- Forum >
- Topic: Spanish >
- "¿Estás pagando mi desayuno?"
40 Comments
pagar means 'to pay for' similarly, buscar (to look or) and mirar (to look at) do not have a preposition after them
553
We would NEVER use this sentence to ask if someone WILL pay for the breakfast. "Estas pagando" means RIGHT NOW, in the present. If you want to ask about the future you use the future tense "vas a pagar" or "pagarás" is fine. It's unfortunate that half of the lesson about the use of the Gerund makes this same mistake. As a rule, we DO NOT use the "present of estar + gerund" for future actions. That's English use, not Spanish.
- 516
"Pay" (pagar) and "buy" (comprar) are different words.
I don't understand all the "likes" for something that is not very correct.
You used the imperative form instead of a simple question. This makes it seem much more commanding than the exercise called for.
- 516
Especially when you say "You ARE..."
If you were to say "You're paying..", that's a little softer, less demanding.
Did you not notice the "?" at the end of the sentence ""you are paying for my breakfast?", surly the "?" creates a question. If spoken with rising inflection on the "paying" then the sentence would express surprise, but if If spoken with rising inflection on the "are you" or the "breakfast" then it is a straight forward question. The English language in whatever guise is so flexible...
- 147
In this sentence anyway! You can say "para mi" for example. "Me" relates to the object of the verbs.
Why isn't is necessary to include "por" for "for"?
¿Estás pagando por mi desayuno?"
In this sentence the "for" may seem obvious but in a sentence such as ¿Estás pagando mi hijo?" how do you know if it means "Are you paying for my child?" (like for a movie ticket) or "Are you paying my child?" (for doing a task)?
- 1045
The reason is 'are you paying my child?' (for doing a task) is '¿Estás pagando a mi hijo?'. The child is an indirect object, the money is the direct object: 'are you paying ten dollars to my child' = '¿Estas pagando diez dolares a mi hijo?'. So the sentences wouldn't be the same. Having said that, 'are you paying for my child?' (cash on their behalf) isn't the same thing as 'are you paying for my breakfast?' (cash for the breakfast), unless you're actually buying the child. I think you do need the 'por' if you're paying on behalf of someone, it only disappears in the cash for child scenario.
Well, yes and no - It seems confusing to see "¿Estás pagando mi desayuno?" used the same way as "¿Estás pagando sus impuestos?" After all, one "pays for" a gift, a meal or a purchase, one does not "pay for" one's taxes, subway fare or one's own way.
Are you paying my breakfast? The "for" part can be left out right? Kind of obvious that its practically the same
- 319
No, I feel it's ungrammatical (or possibly colloquial) without "for". You can pay my bill, you can pay my sister, but you can't pay my breakfast (because it's not a person or an accounting of money).
Hola Brendaharvey: rspreng's comments are correct, but it is also acceptable to use "por": ¿Estás pagando por mi desayuno?", but not "para".
Duo is teaching you well. It is easier to learn local speech later if you first understand formal grammar.
... Also, it's spelled 'tacaño'.
'Estás' is a form of estar, while 'eres' is a form of ser. We use estar for locations and temporary things. Ser is for permanent things and lasting attributes.
We aren't always and forever paying for breakfast, so we use estás here.
