Translation:We hope that there is more research.
I was going to whine about "esperar" having previously meant "wait" and not "hope". And now that I have finally learned that, it means "hope" and not "wait".
But following the "google before whining" rule, I found out that "esperar que" means "hope" when followed by the subjunctive. "haya" is the present subjunctive.
Yes, "esperar que" means "to hope that", but it's not the only time that "esperar" means "to hope". "Esperar" can mean "to wait (for)", "to hope", or "to expect", and even "to trust" (as in "to put one's hope in").
You'll notice that in some cases you can even swap one English word for another without significantly changing the meaning...
"Espero llegar a tiempo" = "I hope to arrive on time" / "I expect to arrive on time"
"¿Esperas visita?" = "Are you expecting someone?" / "Are you waiting for someone?"
"Una mujer que espera en Dios" = "A woman who trusts in God".
"Espero en Dios que no le sucederá nada" = "I hope to God that nothing happens".
It just means before you start whining about something that seems wrong with a sentence because you got it wrong ,so you think Duolingo made a mistake, but then you google it and find out you were wrong and not Duolingo. So whether it is Duolingo or something else, before you assume it is wrong, check first.
There is always more than one translation that is understood by a person l m talking to. I want to learn a language with DL to speak with people and understand them and not to attend a seminar at the university to discuss grammar issues which 99% of native speakers don't know about.
Exactly. Que as a conjunction translates quite well to that, even if that is not required in English. You don't wait that, you wait for. Of course waiting and expecting are somewhat related. One doesn't tend to say that you are waiting for something you don't expect. And if I said I was expecting a delivery you might assume I was waiting for it. They both stand in contrast with to hope. When you say I hope, it is not an expectation or something you are really waiting for.
Thanks for this link! I think this general rule might still have exceptions, though. Wordreference offers this translation for esperar as 'wait for,' even though it is "esperar que + subjunctive".<pre>
We are waiting for the doors to open. Estamos esperando que se abran las puertas.</pre>
I guess this is expressing some uncertainty about the doors opening, but could someone confirm?
I can't say for sure, but perhaps to avoid the situation you wouldn't use esperar + que. If you look back at the English sentence, you used the infinitive "to open." If we keep that infinitive usage across the translation, we get "Estamos esperando para abrirse las puertas." I could be wrong, but I think when you're waiting for someone, for something, or for something to happen, you can use esperar + para.
There are certain expressions that automatically tirigger the subjunctive in the following subordinate clause. "Esperar que ..." is one. "Tener ganas de" is another. "Querer que", "ojala que" are some more. If you check a grammar book they will list the most common. Usually they express the idea that something is going to happen, or is wanted to happen, etc. but it hasn't happened yet, and may be uncertain. So that is why "abran" is appropriate here. in the sentence given - present subjunctive.
You are quite correct, but you are being unnecessarily vague in teaching about the rules for the subjunctive. It is really pretty straightforward, once you get it down. Most of the situations that require the subjunctive have WEIRDO verbs in the first clause. A WEIRDO verb is one that expresses a Wish Emotion Impersonal statement Recommendation Doubt or Ojalá. In order for these types of verbs to trigger the subjunctive, three elements have to be in the sentence. You have to have two clauses joined by que, you must have two different subjects to those clauses, and you have to have the WEIRDO verb in the first clause. Since esparar is a WEIRDO verb (I hope falls under wishes), any sentence with two clauses with two different subjects joined by que will have that second verb in the subjunctive. Ojalá doesn't quite fit the mold, of course. Although Ojalá que is not incorrect, the que is not required. And Ojalá isn't really a verb at all. I have seen various translations for Ojalá, but to me the best one is something like "Please God". But it is ALWAYS followed by the subjunctive.
There are other triggers for the subjunctive that are not quite as definite. There are several conjunctive phrases that can trigger the subjunctive in some or all cases. Some of them only trigger the subjunctive when referring to the future, however, as a few of them don't necessarily assume the future. These are expressions like a menos que, sin que, para que, antes que and con tal de que. Some people add an S to the WEIRDO acronym and call those Speculations. I don't generally like to do that, because this group really doesn't obey the other rules at all. But here is a link to a video which reviews the WEIRDOS acronym including these which is probably the best reinforcement for my explanation if people are confused.
Exactly. There are only a couple of criteria for this form which requires the subjunctive. There must be two subjects in two clauses joined by que and the first verb has to be a WEIRDO verb expressing a Wish, Emotion, Impersonal expression, Recommendations/Requests Doubts or Ojalá. So since you have the two clauses with two subjects joined by que, the verb esperar is the only element required to justify the subjunctive. Here's a link that explains it simply.
I like the simple layout here, but it has a couple of variations I don't quite like. The first is minor. They include the Imperative under Wishes and I learned it under Recommendations. But more significantly she includes the S for Speculation at the end of the acronym. By adding the S, they cover all situations where the subjunctive is required in Spanish. But the adverbial conjunctions listed there are obviously not verbs and also replaced que as the conjugation, although most of them do contain que . So these break the very rule they described. I just think that a sentence like Debe terminar la prueba antes de que acabe el tiempo which requires the subjunctive mostly due to antes de que looks enough different to deserve its own rule. But as I said, together they show the whole picture of when the subjunctive is required, although people may opt to express doubt simply by using the subjunctive in some cases like reported speech., especially in the past tense
Thanks, that's useful - I've bookmarked Prof Jason's channel.
On another sentence in this unit, somebody recommended the practice quizzes on Spanish dict. Start here, http://www.spanishdict.com/grammar, then click on "Practice Quiz" next to "Subjunctive vs. Indicative - WEIRDO vs. SPOCK", and go through the quiz. When you finally get 90%, go onto the next quiz that it suggests. The first day, I spent about an hour and got through 3 or 4 quizzes, and by then, I felt like I had a pretty good hold on the subjunctive.
I didn't bother reading the lesson first, since it explains the relevant rule for each question, whether you get it right or wrong.
(I finally looked at the lesson itself just now, and found out what WEIRDO vs SPOCK means. They are mnemonics.)
The first example that you gave is gramatically incorrect for what you're trying to convey: should be "we hope that there will be more research" That being said: to translate these two phrases, you use the future subjunctive for the former and the present subjective for the latter sentence.
-Esperamos que hubiere (we hope there will be)
-Esperamos que haya (we hope there is)
Also: -Esperamos que hubiera (We hope there was)
"We hope there be more investigation." This was given as a possible correct answer!? It's not even proper English.
I translated "Esperamos que" as "We expect that". Granted that "We hope that" is clearly correct, but is "We expect that" also correct, or is the existence of the subjunctive a clue?
arghratings, i think subjunctive is the clue of hope vs expectations. If it was "we expect that there will be", i think it would be "esperamos habrá". Though, "esperar" in my Larousse has "creer" pretty low on the list of definitions. Mostly, esperar implies doubt, whether hoping, waiting, or whatever. 9/2014
It can be "hope" or "expect". Although "hope" is more likely to use the subjunctive and "expect" often uses the indicative, it's not quite so simple. Either can be subjunctive, and either can be indicative. It is when followed by "que" THEN the subjunctive must be used.
Here are some examples (from SpanishDict.com) that use "esperar que" as "expect" triggering the subjunctive...
- esperaban que les pidiera perdón = they were expecting him to apologize
- ¿acaso esperas que pague yo? = you're not expecting me to pay, are you?
And here's an example (also from SpanishDict.com) where "esperar" = "hope" that is not subjunctive...
- espero llegar a tiempo = I hope to arrive on time;
Same was for me.
My thoughts about this problem of TRANSLATION of spanish SUBJUNCTIVE into english:
it COULD BE translated using MANY ways, but somehow people use common accepted (by whom actually?!) BORING translations. And these commonly accepted (fashionable, modern, etc.) translations by DL are INCONSISTENT AT LEAST, if not WRONG. I find these common translations boring and unimaginable and dry. WHERE IS THE DOUBT?! Emotional, doubtful thought in spanish deserve the same emotional, vivid level in english.
Another point: I know WHAT IS SUBJUNCTIVE. Spanish speaking person KNOWS what is subjunctive. If I say something using subjunctive, they will get it. And vice versa. I do not care what DL puts here as a translation, and do not care anymore about this "accepted correct translation of the subjunctive" nonsense.
Why downvote me? I was showing empathy not sarcasm. Vito, you make several excellent points, and I admire your "chutzpah" and rebel spirit. I totally get where you are coming from but I fear the English language lacks the equivalent passion required to do justice to Spanish subjunctive sentences on occasion. We can always try to convey the most approximate translation, but there will always be cultural differences making this difficult at the best of times.
Ahem, lynettemcw, 'we hope that there be more research' is most definitely not current BrE usage, except in the hands of the most prescriptive of grammarians. It is archaic - and pretentious. 'We hope that there is/may be/can be/will be more research' are all acceptable in current BrE.
I think literally speaking it is possible, although I am not sure what Duo would do with that. The Spanish subjunctive used to have a future form, in fact you will still see it some places. But I was taught that it fell out of use because the present subjunctive, which indicates doubt, already had future implications. So, since this sentence has to be subjunctive, the English future should be reflected by the Spanish present subjunctive.
Technically, it would translate as "We hoped that there is more research." You have a tense disagreement here. But if it was "Esperamos que hubiera más investigación," then it would work. :) Although, it might be "Esperaba" here. I'm terrible with preterite vs. imperfect.
It's not really using subjunctive, per se. Rather, it's using the imperative form, as conjugated below:
So it is the same conjugation as subjunctive in the affirmative nosotros form, but the imperative voice is a completely different tense from present subjunctive. :)
First of all, look at the English sentence:
We hope that there is more research.
Since we have a present-tense English verb, we must use a present-tense Spanish verb, which would be "haya."
Now as for why we use a present-tense verb. In both English and Spanish, we sometimes use present tense to talk about events happening in the immediate future. For example, "He arrives today at 7:00" or "Llega hoy a las siete." Of course, "He will arrive today at 7:00" and "Llegará hoy a las siete" (future) are equally as correct. However, when translating, we have to make sure we don't change the tense of the sentence, as that changes its meaning slightly, and it's simply not a good translation, especially in an academic setting.
So, "Esperamos que hubiere (not habrá) más investigación" is a grammatically correct sentence, but it is not a correct translation.
Also, it seems as if you've mistyped your link. Here is the functional link: http://www.spanishdict.com/conjugate/haber
Hope that helped!
No, it shouldn't. Not only are "expect"and "hope" completely different words, they aren't even synonyms. Something that people need to remember is that, while your translation may be grammatically perfect, it still has to match the meaning of the original sentence. "Expect" changes the sentence from a statement of "It might not but I hope so" to "I'm pretty sure it will." Not only that, but "hope" implies you want it to happen while "expect"does not.
No haya is Presente Subjuntivo of the impersonal hay = there is/ are http://www.123teachme.com/spanish_verb_conjugation/haber_imp
esperar que ... etc. trigger subjunctive tense http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/subj5.htm
Esperar can mean either either wait for or hope.
But the grammatical structure of this sentence shows that it is hope here. This is a classic sentence for the subjunctive in Spanish. It is two clauses with two subjects joined by que and the first verb is a WEIRDO verb. Esperar meaning to hope is a WEIRDO verb because it expresses a Wish. But esperar meaning to wait does not express a Wish, Emotion, Impersonal expression, Recommendation, Doubt or Ojalá. This would mean that, even if you could find a meaningful translation using wait, the second verb would not be in the subjunctive.
You got caught in the haber trap. Since haber is the auxiliary verb used in the perfect tenses, we think of it as sometimes translating as have. But you only translate as have when it is an auxiliary verb and followed by a past participle. All the other uses of to have in English are translated with Tener. To have an investigation would be tener una investigación. The only other function of the verb is reserved to the third person singular form in its various tenses and moods, although the present indicative form has been somewhat mutated into hay from ha. This is the there is expression we find in this sentence. With two clauses and two subjects joined by que and the initial verb being a WEIRDO verb, it is a textbook subjunctive. We wish that there were more research. It would also work with the cognate investigation, but this sentence seems somewhat more likely to be about research without context.
Duo reserves the present progressive translations for the Spanish present progressive unless there is no good way around it. Here the present tense works best anyway. You are correct in that the that is not required in English. But since the que along with the WEIRDO verb in the first clause signal the subjunctive in the second clause, it doesn't hurt that there is something to reinforce the that in the translation. There are some of these sentences where it would sound strange to add that, but here it would probably more common to say that than not.
Duo reserves the English present progressive translations for the Spanish present progressive forms except where it makes it awkward in English. There use is not parallel but it's a technique for controlling what tenses you are practicing. Tense for tense as much as possible.
This is the most common sentence structure that requires the subjunctive in Spanish. There are two clauses with two different subjects joined with que and the first verb is a WEIRDO verb expressing a Wish Emotion Impersonal expression, Request, Doubt or Ojalá. If these three conditions are present, you MUST use the subjunctive for the second verb. English doesn't give much help here. We don't use the subjunctive nearly as often as Spanish, and it sometimes takes a different form. But when thinking about these constructions with WEIRDO verbs the best way to understand them is to substitute I wish for the Spanish verb. Wish in English is a verb which requires the subjunctive where others don't. Consider the difference between I want you to go to the store and I wish you would go to the store. Wish always requires that would with the verb, the indicator of the English subjunctive.
You are certainly correct that "that there is" in indicative, not subjunctive. But that's because the verb hope does not take the subjunctive in English, although it does in Spanish. That's why that be sounds funky, if not wrong, to people. Most people would hear your sentence as will be, in the future. The English verb wish does take the subjunctive, and if you substitute wish for hope here, you get the more usual subjunctive construction of I wish that there were more research. Attempting a subjunctive translation where the English does not use the subjunctive is not the correct way to go, just as it would be incorrect to use an indicative translation into Spanish just because the English uses the indicative.
The word "hope" does take the subjunctive in English.
Essentially, the subjunctive is used for "wish, desire, demand, request, suggestion." "Hope" comes under the "wish" category.
To make it simple, the English subjunctive pretty much corresponds to the Spanish subjunctive.
Basically, the subjunctive is used for "contrary to fact", or to express doubt. Under "doubt" come wish, regret, request, demand, proposal, and I suggest, "hope". ("Hope" is also very close to "wish") (ttps://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbs.aspx http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000031.htm
Especially, see this, which specifically mentions "hope" as a trigger in English: https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/grammar_moods.html
Saying that something is there refers to either a physical or an abstract place. But saying there is something is simply discussing the existence of it. They are not quite the same thing. Yours would be Esperamos que está más investigación está allí. Haber is only used for the abstract concept of there is or there are (in the various tenses and moods) not saying something is there.
Well this sentence is a little hard to translate in such a way as to demonstrate that you understand the grammar at play in the Spanish sentence, so they are using their strongest tense for tense rules, but in this case it is probably overkill. Duo used to consistently mark progressive translations of Spanish present tense sentences as wrong. They have gotten a lot better on that front in terms of allowing translation to the progressive when it is awkward not to, but here the verb is to hope. Verbs like to hope and to want and to think are ones where the English rules for the use of the progressive are closer to the Spanish. We often say I hope, I want or I think to say what you hope, want or think right now without using the progressive. This contrasts with most verbs like to work or to run where it is only the progressive that says you are doing it right now. So certainly for these verbs reflecting the actual tense of the Spanish makes sense. The other issue is the use of the future in the second clause although it isn't necessarily wrong. The verb is the second clause is in the present subjunctive in Spanish, so Duo wants the English equivalent. Unfortunately it is only the past subjunctive that is ever obvious in English, but even that isn't true often. The problem with that idea is that the Spanish future subjunctive is obsolete and the present subjunctive does play both parts, so your use of the future in the second clause would also use the present subjunctive in Spanish. But since the simple future and the present subjunctive are practiced less on Duo, I suspect they just want to be sure you are correctly interpreting the tense and mood.
When it gets to sentences like this with more difficult grammar points to illustrate, I tend to give more leniency toward Duo enforcing it's tense for tense convention. I know I tend to overuse the analogy, but Duo's conventions are their way of asking the student to essentially show their work like in a Math class. But your translation is not invalid, to intentionally use a double negative.
Yes and no. Unlike French and German, Spanish does have a present progressive form. When I first started on Duo maybe five years ago, they almost never accepted progressive forms in translation for the present tense. It wasn't because it was wrong, it often is correct, but Duo wanted to maintain a strict tense for tense system because it works well for an academic tool. If Duo can use the tense of the example to dictate the tense of the answer, they can control what you practice and limit the number of correct translations that they must accept that are beyond the scope of what they are trying to teach. But over the years more and more exceptions have crept in, because some sentences sound strange when they aren't in the progressive. But when you get to verbs describing internal processes like esperar, pensar, creer, sentir and all the modal verbs. The English equivalent of these verbs are ones which are we are much less likely to use in the progressive. If you are in the middle of performing an action verb, you essentially never use the present tense to express that in English, you use the progressive. But these verbs describing internal processes we often use the present tense to describe our current thoughts, feelings, beliefs hopes and fears. We are more likely to say I think, I hope, I know, etc than I am thinking, I am hoping or I am knowing, although the first two would be more likely than the last. The point here is that for the verbs that we don't consistently use the present progressive for, when we do use it is a lot more parallel to the Spanish present progressive which is only used to emphasize that something is ongoing. So here the tense for tense convention actually makes more sense.
It is helpful to become aware of the differences between these classes of verbs. Not only is it helpful here, those internal process verbs in Spanish are pretty much the same ones that are quite comfortable in the imperfect when using the past.
No. That translation doesn't reflect the conditions which require the subjunctive in the Spanish sentence. Those conditions are two clauses with two different subjects. The only thing that can vary in the translation is that the English translation doesn't have to include "that", although the Spanish does have to have. Also I don't believe that esperar is a WEIRDO verb when it means to wait. Only when it means to hope. So essentially you have translated this sentence as one that would not be subjunctive instead of what is above. Although many of the English sentences won't actually be in the subjunctive, the conditions that caused it in Spanish must be translated.
Actually that's not THAT uncommon. It probably happens every day to one of the many Duo users, although not very often to any one. I have never been able to decide which is the less confusing result of Duo fluking and not accepting an answer it always accepts, to see your exact answer as the correction, or to see some random other possible correct answer and to have to wonder why yours was wrong. The latter scenario has led people to make some bad assumptions, although some of them only about Duo. Most of the time it is just an isolated problem, though it will sometimes (but rarely) seems to require you to quit and come back in to reset. The good thing about it happening this way is that should it happen where you get some other weird answer it will probably at least consider that it just might be a Duo fluke.
As for it not having the my answer should have been accepted, you can always enter a comment on that annoying "other" line, although it doesn't spell check, etc. I can tell you from experience those comments do get read, although not any faster than anything else on Duo.
hay = there is/are in present indicative
haya = there is/ are in present subjunctive
Hay is the morphed version of the present indicative of haber that means there is or there are. Hay is the only tense or mood of haber for this meaning that isn't the normal conjugation of the third person singular. Haya is the present subjunctive. This sentence has the three criteria necessary to require that the second verb be in the subjunctive. 1. Two clauses joined by que. 2. Two different subjects and 3. The first verb is a WEIRDO verb expressing a Wish Emotion Indirect statement Recommendations Doubt Ojalá. In this case they translate the same. The subjunctive mood exists in English, but it often has no lexical markers, especially the present subjunctive. And different situations often involve different strategies in English. Adding may or might would make it more obviously subjunctive, but this sentence is a mandatory subjunctive. The grammar reinforces that what you want may not happen. But it doesn't necessarily mean the speaker has any doubt. Might is generally added by a speaker to indicate that he is unsure, which is more appropriate for the voluntary subjunctive.
The english sentence in this case is a compound of two clauses "We are hoping" and "There will be more research." Generally linking two clauses requires a conjunction, in this case it is "that". But modern usage frequently drops the conjunction. This means "We are hoping there will be more research" is not wrong, but in principle what is happening is the the conjunction "that" is being understood, and not spoken/written. Using an "understood" word in an expression certainly does NOT make using the conjunction wrong, Same as if I say to someone "open the door please" what I am actually saying is "you open the door please" since an english sentence needs a subject. So saying "you open the door please" is not wrong, although to be more polite I would say "could you open the door please".