The verb being used here is quedarse - the reflexive form of quedar - which is conjugated in the future: me quedaré, te quedarás, se quedará, etc. The difference between quedar and quedarse is subtle, the best explanation I have seen says that quedarse is used when you stay deliberately and quedar in the sense that you have been left. Incidentally, the future subjunctive 1st/3rd person is quedare which is spelled and pronounced differently to the future 1st person quedaré.
With the meaning above quedar can be pronominal or not, with a small difference in meaning. If you say "me quedaré tres noches", it means you are staying deliberately, meaning that it was your choice to stay, so if you say "quedaré tres noches", it means you are staying, but because of reasons that go beyond you, reasons that you cannot control. This difference has been lost in many dialects, so some people might say thatquedarse is the only correct choice, but both are correct in the proper context.
The difference between 'shall' and 'will' is pretty subtle in English. The only times I've heard it being used in North America recently were in plays about proper, English school teachers being very frosty with someone who wasn't doing what they were told. The idea was that the person was physically able to something, but it they did there would be severe consequences. Example: "You shall not chew gum in my class." Clearly the person could chew gum. On the other hand, the teacher has stout yard stick which she will use to rap your knuckles it you do. 'Shall' kind of fits in with the time when there were yard sticks (not meter sticks) and corporal punishment was still a regular occurrence in schools. If you are a non-native English speaker and want people to stare at you, go right ahead and sprinkle your conversation with 'shall', 'thou' etc.
First, it is important that you use quedarse, because that indicates intention. Second, it is an example of a translation dictionary that includes examples like this:
- Me quedaré en la casa mientras la inspección.
Which many would phrase in English as "I will be in my house during the inspection". It is only added to cover situations like that, and should be thought of as a paraphrased translation.
There are three sentences in this lesson that use the Spanish Future Tense of "quedarse".
Of those three, so far Duo only accepts the English Future Progressive Tense for one of them.
For this sentence: "I will be staying three nights."
It is the most natural for native English speakers--at least for me.
"No me quedaré tres noches" simply means "I will not stay for three nights". Whether that means that you won't stay at all or you do stay but for a different duration is up for the reader to decide.
"I will be away for three nights" can be translated as "Estaré fuera (por) tres noches."
I have been using Duolingo for a couple of months now. I understand there are many ways people link words when they talk, but I'm having a hard time understanding the lady. Is there a tv show any of you can recommend me to watch, so I can become more accustomed to how she speaks? I ask because I could not hear 'tres' at all in this example and it bothers me. I feel like I should be able to catch numbers in Spanish, by now, regardless of where they are in the sentence.
Gracias--But is this really any different from translating the Spanish Simple Present Tense to the English Present Progressive?
We do that with the Spanish Simple Present Tense all the time because Spanish uses its version of the Present Progressive Tense infrequently compared to the English Present Progressive Tense.
The English Future Progressive Tense is rarer than the English Present Progressive, but is the Spanish version even rarer still?
If so--isn't the same applicable to the Future Tenses.
Also--Duo has set a precedent by accepting even one of my Future Progressive Translations.
It is quite different because the English Present Progressive is used differently than the Progressive form in other tenses. Briefly, in addition to things that are in progress at the moment ("I am running"), the Present Progressive is also used to describe (nonprogressive) telic actions. Those are actions that have a defined endpoint, like "He's building a bridge" - the bridge will be built at some point, then the action is over. In contrast, atelic actions that don't have a specific endpoint, like "He builds bridges", are usually expressed in the Simple Present. That means you'll rather say "I'm going to the store now" than "I go to the store now" even though you're still at home at the moment, i.e. the action isn't in progress yet.
In the other tenses, the English Progressive form works a lot more like you'd expect from a progressive form, because you don't have that telicity distinction there. "I will go to the store" is nonprogressive, but it's not clear if you're doing it once or regularly; "I will be going to the store" is progressive, putting focus on the passage of time during that one event. Likewise in the past tense: "I went to the store" is nonprogressive, usually referring to a one-time action, but in the right context, "I went to the store every Monday", you can make it habitual. "I was going to the store" is only progressive.
So there's a mismatch between the English and Spanish Progressive forms in the present tense, because the English Present Progressive includes nonprogressive telic actions, which the Spanish Present Progressive doesn't do. There's also a (smaller) mismatch in the past tense, since Spanish has two different simple forms in that tense, where English has to juggle around with different verbal constructions to get the passage of time across.
But when you talk about the future, the Progressive forms align pretty well, because the English Future Progressive covers just that - the progressive aspect in the future tense. And so does the Spanish Future Progressive.