There is an implied article in "pelo" so shouldn't it also accept "the father"? We have no idea whether it is our father or some other persons father.
I first answered "We're not going to wait for our father". It was deemed wrong, because it wanted "for dad". But in all previous exercises "father" has been accepted for "papai", as well as the implicit possesive, as in "He cleans his mouth" in Portuguese simply "Ele limpa a boca"! So "for our father" should be accepted, for it's right and to keep consistency!
And do they (bebés) eat papas? =)
So no "papas" is eaten in Brazil? It is popular in Portugal, even among adults (not for me though).
Mingau is apparently a Tupi word for the same (essential) thing.
Yeah, DL cannot accept that there are different kinds of "baby" in Portuguese. It is always telling me to, "pay attention to the accents!" Which of course is exactly what I am doing. :D
It is an acquired taste:
I know pai but no papai... So i didnt know what the hell is in front of pai.. Haha entered pa pai. Correct..
In this case, you have to use the article: "esperar pelo papai". "Papai" in mainly used by kids.
I wanted to ask the same question as Hector. I understand that pelo is "por" + article but what I do not understand is why the article is necessary in the sentence - unless the translation is waiting for "the dad" or "our dad". But that is not the case. Where am I going wrong?
Portuguese requires definite article much more often than English does. Here, it probably means "our daddy", but even if this is not the case, "por papai" is not used.
Thank you Paulenrique. Learning a new language requires a lot of flexibility in one's thinking. It's more difficult than I imagined!