"Mañana tenemos que abandonar el palacio."
Translation:Tomorrow we have to leave the palace.
65 Comments
622
Another entry in the Duolingo te prepara para la junta inevitable series.
I suspect leave isn't as accurate, since leave is neutral ambiguous in terms of return (you may leave indefinitely or only for a short while), while abandon expressly indicates that in all likelihood one won't be coming back!
- 1942
Thanks for the insight. Does that mean that Spanish "abandonar" simply means to depart from a place, and doesn't necessarily specify whether there will be a return? Because if so, it would probably be better to use English "leave" if there is no context, and only use "abandon" if it is known that the speaker intends to communicate that the place being left will no longer be returned to.
I agree with 'must' in place of 'have to,' both should be acceptable but must is better. But `we've to' definitely is not standard English, not in N. A., at least.
Exactamente what I was thinking of. Could the both be acceptable? ( The 'must' seems to me the better, though. There is the concept there again.)
I think the problem with this answer is not the "leave" but the "must". DL seems to prefer that you translate "tenemos que" as "we HAVE TO".
- 1005
"Tomorrow we have to abandon the palace." That's probably useful for politicians in Latin America, what?
In a number of translations in this section (infinitives), it rejects "must" in favor of "have to" for the "tener que" construction. I know that Duolinguo is sometimes crotchety about translations, but "must" has been accepted along with "have to" in most other places in Duolinguo, so this is particularly annoying, as it has come up at least 3 or 4 times for me already in different sentences. And the "Submit" button is broken, so I can't submit corrections. Get on it, Duolinguo! Fix all the "have to" translations to take "must" (also some of the "ir a" translations don't accept English "will", although most of them do).
Yes you're right! "Must" is a better translation than "have to" for "tener que" in my opinion. We should report it.
"Have to" imply that the obligation is from something or someone external to the person who speak. [Or to apologize according to my books & sites. ("Sorry I can't come, I have to wash my hair"= "Disculpe, no puedo venir, tengo que lavarme el pelo" (correct?)] In these cases, we should translate "tener que" by "have to", but in other cases, "must" is better.
-
Tener que/deber = strong obligation, = "must".
-
Tener que = (strong) suggestion, invitation (with "you" and "we") = "must" = "You must come and visit us." (French: "Tu dois absolument...")
-
Deber de = (strong) probability = "must" = "You must be hungry!"
Source: http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/must And http://www.englishgrammarsecrets.com/musthaveto/menu.php
Ok, here is another one. Poder requires a "can" translation not a "be able" translation. This has become a pet peeve. Annoying. And wrong.
It's probably not as exciting as people here are suggesting. Maybe the fumigation squad is coming to kill the cockroaches.
As a writer interested in fantasy and history, I appreciate sentences such as these.
Some of these sentences are so outrageous. I have to double check words I know to make sure the sentence is real.
They are insisting on we've- I would never use this in written English in my work.
Although the hints suggest the idiom? to throw in the towel.. (which is a common phrase in English. That answer is marked incorrect.
- 954
Hello almccutc: Tener que is found often in Spanish and indicates an obligation. Many people try to use "must" which is usually not accepted by Duolingo. They seem to want "have to". Caution: if any thing "splits" tener (or any of its conjugated forms) with que, then the obligation does not apply and should not be translated as "have to".
