Translation:I would throw a party for my birthday if I had more friends.
In this make/have discussion I wish people would identify their region. Some differences are just idiosyncratic but most tend to be regional. If I, who would say throw, found out where I should say make I've gained linguistic knowledge, although not Spanish. But y'all (not Southern, but...) seem to be trying to make one right and one wrong. I don't believe that is the issue here.
Throw is not jargon. Jargon is either language particular to a particular field or unintelligible or pretensious language.
To throw a party was probably at one point colloquial speech, but now it is listed as a standard definition of throw, albeit #19
"Make" just isn't the right translation of hacer, in this particular instance. "Throw a party" is more US, and "have party" is more UK. I'm in the UK btw. "Make a party" just cracks me up because it makes me think of Borat's deliberately broken English when he talks about "making sexytime" <3
hacer una fiesta = have a party or throw a party
dar una fiesta = have a party, throw a party, give a party
Obviously there is no context. But a possible context is someone who is making plans for their birthday. They say they would throw a party, but they don't have enough friends to make it work. The structure is relatively common. There are two clauses, but either can come first. One clause has a conditional tense and the other clause begins with if and contains a past subjunctive. The same structure exists in English, although it is often hard to recognize our subjunctive. But in this structure indicates a contrary to fact statement. There is an idiom/proverb in English which my mother used to say a lot. I translated it into Spanish early on so I could learn the Spanish structure. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. Si deseos fueron caballos, los mendigos montarian
That's a great question, but no, not in this case. Cumpleaños is a Spanish compound which follows the regular rules for compound words. In Spanish compound words are formed by taking the third person singular form of a verb and combining it with the plural form of a noun. In this case you have comple from cumplir to fulfill and años years. This is not as obvious a combination for English speakers as many others.
Some other compound words like this are:
Lavaplatos - lava wash + platos dishes. Dishwasher
Lavarropas - lava wash + ropas clothes (the r is doubled here because an initial R has the rr sound) Clothes washer.
Parabrisas - para stop + brisas breezes. Windshield
Paraguas - para stop + aguas waters (second a dropped) Umbrella.
Abrelatas - Abre open + latas cans. Can opener.
Rascacielos - rasca scrape + cielo sky. Skyscraper.
There are many more.
As a rule, these nouns share a couple of characteristics. First, whether the noun portion of the word is masculine or feminine when separate, the compound word is masculine. And second, these words don't change in the plural. So mi cumpleaños is my birthday and mis cumpleaños is my birthdays. I learned these rules as having exceptions, but I don't think I know any that don't obey these rules.
Me alegría de que hayas escrito en español. Permítame ayudarte con los detalles. Duelo es el verbo (I hurt). El sustantivo es dolor. Por consiguiente las dos posibilidades son así
Tengo dolor de cabeza (tener + sustantivo)
Me duele el corazón (pronomial verb construction like gustar)
Not accurately) haría doesn't trigger past subj, words that do are the same as for the present subj. I suppose it's just the way to express the same thing as second conditional in English.
Spanish: Main - Conditional, Dependent - past subjunctive
English: Main - would + verb, Dependent - past simple/progressive
Furthermore, wiki tells that in English the past tense (simple past or past progressive) of the condition clause is historically the past subjunctive. In modern English this is identical to the past indicative, except in the first and third persons singular of the verb be, where the indicative is was and the subjunctive were. Considering this you can say that translation is literal)
I hadn't even gotten to más amigos when Duo decided I'd said the sentence correctly and confirmed it - stopping it's recording short of my finishing the sentence. I'm not complaining, just wondering what's going on? Must be something like, if you get 90% or so correct enough, Duo marks it as completed correctly. So, if your pronunciation is very good for the first part of the sentence, you don't have to finish it, because you've already gotten a 90 on the "test".
It doesn't have quite the same meaning. Tense always matters. I would have had a party means that the decision is past. This is about what someone is thinking about doing for their birthday which hasn't happened yet. That is a situational difference, not a difference in regional speech.
If I would have more friends is apparently attempting to be a conditional statement, but is grammatically incorrect in both languages actually. This sentence is actually the same in both languages. The issue with the English is that the English subjunctive is almost invisible in most verbs and person conjugations. And it isn't therefore taught very effectively. But English definitely has a subjunctive mood, although used less frequently than in Spanish, and this is a good example. It is the classic case of a conditional/subjunctive statement where the subjunctive portion describes the condition for the conditional portion to be completed. When the subjunctive portion is in the past tense, it indicates a contrary-to-fact condition. We know from this sentence that the speaker is not having a party and does not have more (meaning enough) friends. When you get to that meaning from these words, you know to use the subjunctive mood.
Good question, but no. Birthdays come one at a time for us all. But cumpleaños is an example of the most common form of Spanish compound word. There are a few exceptions but most take the third person singular present indicative form of the verb and the plural form of the noun. This makes a compound word which is masculine and doesn't alter form to make the plural. So here we have cumple from the verb cumplir to complete and años which is years. Your birthday is when you complete years. Other examples include
Para (parar) + aguas = paraguas (second a dropped) stop waters =umbrella
Lava (lavar) + platos = Lavaplatos wash plates= dishwasher
Abre (abrir) + latas = Abrelatas can opener
Para + caídas = paracaidas stop falls parachute
Saca (sacar) + corchos = sacacorchos take out corks corkscrew.
There are a few that do take the singular form like guarapelo (guard hair which is a locket). But most take the above form.
I think if you are going to translate hacer literally make a party might be better, but neither expression is at all common in English. You can have a party, but even that doesn't always mean that you are the initiator and the host. Throw in the verb we use that definitely means that, so the common for common convention would make that the best translation.
The problem comes when you seem to think it would not be common for that to be said in Spanish. Saying on my birthday is just as common in Spanish, but that would be en mi cumpleaños. But that's not what was said here. Many people move their birthday parties to the weekend, so it might not be what the speaker means either. There is language that is somewhat ambiguous and can therefore have a couple of different accurate translations, but this is not one. The purpose of translation on Duo is to accurately reflect what is being said in Spanish within common English grammar and syntax. Your change does not accurately reflect what the sentence said, and the speaker could have easily have altered the same word in Spanish to get to that meaning. So the fact that it is common in English, but neither more common nor more correct is irrelevant.
That would tend to be correct only under special circumstances, like if a young girl were talking who was having a single sex birthday party. Most adults would have at least one male among the friends they would invite to a birthday party, and it only takes one to make the whole group amigas feminine.
This is an example of Duo's common for common convention. While it is a possible English sentence, the verb make is seldom if ever used about parties. We have parties or we throw parties. I know at one point Duo didn't accept have either, which I think was a mistake. I think have might be accepted now, but I am not sure. But Duo is especially sensitive about a direct translation of the commonest verb phrase in Spanish into something that is not common in English. The issue is not simply that the sentence sounds a little odd in English. Duo has many sentences with odd translations meant to illustrate something mostly about Spanish. But in addition to standard expressions like Greetings there are certain verbs that are used with certain nouns. These may sound idiomatic in one language and more denotative in the other, but when you have a standard expression in EITHER language which is somehow metaphorical or idiomatic like throw a party, pitch a tent or draw a bath (all English expressions, though Spanish has its own) Duo wants those to be the go to translations. To the extent that the direct translation is at all possible in English, people often object. But learning a language means both understanding and being able to produce correct, fluid speech using the appropriate common construction. If you simply translate the sentence without looking for a more common way to say it, you are more likely to try a direct translation the other way when talking about throwing a party. No se puede tirar una fiesta. Saying tirar una fiesta makes no sense, so Duo want to cement the link between throw a party and hacer una fiesta. As I say, I believe have a party should also be allowed.
They don't really mean the same thing. They are two different verbs. Yo haría literally means I would make. It is from the verb hacer. Habria is from the verb Haber. Haber is only used as an auxiliary verb in all of its persons except for third person singular, where it is always used without a subject or subject pronoun and is translated with There. So it would translate to There would be. While the meanings may be similar in this case, they certainly don't make the same sentence.
Duo does refuse to accept correct answers from time to time. Often it is a random one up error. But very rarely it lasts a while session. If it doesn't work, exit totally out of Duo, reboot your device and try again. I have never had a random problem that survives that. Occasionally a more permenant error creeps in when Duo is updating which answers it accepts, but when that happens everyone complains, and I haven't heard about one of those errors in a while.
No. This sentence is almost the definition of the conditional. I would... if. The if clause contains the CONDITION under which the second clause is true. And the first clause in the conditional dictates that the condition be in the past subjunctive. The present subjunctive adds doubt to the statement, but the past subjunctive is most often a contrary to fact statement.
The majority of the time you see the subjunctive it is required due to some elements in the sentence's construction. Some of these would be subjunctive in English and some not. But the sentences where someone voluntarily adds the subjunctive just to add doubt to the sentence will not look subjunctive in English. They will be more like the sentence that Duo recently added that caused such confusion, "I might have done it" where the purpose of adding might was not to translate a Spanish word, but to "translate" the effect of adding the subjunctive where it isn't required by the nature of the sentence. So Duo's translation was simply, Yo lo hiciera.
Had you ever said make a party before? Duo uses common for common translation for set expressions. Spanish uses hacer + noun a lot, where we say something different. One part of language fluency is automatically making these standard changes between the English way and the Spanish way. While that certainly involves learning a lot of vocabulary for direct translation, it also involves translating set expressions in a less direct way to other set expressions. Many set expressions can be obvious. Greetings, expressions of concern, what you say when someone sneezes or as a toast are quite often extremely idiomatic. But there are a lot of small phrases too, like throw a party, set the table (or lay if you are British) and 100 others that Duo is trying to teach you the set expression for in Spanish.
I haven't seen an exercise with a cat in the freezer. But I have seen the one that went something like Él daba comida a su perro. That particular sentence has crystallized my need to preach the word of the true imperfect. (OK, so I may be slightly over dramatic). But I have always objected to the use of "used to" with the imperfect for the simple fact that, along with meaning that the action was repeated or routine, it also implies that it no longer happens. The fact that everyone was bemoaning the fact that the man had stopped feeding his dog. That is not what that sentence is saying. The reason the imperfect is called imperfect is that the action or state described by the verb is not necessarily complete or over. For example, if you have gone to church every week for your whole life, you may talk about a time in the past where it was significant that you went to church every week, and therefore use the past tense. That is exactly when you use the imperfect, because the imperfect does NOT imply that you no longer go.
Anneliseped, you do not say whether you are a native English speaker, but, as one, I would say neither create, make, establish nor design would work in the English translation here, though "throw" or "have" are easy options. If you were to create, make, establish or even, maybe, design a party, it would probably be in the sense of a political party, though that might be cause for you to celebrate by "having" or "throwing" a party with lots of balloons and cold refreshments.