted wrong. The negation should apply only to the direct object, not to the verb. Of course English speakers don't necessarily apply the rules of logic, so plenty of people would say "I have not come..." or "I haven't come..." or "I didn't come..." in this context. But the logically correct version should not be counted wrong!


"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him."


I think the point is that in informal speech people say "I have not come", in Brazil as well as in the US. The way the Portuguese is written in this case reflects that. It's nonsense, yes, but it's a more accurate translation of the "incorrect" idiom in Portuguese to the same idiom in English.

For an example, the best translation of Zolá's L'Assomoire (imo) translates the main characters' dialog as 19th-Century cockney dialect, to reflect the English equivalent to how a poor, uneducated French person who is from a rural area in the 19th Century would sound to a French reader.


My complaint is that "I didn't come" was rejected. Throughout this lesson, and in the tips for an earlier lesson about preterite tense, Duolingo stresses that it means both/either "did not" or "have not"--i.e., any completed action in the past. Am I missing something?


She's got a lovely family


The English is wrong. I came period. I came to defend my son not my husband or in the reverse order but I showed up.


I still don't understand why O meu marido and not O meu filho. If you can use it in one why can't you use it in both? Especially, as I understood, if it is required in Portugal.


I wonder if "para" and "o" in the sentence are necessary. Please can someone advise?


This is very ambiguous. I added "but to defend my son" to make it clearer, but not allowed.

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