"Este dinheiro não vai dar para o mês todo."
Translation:This money is not going to last the whole month.
24 Comments
Here in Pennsylvania in the US we would say something more like "This money will not last all month." The phrase is trying to say that there is not enough money to last ,or be sufficient to cover all of the expenses that will be incurred, that month. So I used, "This money will not last all month." and got it wrong, but I still feel it is a better translation than "This money is not going to do for the whole month."
[Note: the model answer to the exercise has been changed and this comment applies to the version quoted by NaterStWilly at the top of the page.]
Without considering whether it is a good translation, I can't see anything wrong with the English sentence. I'm not sure why you are doubtful; is it because you don't like "do" here? If that's the case then see item 2 in the dictionary entry here: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/do
[Added later] It may make you feel happier with the current answer to see that this American dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/do also gives one meaning of "do" as "to be adequate or sufficient" so what the answer is really saying is "This money is not going to be sufficient for the whole month".
I would be happy with "do", but was corrected to "make", which is less known to me, at least. (I entered 'reach', which I agree wasn't the best choice, but wotds as "suffice" should be accepted, at least.) I was also corrected for entering "THESE money", so I guess it was only one note/coin... :-)
The variations "This money is not going to {do | make do | suffice} for the whole month" all seem fine to me.
In other circumstances you could say "these coins/notes" but never "these money" because, ironically, money is uncountable grammatically speaking.
It's perfectly good English where I come from (Ireland) and I imagine it's fine in the UK also.
760
I wrote "This money will not suffice for the whole month". Should I ask DL to accept my answer?
"Dar" does not mean "to do". The two words are equivalent only in the very specific sense of being sufficient to meet some need. We might say "This will not do" or in Portuguese "Isto não vai dar". They day the same thing but are both idiomatic expressions. We get to those expressions by different means. The English seems clear to native speakers - this will not do what I need to get done. The Portuguese phrase says that it will not give me ("dar") what I need to achieve my objectives. The different thought processes in English and Portuguese take us to the same place We use "dar" the same way in Spanish.
This is a clear explanation. Thank you, Coayuco. I hope you could be my tutor. French is my native language. Puis-je vous être utile?
I think "dar" is used idiomatically in this sentence and it just so happens that one way to express its meaning here is with "to do" but that doesn't imply it means "to do" more generally.
Yes, "dar" is used in lots of idiomatic expressions in Brazilian Portuguese where literal translation hardly ever works. Here's a very short list: http://www.netplaces.com/brazilian-portuguese/imperative-and-subjunctive-constructions/expression-with-the-verb-dar.htm.
- 108
I put "This money won't last all month", which it rejected, saying the correct translation is "This money's not going to last all month". Reported it.
- 1524
"This money will not be enough for the entire month."
Was accepted on 8/28/2014.
I think this is a sentence that shouldn't be translated literally. I got the general idea of the sentence and used my Spanish. Then translated the whole sentence into the best English equivalent.
What is wrong with substituting "won't" for "is not going to" in this translation?
not to quibble with the apparent idiom, but wouldn't "proporcionar" be a better choice than "dar."
