Is it just me, or are most of these gerund constructions unnatural (or at least unusual) in Spanish? For example, in this exercise, wouldn't you normally say, "¿Quién va a pagar el hotel?" The question as asked seems to imply someone is at the concierge desk paying RIGHT NOW.
Yes, this is a case where you can't literally translate the tense in Spanish into the same tense in English. In English, you can use the gerund to mean different things: Who is paying the hotel? (Who pays for the hotel? Who will pay for the hotel?) Someone is in downstairs paying the hotel for parking right now (or the room or the dinner last night). Who is paying the hotel? (Someone is currently in the process of giving money to the hotel.)
My understanding of the gerund in Spanish is that it is actually the latter, which isn't the first meaning you'd jump to in English without any context.
A major correction:
In English, the sentence "Who is paying for the hotel" had NO gerund in it. By definition, a gerund is a present participle (gerundio) that is being uses as a NOUN.
When the present participle (paying) is used with "is/are/were (etc.), the "present continuous tense is created.
Thus, in this Duo sentence, "who is paying", the word "paying" is a present participle used to create a present (continuous) progressive tense.
Unfortunately, Spanish translates the word "gerundio" into "gerund." But actually, the correct translation of "gerundio" is "present participle." "Gerund" and "gerundio" are false cognates ( cognados falsos, amigos falsos).
For further discussion of gerundios and present participles see these: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/27878080 https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/19031429 https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/26606766?from_email=comment&comment_id=28485014 https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/627/02/ http://grammar.spanishintexas.org/verbs/introduction-to-verbs/ http://elblogdelingles.blogspot.com/2007/02/lesson-45-ing-form-or-infinitive.html https://es.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/spanish-grammar-for-english-speakers#OLDO-Spanish-supp-03-p-23
Minor correction for"....who doesn't know whoever is paying..." "Whom" is for direct or indirect objects in a sentence. "Who" is for the subject.
Thus "who is paying whom".
Or, "you are giving what to whom?" Or, "Who is giving what to whom."
In this clause, ?whomsoever is paying", "whosoever" is the subject, and "whomsoever" is incorrect.
Spanish verb tenses allow you to be very precise if you wish but in casual speech are often used loosely. Estar + present participle (gerund) is the present progressive tense and implies an action that is going on right now. As you can see, in English, more words or phrases must be added to give the same exact meaning
"It's wrong." - "It's correct in these circumstances." You confuse me. :´)
With a bit of imagination you can come up with a needlessly complicated situation where it could perhaps apply. Like, you fell asleep in your hotel room of four while you discussed the payment of the room. When you wake up, you notice that two have left and the remaining friend informs you that the other two have gone down to pay. So, curious, you ask: "Who of them is paying the hotel?"
Yes, it's still not the most natural concept, but it has an application.
This gets a lot simpler if you translate "quién" as "which one of us".
And pagar means both "pay" or "pay for", depending on context.
Finally, if you read the English sentence literally, it would mean "Who is paying for ownership of the hotel." So, when you say "paying for", there is an understood "bill" or "expenses/costs" left off the end of the sentence: "Which one of us is paying for the hotel [bill]."
You make a good point. The English is really the confusing part here.
"Paying for the hotel" literally means either (a) the hotel is making a payment and someone (accountant, or whomever) has to do it. [for = on behalf of] or (b) someone's getting a new hotel, and you want to know who's paying for it.
The intent is "Who is paying the hotel for use of a hotel room" (or some service).
I'd call it a semi-idiom. It's almost literal, but the item "hotel" determines the meaning of the rest of the sentence. "Who's paying for Bob?" or "Who's paying for lunch?" and "Who's paying for the hotel?" each require different assumptions.
I think, in Spanish, "para" vs "por" (or neither) make it clear where it's not explicit in English.
LOL. I never meant to type "Pro" .........so again, if you will: "Yo pago la luz." (the light bill) "Yo pago el telefono." (the monthly phone bill). To my "ear" and not any expertise it seems sometimes I have choices: Pago la pizza OR pago por la pizza. Pago las vacaiones OR pago por las vaccines. Please comment! My Mexican house keeper finds them both acceptable and won't recommend one form over the other.
Both forms are correct, and as your house keeper seems to, she won't decide one over the other, because they're practically the same :)
Although, i would recommend the first one (Pago la pizza, pago las vacaciones), it's simpler, shorter, neater
The second option, to my tasting, is a little bit too... Defensive, as if you were fighting for the custody of something ("YO PAGUÉ POR ESAS VACACIONES!" - I paid for those vacations!) And all in all, "por" might or not be there -- depends on you, how you want to sound, where you are.
I still recommend the 1st one :).
Yes, what is convenient is that you will pay the hotel for the hotel.
If you decide to say who you are paying then you might want to say that you are paying that person for the item. Otherwise if you don't mention whom you are paying, it looks as though you don't need to say "por" because it is built into the verb.
The listener seems to understand that you are paying (the appropriate person to whom you would normally pay this to, for) the item.
You may want to indicate "por" whenever it could be ambiguous whether the noun following is the recipient of the money or what is being paid for or just to emphasize that this is what is being paid for.
You can even have a sentence in which you pay money (direct object) to someone (indirect object) for something or some service (object of preposition "for" in English.
In English you must use "for", but it is not required in Spanish especially if it is the only object.
If you don't specify another object or service that you are paying for, then what would you assume that you would be paying the hotel for? I would assume I was paying the hotel bill to the hotel. Which can also be worded as "I am paying for the hotel." (of course to the hotel)
I think you mean "Por" and "Pagar"
"Pago la pizza" is simply "I pay the pizza" "Pago por la pizza" is "I pay for the pizza"
Or "Lo hice por teléfono", which is "I did it OVER the phone"
"Por" as in for something, or by means of something
And please, as a last tip, you don't really need to use the personal pronoun "Yo pago la pizza" It's redundant, ugly, not useful, and wastes letters Unless you want to emphasize "who?", you don't really use personals; Spanish is pro-drop.
"¿Quién está pagando el hotel?" = "Who is paying FOR the hotel".
"¿Quién paga el hotel? = "Who pays FOR the hotel?"
"pagar" = to pay FOR
The word "for" is part of the verb.
I know it can also mean just "to pay", but in this sentence we need the word "for" in English.
It is acceptable with or without "por". It varies by region. Some people use "por"; other do not.