1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Spanish
  4. >
  5. "Vamos a vender los zapatos."

"Vamos a vender los zapatos."

Translation:We are going to sell the shoes.

October 10, 2013



I, too, think "let's sell the shoes" os correct. It would just have a different lesson context


I agree on this too. They should be more specific with this question.


"Let's sell the shoes" is correct


Vamos means "we are going to" - it's in the affirmative.

"Let's sell the shoes" is a suggestion. It can be used colloquially to be an affirmation, exactly like the idiom, "Let's do this!" Though, if you are speaking with strangers or with even slight formality it wouldn't be a definite order like, "we are going to"

Also, depending on context, "we are going to" can be pointing to a less strict timeline future scenario. Whereas, "let's" would still be a suggestion.

"Let's sell shoes." "Good idea! We are going to sell shoes."


That would technically be the nosotros imperative form of 'vender': "Vendamos los zapatos," though in reality people may use "vamos a" instead for this purpose


"Vamos" is a typical imperative way to say "let us go". While "Nosotros vamos" is not.


Later, DL will teach "vamos a" as a form of imperative as in "let's sell the shoes.

However, often the imperative is indicated by an exclamation mark (!) "Let's see the shoes!" = "Vamos a vender..."



The DL translation is not the best. A better translation is "We are going to sell the shoes" "We will sell the shoes" = "Venderemos los zapatos"


What about "We will sell shoes."? Can't "los zapatos" translate to "shoes" or "the shoes" depending on the context? I thought the word "the" in Spanish was just thrown in their in ways which would be redundant or incorrect in English.


"We will sell shoes" = "Venderemos zapatos" "Los zapatos" refers to specific shoes, the ones that yo have already talked about. "Zapatos" without the article means shoes in general; you are going to into the business of selling shoes. The articles are not superfluous or redundant.


My understanding is: If it were "...sell red shoes", it would be "...los zapatos rojos" Spanish uses the article when the direct object (shoes) is modified).

However, in this sentence, there is no "los" because a definite article is not used with an indefinite amount, an unknown quantity. If you can put the words "some" or "any" before it, it is an indefinite (unknown) quantity.

HTTPS://WWW.THOUGHTCO.COM/UNCOUNTABLE-NOUN-SPANISH-3079280 http://www.fluentu.com/spanish/blog/definite-and-indefinite-articles-in-spanish/


The second part of your explanation is correct, but the first part isn't. Modifications don't influence the use of the definite article. (Only of the indefinite one in, for instance, job descriptions.)

"We are going to sell red shoes" would still be "Vamos a vender zapatos rojos." If you say "los zapatos rojos" it would again be "the red shoes".


'We ARE GOING TO sell the shoes' seems like a more accurate translation from what I understand here. If one replaces 'are going to' with 'will', won't that change the Spanish sentence? I sometimes think in Spanish without realizing it and type spanish when I am supposed to type english^^ I guess it's a good sign that I am learning alot:)


Sell the suit first, then sell the shoes...:-)


we are going to sell shoes.

should be acceptable.


But it won't be.
Because it's about 'the' shoes.
Not shoes in general.


Why is Let us sell the shoes wrong?


This particular lesson is teaching the ir +a + infinitive construct to talk about future events. Let's - is correct, but it's a different usage.


It has a different meaning... We will sell the shoes : that's what we're gonna do. Let us sell the shoes: you're asking permission to sell. Completely different meaning !


Is "(to) sell........down the river" really a sentence used in Spanish? I thought things only got sold down the river in the USA.


I don't understand your question? There is nothing about a river in this sentence.


por favor, no mi Jordan :(


Right, otherwise how we are going to defend the country.


And keep the television


On hover: "We are selling the shoes"; and yet your claim is that the correct definition is "We will sell the shoes", despite not appearing on hover.


but we're definitely not selling the pants XD


Why not "les zapatos"?


Les is not an article. The definite articles (that translate to "the" in English) are el (masc sing), la (fem sing), los (masc plur), and las (fem plur).

Les, on the other hand, is an indirect object pronoun, and translates as "to/for them", mostly: "Les di buena comida" - "I gave good food to them."


Why does v sound so much like b in Spanish?


In Spanish, 'b' and 'v' make the exact same sounds, but two different ones. At the beginning of a sentence, after a pause, or after 'm' and 'n' it sounds like 'b', everywhere else like a softer 'v'. So the sentence

Bebemos vino en invierno. (We drink wine in winter)

is going to sound more like

"Bevemos vino en inbierno."


I agree with many of the comments. 'We will sell' is 'Venderemos'.


I thought I argued about this one, but your description on hover is still wrong. Why is it "We'll sell the shoes" rather than "We are selling the shoes"?


"We are selling the shoes" is present progressive tense (which Spanish has as well), but the construction "ir a [verb]" denotes the phrasal future tense, a pretty direct translation of the English "to be going to [verb]".

"Going to" future and "will" future are often interchanged in this course (which I'm not a big fan of), so this sentence allows both the translations "We are going to sell the shoes" and "We will sell the shoes".


So what's wrong with 'We're going to sell the shoes'?


Bruce, there's nothing wrong with that translation.


I agree. Thank you for the reassurance.

Learn Spanish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.