142 Comments This discussion is locked.
Never really thought about holding/carrying a child as "wearing" him. This sentence definitely needs better dictionary hints. Really, what this site needs is "expression hints" for when learning one word just isn't going to teach you the sentence.
Llevar can be translated mostly as "to take". There is no "to wear" in Spanish, and how you get that verb is by "llevar puesto". Unfortunately "puesto" is commonly omitted because normally the context will tell you where are you standing. I believe if you remember this, you'll be fine.
llevar also means to carry, I first learned it as meaning to carry so when you say "ella esta llevando un vestido", you are literally saying she is carrying a dress but it translates to wear.
But in a sense she is physically carrying just not in a literal sense with her hands... Idk why it seems to help so I can wrap my head around this concept...
Yes, in the context of clothes "llevar" can obviously mean "to wear" which is the same as carrying around clothes but just not using your hands.
@RamNagel, in your message below, where it is below, because the Duolingo programmers recently altogether totally screwed up where messages get shown in a thread, what I think you mean is that "llevar" can be translated as the English word, "wear," and not that it MEANS "wear" because the situation is just as RAMOSRAUL directly stated: "there is no 'to wear' in Spanish." This means there is no Spanish word which MEANS "wear." What a word means in a language and what the word can be translated to in another language are two entirely different matters, and it is a gross error to be using the words, "MEAN," and, "TRANSLATE," interchangably.
And as far as "in the context of clothes" is concerned there are a great many instances in which the English verb,"take" would apply. Many, many, many.
This is not a matter if opinion or preferernce or whatever one might like to believe about what seems to oneself to be "obvious."
It is the way it is. Like or not, accept it or not. It is reality.
Tocar is to touch, also to play an instrument. I cannot figure out from the top of my head a special situation where that could be the case, so I would quite confidently say "no, it isn't"
"Tomar" to take, i see as take in like food or drink, or take for yourself. Whereas llevar, to take, meaning take somewhere else.
Thanks for clearing this up, I translated "He wears the red shoes" wrong. I translated that he took the shoes since that's how I always understood it as a kid.
and in ancient greek ' φοράω - φορώ ' (though now a days it only means wear)
Similar in Lithuanian... Nešti - to carry, nešioti (continuous) - to wear (or carry continuously).
And it is the same in Afrikaans (South African Dutch): "dra" is to wear and carry. In the context of clothes, obviously the "wear" usage is more common.
I learned in school that llevar is more "to carry", but that's basically the same as "to take".
I played this slowly several time, and all I could hear was "chiva" for lleva.
There are places is South America that pronounce LL (and Y) kind of like the 's' in measure. Por ejemplo, llamar sounds like zhamar and yo is zho
Its like how some people pronounce the double L with a "j" sound, I guess the s~z sound is in between those two...
Like the si in vision? It's how we pronounce the j in Portuguese and French.
yes, living in Spain taught me that they pronounce 'll' like 'hy'. like a 'y' sound, but with this heavy breath before it like 'h'. /h/yeva :)
My boyfriend is 100% mexican and says they pronounce ll like a j. So lleva is pronounced jeva. The duolingo spanish has been great for me since it is mexican influence xD
In english, to take someone to bed implies a romantic situation. I.e. you would put your child to bed, but never take them to bed. Is there a way to distinguish this in spanish? This seems to mean the former but not the latter.
In spanish is not romantic when is a child. you can take a child to the bed, but this is not romatic. If you take your girlfriend to the bed, this is romantic.
If you translated el niño as the child, then no. Not romantic at all, but if you translated it as the boy, then it could depending on context. Boy does suggest youth, but not necessarily so much youth that a sexual context is inappropriate. So "She takes the boy to bed," can certainly be read as being a bit racy. At least in English.
I think that in Hispanish "Ella se lleva al muchacho a la cama", can certainly be read as being a bit racy. But if we used the word "niño" this is inappropriate.
We. Are. Not. Learning. English. I'm sorry, but it is kind of frustrating for me to constantly read "In English we say this..." We are learning Spanish - not as a translation of English, but as it's own language.
That being said, I took/carried my children to bed every night until they outgrew it. <shrug>
I also read this and thought it had a romantic connotation. ie. 'She takes the boy to bed' ... of course this is a little creepy.
Just an observation: It's interesting how it's creepy in English, but not (as far as I know), Malay, Arabic, Spanish, or Mandarin.
I agree. Nice way to put it. You can't really say much of anything in English around the wrong people and have it NOT sound like some sort of innuendo....
Think of the translation as "to carry" instead of "to take". In English, we say "She carries the child to bed. "
michisjourdi's explanation of al nino vs el nino obviously still has some of us confused. Can someone please explain why you would say. 'Ella lleva a la nina a la cama" instead of " Ella lleve la nina a la cama.
when the object of the verb is a person, you have to use "a" after the verb. and then "a" + "el" = "al"
I think the idea is to learn how to use "llevar" in Spanish, with it's objects. Aside from that, yes, that's the meaning of the sentence after all. Although there are many expressions similar to this one, the right idiom you are looking for there is "Ella acuesta al niño". That's the equivalent to "She puts the child to bed".
Acostar is a verb that means "the process to lay". You can say "acostado = laying (in bed)" as in: -Would you come and play paintball with us in the living room? -No, I'm in bed already = No, ya estoy acostado. This verb is mainly used with people, although can be used some times with animals. However the correct use for animals and things is "tumbar(se)". In Spain is rather common to use "tumbar" for people too, so do not be offended if you ever hear it, but you can remark the right use ;)
You folks discussing these sentences is sooooo helpful. Thank you. This ability is truly what sets Duolingo apart.
Not only that but "She takes the child to bed." can mean that she is having sex with the child
Funny enough, it can also mean that in Spanish. Though acostarse con [somebody] would mean that (among the long list of verbs for this purpose, this is no vulgarism), llevar a [someody] a la cama can also be used. I do believe is perhaps linked with a translation from English.... but really I have no idea of the background.
Just as fun fact, Yacer (to lay) can be used as synonym of acostarse, although is "old" Spanish. You will find it in old texts and poetry though. The use is not exactly the same, as nobody would say "voy a yacer". It was used as acostarse con = yacer con. Nevertheless it is still used sometimes as "to lay" in a broader context.
i read somewhere that when you use a verb that refers to a person (i am not sure that i said this right), you always use A in front of that person.
Exemple> yo apoyo A mi padre; ella lee un livro a su hijo; veo a tu maestre entre los estudiantes...
i think that is the reason for AL (a+el)
Yes, when a person or personified object (like your pet) is the direct object, you use the personal 'a'. The direct object is the noun that is receiving the action of the transitive verb. "I kissed the king." The king is being kissed, so he is the direct object and would require the 'a' in Spanish.
You are correct about al=a+el too. In Spanish, a el becomes al.
I understand the "al" nino --- but I don't understand why the "a" before la cama?
'A' before 'la cama' is the more standard use of the word: to. Usually 'a' means 'to' when it is not the 'personal a'. She takes him where? to the bed.
What's the purpose of using "al" in this sentance? Whould it be still OK if there was "el" instead or does "al" imply the actual act of taking something from place to place?
al is a contraction of a + el and here you are using the personal a (referring to the child) so al is necessary. If you were to say, "She takes the (female) child to the bed." it would be Ella lleva a la niña a la cama.
Good question. Maybe the sentence would be the same? Ricky: "Yo llevo ropa a su casa." Lucy: "Well, I should hope so!"
For those of us confused by the «al» in this sentence, it is a contraction using the personal a and el. Those are a couple of grammer topics that are ignored in most immersion courses. Duo covered contractions in the prepositions tips but I haven't seen anything about personal a. Here is a good link: http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/persa.htm I hope this helps!
I found the expression "Comida para llevar" Take away or carry away food - helps me remember the meaning of "Llevar"
In Hispanic neighborhoods in the USA, you see signs "Comida para llever" or more commonly 'LLEVER" which in American English would translate to "Carry out" (food).
Can I not say brings the child to bed? Or is this English incorrect? I think I have said this mulitple times in English. I brought him to bed.
It is correct English. It may be that they don't accept bring because they want the translation for take/lleva.
Llevar could mean someone is holding or wearing something (context could clear it up; if it is obvious it is something worn then llevar can imply llevar puestro and puestro can be omitted). Llevar puestro means it is certainly worn and not being held.
When the object of the verb is a person you use a after the verb
A + El = Al
Why is it "lleva al niño" and not "lleva el niño" for takes the boy? I'm reading the like "she takes to the boy to the bed"...
Daniel - because whenever you have an action verb (take/lleva) + a masculine person (boy/ el niño) you have to have this "a" before the "el, and then the "a and the "el" become contracted to al. So, "take the boy/lleva el niño" becomes "lleva al niño". When it is a feminine person (like "niñA") it is "a la niña" [not contracted].
This is also done not just to persons but also to animals when you have personal relationship with one, like when it's your pet , for example, or your neighbor's.
"She brings the boy to the bed" is not the same as "She takes the boy to the bed"?
In English, "bring" refers to going toward something, while "take" refers to going away from something. For example: "Take him home, please." "Yes, I"ll bring him with me when I leave."
This would make her sentence even more correct. After all, you are "bringing" the boy towards the bed. Both are correct usage in this case.
Duolingo is trying to get you to use a specific word in this practice session "lleve" which means "take".
Isn't it pronounced [ieva] as in "year", not [jeva] as in "jungle"? Also, I never stumbled uppon "llevar AL nino". Shouldn't it be "Ella lleva EL nino al la cama"? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The soft J sound that you heard is fairly common in Latin America. You may have heard someone with a Mexican accent speaking English pronounce 'you' as 'jyū'. They do this because the consonantal y and ll sounds are pronounced as such with their dialect.
tomar = to take, llevar = wear (...clothes) or to bring (...something to someone, or somewhere)
Llevar is take, not bring. Traer is bring. Here are some examples for the differences between tomar and llevar. They aren't absolute definitive rules, rather they are descriptions of how the verbs are usually used.
Tomar is to take (for your personal use). So tomar for taking pills (as in you swallow them), taking taxis, taking a picture, take the train. Llevar is take as in you transport something. Take dish to a dinner. Take groceries to your mother. Take a tent when you camp. Take pills to somebody else.
This breaks down when the words aren't specifically meant as 'to take'. Llevar is used for clothes which are being worn, despite them being for personal use. As I noted, this isn't a foolproof method of determining which verb to use. It would be much easier if multiple words didn't have an exponential amount of meanings.
Which goes to show how even the translation/learning sites can be incorrect. I got my info on the two you corrected me on from them. Dang it!
More lingots for you. :)
Why not "Ella lleva el niño a la coma "? When should I use "al niño" instead of "el niño" /
Why before "el niño" is there an "a" ? ( al = a + el ) A takes B to C = A lleva a B a C ?
Why personal "a" is being used in the sentence. Also in , voy a la escuela.
That "a" in your example is a different "a" than the one used with a person/personified Direct Object, like "niño". That "a" in your sentence translates to the English preposition "to" (to the bed). Like in your phrase, "voy a la escuela" = "go(es) to school".
Why not "She puts the boy to bed"? "She takes the boy to the bed" sounds like she wants to make love to him.
"Take to bed", maybe. That can be ambiguous. I believe "take to the bed" only can mean physical relocation.
Hah! I do agree with you, but the Great Dogged Owl is so so so pertinacious. I've tried "to carry" for "llevar" many times in different exercises but it's never been accepted.
Ok, but, 'the boy' is ' el niño' , so why this sentence says: 'ella lleva AL niño a la cama' ?
al is a contraction of a el. When referring to a person, as opposed to an object, you normally put a "personal a" before the noun. So, because a boy is a person, "el niño" becomes "al niño".
The rules for the Personal a are a bit complicated, but you can read more about it here: http://www.studyspanish.com/lessons/persa.htm
Can someone explain the usage of 'al' and 'a la' again? I'm sorry, I often understand the explanations in context, then something like this comes up and it doesn't make sense again... "She takes to the boy to the bed".... Whyyyy!?
""al = a el"".......... but ---"a el"--- It is wrong.
I go to the school.... yo voy al colegio "or" yo voy a la escuela.
Why? because "colegio" is a masculine word and "escuela" is a female word
to the boy = al niño------------to the girl = a la niña.
Daniel, I've replied to your comment (above), but let me just add here, if I may. The Spanish "a" before "el niño" (al niño) and "la niña" (a la niña) has no English equivalent. It is called "the personal 'a'. This only occurs in Spanish but not in English.
But the "a" in "a la cama" translates to the English preposition "to".
"... to (the) school" = "a la escuela"
"... to (the) school" = "al colegio"
"... to the house" = "a la casa"
"... to the building" = "al edificio"
"... to (the) bed" = "a la cama"
So in other words, what you have here are two different "A's" which perform different functions in a sentence. Hope this helps.
I don't know that. Maybe, it is an effect of the literal translation?
She takes the child to the bed
llevar can also mean to carry,however,I played this sentence several times,and never caught the pronunciation as llevar,I heard it as "jevar" with a "J"
Could it also be "She brings the child to bed?" I entered this and was marked wrong but I thought llevar had the sense of "bring" as well.
Spanish differentiates between llevar and traer/take and bring. Let's think in first person present tense. Llevar is to take something to a place the speaker is not standing at the moment she is speaking. Traer is to bring an object to the location the speaker is currently at. So you can traer the child to bed if you are standing at the bed when you say it. You would use the verb llevar if you are going to take the child to bed and you are not currently in the bedroom when you describe your action.
I know that it gets murky in English for some speakers. We say we are bringing food to a dinner. In Spanish, you would have to use llevar unless you are already present at the dinner when you describe the action. Then you will have brought the food and therefore you would use traer. If you're going to the store to get food, again use traer because you are bringing it back home to where you are. Unless of course, you are taking it to somewhere you are not presently. Then you are llevando!
Nice! Thank you for the explanations. Now, to figure out how to store all of that in my head...
Have a lingo on me.
Thanks! Remember that this is a matter of perspective. The person at the dinner waiting for you to arrive will speak of what you are going to 'traer'. You will be 'llevando' something until you get there, at which point you 'trajiste' a dish.
Of course, llevar as 'carry' confuses this a little. Just remember that if you were already at the place you were carrying it to, you would have put it down already! If you are carrying it, you haven't yet arrived at the place it is going. This doesn't have to be true. You may just be showing your strength off. It's just a way to remember it and still have it make sense.
I was taught that llevar meant to bring, so I said "she brings the boy to the bed." Is there any reason why that would be unacceptable?
Llevar is take or carry. Traer is bring. In English we sometimes say bring when we mean take, but Spanish is more distinct.
Tienes razón y el computador del Duolingo no tiene la significa "to bring" para llevar. Se usa el verbo traer para "to bring".
I don't understand why "al" nino ????? and not "el" nino ????? please help !!
I wrote "Ella lleva el niño a la cama", but DL tells me it should be "Ella lleva al niño a la cama." How the heck is "al" correct?!
Your question is answered in the comments above. Please read comments before posting questions.
I couldn't find my answer there. I know that "al" is usually composed of "a" and "el", which means "to the". E.g.: Yo voy al colegio - I go to (the) college. By why would there be an "al" before "niño"?. This doesn't make ANY sense, since I'm taking THE boy (el niño) to bed.
This has to do with the personal "a" not "a as in to the". It is contracted "a + el" the same way.
This may have already been asked, but what is wrong with "Ella lleva el nino a la cama" (aside from no accent over the "n")?
For this sentence, might "put" be a better translation for "lleva?" To say "takes," in English, ever so slightly implies a sexual connotation, which context would clarify, however... You might be told to "take" the boy to his room, but it will be, "put" him to bed. Probably omit "the" before bed too.
Duolingo has never accepted "carry" for "llevar" (at least in my experience). I have tried using it in different exercises with "llevar" and it's always been declined. (Oct 27, 2015)
This is definitely unusual. The previous sentence was about a wife wearing a blue dress, then they use the same word for what a person is doing with/to a child, and I did initially think that it meant she wears the child to the bed...? When that didn't make sense I came here. So technically, because she is holding the child/has a child on her shoulder or in her arms, would carrying, taking, and holding also be lleva?