It just so happens that for -ar and -ir verbs the nosotros form is the same for present and preterit (simple past).
And BAM, all of a sudden: past tense. Why doesn't duolingo make a past tense lesson first? In all other sentences before past tense would have made more sense but it was allways present tense.
This is it's own philosophy with all of it. Introduce certain parts while warming you up to the words. We still haven't learned 'ser' vs 'estar' yet. I think it's novel. Just focus on learning and less on what you don't know. And you should probably focus on one language at a time too.
I am reporting this sentence for being in the wrong section. It really shouldn't be here.
But I am glad we have this because I just am. Embedded words. That's how we learn our native language. Nobody teaches chlidren correct grammar but if they hear correct grammar, they learn it through context and repetition. ASSOCiAtiONS make us more automatic with our words. we are just learning that it is also past tense and contexually learning a difference with an easy adverb for a past tense use of it.
ah! Marie. I am glad to read your comments. It is exactly what i say since i started learning foreign languages when i was very young ( i speak 7 of them but not those you see me studying here with the exception of french-italian-portuguese, spanish and german, which i am doing for fun and to see how DUO is teaching them. LEARN LIKE A CHILD IS LEARNING HIS MOTHER TONGUE, BY IMITATION. bzw I am 78 .
Thanks nahuatl i live near Spain our countries have a common border they are here all the time and my daughter lives in Madrid. I waste my time saying the same.:)
I disagree... its cool to learn that a word you know already can be used in another way too!
I think that it's because Duolingo is ultimately based on teaching us individual words. As Mark2020 explains here, the present and simple past tenses are the same for many verbs in the first-person plural, so when Duolingo needs to give us a past-tense verb (which is pretty much necessary to go with "recientemente"), it thinks that those are available.
Actually if the wording can mean both past and present then it should be in here
we haven't been introduced to the past tense yet, have we? And so doesn't that make it even more of a stretch to imagine we would guess this is past when it looks identical to the present?
not really since "we walk recently"isn't really logical. I think it's pretty intuitive since while not outright teaching this quirk of the language it guides you to coming to the conclusion yourself.
Using double negatives without one negative canceling the other isn't logical either, but that's apparently how it's done in Spanish.
I don't believe that's correct. Could you give an example of a double negative in Spanish?
Edit: caiser pointed out some counterexamples.
No digo nada: I don't say anything
No vino nadie: Nobody came
No tengo a nadie para contárselo: I haven't anybody to tell it
French : je ne dis RIEN personne N"est venu Je n'ai personne a qui le raconter.
you cannot say WE WALK RECENTLY. therefore it is evident that it MUST be WE WALKED. I have it easy because I do speak spanish ( castellano) as my third mother tongue, after french and german ( or rather Swiss german = Alamanisch). Sometimes we have to imagine things. it doesn't matter if we make mistakes. it is only those who don't do anything that don't make mistakes. Let your imagination flow young women and men. The fact that you are learning foreign languages is the proof that you DO have a lot of it. This will keep you for ever young. I will be 79 in a few months.
Gusten Tag und buenos días. Tengo noventa años de edad AND i am studying several languages for the mental exercise it gives me. I enjoyed your comments and agree completely. I learn more from student comments than from the basic Duolingo available on my android tablet
But "We have been walking recently" does make sense. Would the Spanish not use present tense for this?
Actually 'we walked recently' and 'we were walking recently' would both be correct. However, 'we have been walking' requires the use of "hemos" to indicate 'we have been'.
But now we know to watch out for that in present tense, so it is a present tense issue for bridging. I find this ok...useful...because we learn all at once.
I don't understand how the present tense can be used to convey past tense just because you add the word recently.
Caminamos is not present tense in this situation ;)
Yo camino Yo caminé
Tu caminas Tu caminaste
Él camina Él caminó
Nosotros caminamos Nosotros caminamos
Vosotros camináis Vosotros caminasteis
Ellos caminan Ellos caminaron
depende amigo mio. Yo vivo desde mas de 50 anios en America Latina, mas que todo en Ecuador y ahora también Peru. Aquí también se utiliza nosotros y vosotros aunque mas nosotros que vosotros.( no tengo la N con tilde en mi teclado, por eso escribo anio. sino hay una confusion desagradable a veces.No le voy a desear FELIZ ANO, por eso escribo FELIZ ANIO !)
I believe it is more appropriate to use the present perfect because the time of the action is not precise. I would rather say: Hemos caminado recientemente. And not preterito indefinido. Example: Caminamos ayer. This is the preterito indefinido, with a specific time given.
Many of the past tense conjugations in spanish are the same as the present tense. However, i don't think they should be accepting the present tense version in this case...
This past tense (the preterit) is identical only for the nosotros form, and only for -ar and -ir verbs.
After looking at a verb book it appears that most AR and IR verbs are the same in the first person present tense plural and the first person past (preterite) tense plural. The ER verbs do not appear to be the same in both tenses.
It could be right also to say "recently, we walk." and perhaps would be right depending on punctuation in Spanish which I know nothing about. But I do now for sure in English, you can say "recently, we walk."
"Do you go to work by car?" "Recently I walk... for exercise."
Thank you for this clarification. I couldn't understand why you kept saying 'we walk' should be accepted when "recently" clearly indicates the need for past tense. This sentence helps clarify your meaning (I used to drive, but lately I walk because it is better exercise). Personally, I hadn't thought of this sentence in that context. Just serves as a reminder of how interesting and multi-faceted language can be. Thanks.
Does anybody know what is the difference between recientemente and en estos di'as? gracias!
I did right only because i translated this sentense from english to spanish yet. But I did not understand why?? Only because of the word "recently"????
Present and preterite are identitical in the nosotros form for most -ar and -ir verbs. This makes it ambiguos but the recently resolves the ambiguity because "we walk recently" isn't a logical construction.
Agreed "we walk recently" is not a logical sentence, but I tried it out of interest to test the software and guess what...DL says it's OK! This doesn't help learners at all. And I can't see how I can be 47% fluent according to DL when this is the first time I've been required to use anything other than the present simple.
This website may serve a purpose for learning some vocabulary or doing a bit of revision (how I'm using it) but it isn't really going to teach anyone to be a competent user of the language.
it seems a good start to really own those words and get them laid in with associations...we learn words that way in our native language, not just first starting with present and then past...we learn through hearing it over and over...Dad went to work. Look around. Dad is gone. past tense notions begin to form. Every word contexual...and then someone makes a chart to help folks who learned it a bit differently can come to agreement and be editors and get paid.
It can be a logical sentence in this sense:
"it's not far to drive to work."
"Recently, we walk." Can it be done without the comma? Some editors in context would allow it. It can be "Recently we walk" or "We walk recently." it's an ongoing recent pattern due to being close to work, needing exercise, or the car is broken.
But it seems that it is much fuzzier or wrong without the comma and no context.
because we have walked is a past participle that is constructed differently than the preterite form "we walked"
I think also you can mean the present continuous situation where the car is broken or you live close to work with others in your location and say, "Recently, we walk." The comma in some contexts would not be needed, perhaps, but alone without context, a comma would be needed in my opinion to show present ongoing behavior that began recently.
how does one know that it is walked and not walk -- appears to be a present tense verb!
It's because the adverb recently" indicates that an action occurred in the past. "We walk recently" doesn't make sense. If it's now, then we walk. If it was recently, then we walked. Think about "I read the newspaper every morning" vs "I read the newspaper yesterday."
Wait a minute! Since the sentence is in past tense.....sudnt 'recently' become reciente instead of recientamente?
Why does the adverb come after the verb in this case? Generally, the rule is adverb before verb, no?
So is 'We walk together' & 'we walked together' worded the same in spanish? (Ie..Caminamos juntos?)
i dont know if this is my chilean spanish speaking, but im almost sure its caminamos recién.