63 Comments This discussion is locked.
Sounds like it can mean "drank", but given that this tense has not been introduced yet, it's inappropriate to test the user on this topic.
The present (presente) and past (pretérito perfeito) tenses when using the pronoun ''Nós'' are exactly the same. Example: Nós bebemos leite. (we drink milk) This is a statement or fact that we drink milk. However adding a past tense word like yesterday (ontem) tells us that it is a past tense form we are speaking about Example: Nós bebemos leite ontem. (we drank milk yesterday.)
"drank" is the simple past. "drunk" is the past participle, as in "have drunk" and "had drunk".
It might sound weird. To native speakers, it would sound as if you drank "milk of chocolate". Like "milk of strawberry"
For drinks we would say "leite achocolatado" or just "achocolatado"... or "leite (com) sabor (de) chocolate" (the words in parentheses are optional in this case).
In some cases, people use the brand of chocolate milk (or equivalent) to describe what they are drinking. "Nós bebemos Nescau". Toddy and Toddynho are also pretty famous.
Or just "leite com chocolate."
No, I'm pretty sure we have both Nescau and Nesquik.
I think you want to use this sentence because you've noticed that "carrot cake" is translated by "bolo DE cenoura", but the raison why English language put "carrot cake" is because you have the noun "cake" and the ingredient/material before the noun, acting as an adjective. With "chocolate milk" it doesn't work, it's not really a milk, "made of chocolate", rather a milk "with" chocolate. The English grammar construction in "chocolate milk" is a bit unusual,"chocolated" or "chocolate-flavour" would be more logical.
I always said leite de chocolate, as well, but I guess that's just a Luso-American idiosyncrasy of mine. :/ However, leite com chocolate makes me think of a glass of milk with a bar of chocolate dunked into it. :)
I wrote we drink milk with chocolate and it literally correct. "Chocolate milk" is really the best answer, because it might suggest that "we drink milk with (a bar of) chocolate." There is nothing in the way that this can be written to express the idea of the chocolate and the milk being inseparable. Oh well, that is the vagueness of language.
I think "leite com chocolate" is a whole entity, if you want to say "I drink milk and chocolate", I guess you'll have another way to say it in Portuguese, as maybe "Eu bebo leite e chocolate"? And I don't know if we can say "bebo chocolate" alone, as you probably can't say "I drink chocolate" in English.
"Nós bebemos leite com chocolate." can this be translated as 'We drink milk with chocolate" because 'com' in Portuguese mean with and the true word to word translation gives that sentence
A question for native English speakers: As the idiomatic way to say it in English is "chocolate milk" if you use "milk with chocolate (even if people would guess what you mean), can it imply you drink milk alongside with chocolate (but it seems difficult to drink milk and chocolate since it implies that chocolate have to been liquid, and in consequence, maybe added with milk)
Maybe it's better to use "milk with chocolate" when you are still learning, because it's more litteral, but "chocolate milk" seems better because it prevents from being confused.
I'm a native speaker of American English, and saying "I drink X with Y" can be parsed differently depending on what Y is.
"I drink coffee with cinnamon" means "I like to sprinkle cinnamon in my coffee" but "I drink Pepsi with dinner" means that Pepsi is my beverage of choice to wash down my casserole.
"I drink milk with chocolate" can be a little ambiguous because it can mean "I like to add some chocolaty thing to my milk" although I think the first thing people would think of in this case would be "I enjoy drinking milk while I eat chocolate."
But whenever the end result is "X flavored with Y," (as with "coffee with cinnamon") it always means that you're the one who added Y as you prepared it or as you're sitting there drinking it. It never means it came like that. Then it would be "YX" as in "chocolate milk."
And now you're thinking "Wait, so adding chocolate to milk doesn't make chocolate milk?" Sure it can, but saying "milk with chocolate" implies that the end result is something other than what most people would accept as proper chocolate milk. "Cardamom tea" implies that the tea was prepared from the start with cardamom, whereas "tea with cardamom" implies that you simply added a little cardamom after you made some plain tea.
I hope that helps. This is one of those things that native speakers just take for granted, and don't realize how subtle it is until they try to explain it to someone who's a foreign speaker!
I'm surprised that answer was accepted, I thought drinking would use bebendo.
Maybe their were being nice to me since I am still a low level learner! lol!
I think the difference is that you can say "I'm learning" in English, even if the action is not finished yet, but in Portuguese, you have to use the continuous tense only if the action is undergoing right now, so, there are a lot of cases where you can use the simple present in Portuguese, and translate it with a continuous tense in English.
Is "chocola-che" the correct pronunciation? This is a very important word to get right hahaha.
I do not understand the use of the word "com". Why isn't "leite chocolate" enough?
In Portuguese, just saying leite chocolate is the same as just saying two random, unrelated things. Like elephant, plate. The language requires at least one word to determine the relationship between both nouns, or one of the words to be turned into an adjective in order to describe the whole.
Like, for example, milk with chocolate, milk and chocolate, milky chocolate, chocolate-y milk, milk of chocolate and so on. Please take a look at the other comments and you'll see some more explanations. I hope it helps! =]
Hi , i think when are learning some lenguages has learn it like it is . When you are learn spanish is very dificult for some body end when they are learn it ask why this of why that , jus only have to learn like is.
I reckon this is how you find out that preteritum and present have the same form here /we - drink/
That would make sense... but for the other languages, they separate learning verbs in their different tenses. It would be a little much to throw in a preterit verb practice drill at that point!
I meant to write "drink" and it changed to "drunk" and it was considered wrong. Shouldn't it be considered a spelling error?
it was considered wrong (and not a spelling error) because it happens to be the past participle (often called the "third column form") of the verb drink.....in other words; if you wrote "dronk" or "drenk" or whatever, it would be considered a spelling mistake, but "drank" (the past simple) and "drunk" (the past participle form) are considered wrong because they are legitimate forms of the verb, but not in the tense that is required here :)
It might be considered a typo if what you produced wasn't a word. But when you end up with a real word, the program can't tell if it's just a typo or a genuine error, and assumes it's a genuine error.
For example, "Let's go eat" and "Let's go east" are both perfectly sensible and grammatical sentences, but they mean two entirely different things. If you're learning English and typed the one where it should have been the other, then you translated it wrong. Without a human to make a judgment call, the computer errs on the side of calling it wrong.
In English, a word like "listen" usually requires "to" immediately after it, right? Similarly, "gostar" usually requires "de" (pronounced like "gee") after. So the sentence should be "Eu gosto de chocolate". =]
Why is the article "con" there? Would that not translate to "milk with chocolate?"
That is just the way to say "chocolate milk." Please read the other comments before posting.
Não vejo nenhum "had." Não entendo do que é que você está a falar. Em inglês, também pode-se dizer "I had chocolate milk." = «Tive leite com chocolate.» porque é entendido que o leite foi bebido. Será que é a isto que você refere-se?
I believe that «t» is pronounced [t͡ʃ ] whenever an «e» or an «i» follows. In European Portuguese, though, «t» is always pronounced [t].
That comes up as an emoji on my comp. I assume you mean "ch" sound when e or i follows?
Yes, that's what they meant. They were using proper IPA symbols: the "t" with the character that represents "sh" with a tie bar over them to indicate simultaneous phonation. In English: "ch".
It seems to me that "te" at the end of a word is pronounced "chay" or "chee".
No. In English "chocolate with milk" is two different things. One thing is chocolate, and and the other thing is milk.
"Chocolate milk" is milk flavored like chocolate.
"Milk chocolate" is a kind of chocolate that is made with milk.
In English, the adjective comes before the noun. So first is the adjective that describes it, and then comes the noun, the thing that it is.
Just a doubt..the pronunciation of the male and female voices sounds different (or this is my perception!) As for example "chocolaCHe" (as English CHannel) and "chocolaTe". Is this the difference between Portugal Portuguese and Brasilian Portuguese?
Só stupid, what the different if i said "milk chocolate" or "chocolate milk" !!!! So stupid
No, it's not missing. It's not needed. Different languages say things different ways.
I figured com = with. So- leite com chocolate = milk with chocolate. leite e chocolate = milk and chocolate.