Menu
Home
Forum
Board
Writers
Local
Guest
|
![]() |
| cafeina,30.10.2005 | To enter to this site, you must write -and read, I hope- english (is this true?)
So, to anyone who want to play around, this is a good place to learn and understand english.
Let us teaching you how your spanish can be translated to english. | | |
| cafeina,30.10.2005 | An example could be:
¿How can I write "macho" in english?
It's easy: "macho" is "Rosendo".
For example, if you want to say "¿quién es macho?"
you could write: who is Rosendo? | | |
| Malomo,30.10.2005 | Rosendo doesn't sound too much "macho"
Kinda Pinky instead... | | |
| cafeina,30.10.2005 | Leeson 2:
A common expression in spanish is: "no entiendo un carajo".
There are so many ways, to say this with english words.
One of them, could be: "where in the world is lamparita?"
| | |
| cafeina,30.10.2005 | Kinda Pinky?
Wow! We must learn this!
Well, children; please pay attention:
The professor Malomo has a real and interesting new words to the translation forum.
If you say: "who is Kinda Pinky?"
The spanish translation, must be: "Rosendo es un Kinda Pinky".
But, dont forget the "macho" spanish word.
Repeat after me:
This is the ceiling, this is the floor, and Rosendo is not a macho.
| | |
| Malomo,30.10.2005 | Pinky asks: What are we going to do tonight Rosendo?
Rosendo answers: The same thing we do everynight Pinky: Try to conquer some stick.
Of course I'm talking about magic sticks also knowns as "wands". That's because Rosendo is the famous Wizard's Apprentice, in whom Dukas inspired his also famous musical score. | | |
| rosend,30.10.2005 | Wow, woooooooooow! What the f**k are you guys talking about?
I`m very macho, mind you, Rosendo was a character from Borges' "Hombre de la esquina rosada"
Don`t get confused, please.
Cafeìna, you really mistake me for the other guy, ceheneo, that guy was kinda sissy...
| | |
| cafeina,30.10.2005 | Are you talking about "Man of the pink corner?"
Please Rosend "the macho", speak english at this page.
Don't be the "usual disturbing man", if possible...
Dont ask for "peras" to the "olmo". | | |
| Aniuxa,30.10.2005 | jajajajaja
Where in the world is maitencillo??? | | |
| rosend,30.10.2005 | That's what I want to know, Where the hell is Maintecillo, she screw aour bussiness and run off, cafeìna...
Ypu know me , man, I'm an un-adapted, sorry, don`t know the wor in english | | |
| Rene-Caballero,31.10.2005 | | One assumes that we are going to learn english of people who know less english than we? | | |
| cafeina,31.10.2005 | No, Mr. Renné.
Please, teach us. | | |
| Rene-Caballero,31.10.2005 | | With much taste it would do it, but as soon as I know to say my name | | |
| Rene-Caballero,31.10.2005 | The lessons of the school of primary with rené
Verb to be
I am, was, will be
You are, were, will be
he is, was, will be
she is, was, will be
it is, was, will be
you are, were, will be
we are, were, will be
they are, were, will be. | | |
| rosend,31.10.2005 | Educating the un-adapted
Repeat after me
Learn to greet
Aprenda a saludar
What do you say?
¿Qué dice?
How does it dance to you?
¿Cómo le baila?
All wind?
¿Todo viento?
What wave, ox?
¿Qué onda, buey (México)
What are you doing, big egg?
¿Que haces, weón? (Chile)
General expressions
To the big whore/slut/bitch!
A la gran puta!
The big flute!
La gran flauta!
I don’t hunt a football
No cazo un fulbo
I live at 3000 John see fair Av., Good Airs
Vive en La Av. Juan B. Justo al 3000, Buenos Aires
| | |
| cafeina,31.10.2005 | ha ha ha ha
ho ho ho ho
Beautiful, Rosend "the macho"!
I'm now ready to travel to Colombia.
They speak english -as you know-, can you give me an example like: "quiero un porro".
How do you say this? | | |
| MyNameisCalami,31.10.2005 | | To say that you call me. Caaaaalaaaamiiiiiii. | | |
| ElSauce,31.10.2005 | Rosend "the macho"
jajajajajajajajajaja
sorry...
translating...
hahahahahahahahaha
| | |
| rosend,31.10.2005 | | Ah! ElSauce, I thought you were laughing at me | | |
| cafeina,01.11.2005 | In my whole fucking life, I never hear a more ridiculous nick like "MyNameIsCalami".
Okay, I will stand at the Cali bus station, and with my loud and beautiful voice, I will shout:
"I need a MyNameIsCalami"
( I hope someone will understand this... ) | | |
| MyNameisCalami,02.11.2005 | | Ridiculous but necessary. I`m your provider... | | |
| Malomo,02.11.2005 | D.E.A!!! FREEZE!!!!
You all are under arrest!!
You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to call a lawyer, if you can't pay a lawyer the government will provide you the worstest lawyer ever seen. You have the right to smile in the jail picture. You have the right to ask for vaseline if your cell partner is Motumbo. You have the right to go left. | | |
| ElSauce,02.11.2005 | hahahahaha
Nooooo, I was laughing at The Macho Man!! | | |
| cafeina,02.11.2005 | Why are we under arrest?
What we did?
Ohhh my God, who will feed my dog?
| | |
| maitencillo,03.11.2005 | Between no more and drink a chair: entre no más y tome asiento.
(By te way: maitencillo is here  ) | | |
| GAIUS,03.11.2005 | It is important to let the aspiring bilinguals who
come from romance languages to English, or any
other conceptual language, that syntax is the
most important object of study in order to acquire
some knowledge about sentence composition.
In Spanish, as in most Romance languages, the ru-
les of distribution is the top concern. In conceptual
languages, on the other hand, the rules of organiza-
tion are the top priority.
The basic order for the affirmative sentence in En-
glish is Subject-Verb-Complement; and newcomers
should stick to that order until a time when they
can safely risk more literary arrangements.
Interrogatives and negatives change that order, but
the manner of such change depends on the verbal
system to which the specific sentence belong-
If it is a non-auxiliary verb, the interrogative is formed by simply adding Do-Does at the beginning.
For the negative, by adding Don´t-Doesn´t (for
the third person singular) between the subject and
the Verb.
If it is an auxiliary verb (Ser/Estar=Be, Haber=Have
o Poder=Can) the interrogative is formed by inter-
changing the position of the subject and the verb.
I am happy Am I happy?
The negative is formed simply by putting together
the verb and the contraction of not without chan-
ging the basic order of the affirmative.
You are happy You aren't happy
Anytime a tense is formed by more than one word
in the verbal phrase, which is to say, the verb plus
either an auxiliary verb or an auxiliary form (like
will or would) the sentence should be ordered like
belonging to the auxiliary system explained above.
SYNTAX OF AFFIRMATIVE, NEGATIVE, INTERROGA-
TIVE IN AN AUXILIARY AND NON AUXILIARY VERB.
Auxiliary TO BE
PRESENT AFFIRMATIVE We are hot
INTERROG Are we hot?
NEGATIVE We aren't hot
PAST Affirmative We were hot
Interrogative Were We hot?
Negative We weren't hot
FUTURE Affirmative We will be hot
Interrogative Will we be hot?
Negative We Won't be hot
PROGR. Affirmative We are being hot
Interrogative Are we being hot?
Negative We aren't being hot
PAST Affirmative We were being hot
Interrogative Were we being hot?
Negative We weren't being hot
P. PERFECT Affirmative We have been hot
Interrog. Have we been hot?
Negative We haven't been hot
PS PERFECT Affirmative We had been hot
Interrog Had we been hot?
Negative We hadn't been hot
FUT PERF Affirmative We will have been hot
Interrog. Will we have been hot?
Negative We won't have been hot
CONDIT. Affirmative We would be hot
Interrog Would we be hot?
Negative We wouldn't be hot
COND. PROG NOT APPLICABLE
COND. PERF. Affirm. We would have been hot
Interr Would be have been hot?
Neg. We wouldn't have been hot
Because of semantic restrictions the progressives
are limited in the case of the verb To Be.
NON AUXILIARY SYSTEM
TO HAVE
PRESENT Affirm We have time
Interr. Do we have time?
Negat We don´t have time
PAST Affirm We had time
Interr Did we have time?
Negat We didn´t have time
English is a sincretic conceptual language where any
redundancy is avoided (despite the fact that other
than in these syntactic economies, English is more
redundant than Spanish) which accounts for the
fact that once the auxiliary Did for question and
Didn´t for negative already indicate the past tense,
the verb, therefore, goes in the indicative form mi-
nus the indicative marker To.
After the Present and the Past, ALL the other tenses require verbal phrases make up by the verb being combined either with an auxiliary verb or an auxiliary form. Therefore, from the Future on, all
verbs in English take the Auxiliary System shown above with the Verb To Be.
FUTURE Affirm We will have time
Interr Will we have time?
Negat We won´t have time
PROGRES Affirm We are having time
Interrog Are we having time?
Negat We aren´t having time
PS. PROG Affirm We were having time
Int. Were we having time?
Negat We weren´t having time
Fut Prog Affirm We will be having time
Interr Will we be having time?
Neg We won´t be having time
PR PERF. Affirm We have had time
Interr Have we had time?
Neg We haven´t had time
PS. PERF Affirm We had had time
Interr Had we had time?
Negat We hadn´t had time
HAD-HAD In the so called stutters tense the form had is repeated because there are three kinds of
Participles in English.
Those which are the same past form
Those which are a variation on the verb root
And those irregular verbs that are not the past for nor a new form, but the indicative minus the marker To.
Since Had is the past form of the verb To Have and have is the auxiliary verb for the participle (Haber) here we have the verb to Have in its double function of auxiliary (Haber) and non-auxiliary (Tener). Since the past for both Haber and Tener is Had we end up with the form Had (Había) and Had (Tenido)
FUTURE PERF. Affirm We will have had time
Interr Will we have had time?
Neg We won´t have had time
CONDIT. Affirm We would have time
Interr Would we have time?
Negat We wouldn´t have time
COND. PROG Affirm We would be having time
Interrog Would we be having time?
Negat We wouldn´t be having ...
COND. PERF. Affirm We would have had time
Interrog Would we have had time?
Negat. We wouldn´t have had ....
The contraction Would've is pronounced Wurav
COND. PERF.
PROGRESS. Affirm. We would've been having ....
Interr Would we have been having..
Negat We wouldn't have been hav..
OKAY KIDS, NEXT CLASS I WILL BE SHOWING YOU
THE SUBJUNCTIVE AND THE PASSIVE VOICES.
ANY QUESTIONS, DOUBTS OR CORRECTIONS, GO
HEAD, LET'S TALK.......
SANUTO
| | |
| GAIUS,03.11.2005 | Some time ago I was tempted to send a nice tuto-
rial like the one above to the Loscuentos.net thin-
king that the explanations in Spanish would be a lot
easier and more effective for the aspiring English
students, but then I feared that maybe it was going
to be resented by those with no interest whatsoe-
ver regarding the desire to learn some English or
improve on whatever knowledge already attained.
Every Saturday between ten and twelve I conduct
English tutoring from my messenger. At this moment
I have 182 students spread all around latinamerica,
and they have progressed a lot. They have already
conquered the English subjunctive including the
Hypothetic Present and Past.
By next March I will start the tutoring with those
who missed the basics last time and any of you will
be welcomed in case you decide to try.
Any questions or needs you have respecting the
language, even if you are not living in an English
speaking country, send me a mail and I will sure try
to answer it as shortly as my tight schedule allows.
| | |
| cafeina,03.11.2005 | | Heeeeeeeeeeeelp! | | |
| Malomo,03.11.2005 | Gaius, thanks. Now we're talking!
It was a very interesting reading.
Finally somebody who really knows the matter come to help.
I'll keep in touch. | | |
| GAIUS,04.11.2005 | YOU AND ME OR YOU AND I
It all depends:
If after ME comes a verb, ME is incorrect.
Me is the objective form of the pronoun. It shouldn´t precede and action.
YOU AND ME WORK TOGETHER, for instance, would
be the same as saying TU Y MI TRABAJAMOS JUN-
TOS, es español.
If the phrase is an objective one, receiving the
effect of an action, then Me is correct.
NOBODY BELIEVED YOU AND ME is like saying in
Spanish Nadie nos creyò a ti y a mi, which is the
correct way. Nobody believed you and I would be
like saying NADIE NOS CREYO A TI Y A YO.
TIP: If you and me were the subjects of a verb,
Me is incorrect.
WHO AND WHOM
Who is the subjective or nominal form of the
relative pronoun for the first person. Should
only be used to refer to actions performed.
WHOM is the objective case of the relative
pronoun for the first person. Should only be
used to refer to the object, or recipient, of a
verb.
THAT IS THE MAN WHO HIRED ME
THAT IS THE MAN WHOM I HIRED
Who you voted for in the election is wrong. Who
didn't perfomed the action of voting. WHOM you
voted form is the correct way, because WHOM
received the action of voting.
When Whom is preceded by a subjective predicate it should usually be preceded by TO.
JULIUS CAESAR WAS HATED BECAUSE HE WAS THE
KIND OF A MAN TO WHOM EVERYTHING WAS EASY.
| | |
| GAIUS,04.11.2005 | RELATIVE PRONOUNS
WHO, for persons and THAT for things, WHOM
AND WHOSE, are the Subjective, Objective and
Possesive cases of the noun, pronoun or subject
that can be placed preceding a verb because it
has already been used as subjective predicate
in the same sentence.
THAT IS THE MAN WHO HIRED ME
Who replaces man, the real subject of the verb
TO HIRE, which can't be used preceding the ac-
tion because it has already been used, in the same
sentence as subjective predicate of the verb TO
BE.
THAT = DEMONSTRATIVE ARTICLE
IS = LINKING VERB
THE = DEFINITE ARTICLE
MAN = NOUN
The noun Man with its modifier The have been used
already as subjective predicate of the verbal clause
That is, therefore, Man cannot be repeated as a
subject in the same sentence.
It is for this kind of cases that the relative pronouns
were invented.
WHO replaces Man to avoid the repetition of THAT
IS THE MAN MAN HIRED ME or the incompleteness
of THAT IS THE MAN HIRED ME.
TIP: A RELATIVE PRONOUN IS USED TO REPLACE
A NOUN, PRONOUN OR SUBJECT THAT CAN'T BE
USED AS A SUBJECT BECAUSE IT HAS ALREADY
BEEN USED AS AN OBJECT OF ANOTHER VERB.
Sounds complicated for the non-integrated but,
hey, we are all writers here, Aren't we? | | |
| Malomo,05.11.2005 | I'm not sure what I am.
| | |
| GAIUS,10.11.2005 | CONJUNCTIONS
Conyónkshons
CONJUNCIONES
A Conjuction joins words, phrases or
clauses. The conjunctions show the
relationship between the sentence
elements that they connect.
There are three groups of conjuctions:
COORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS
Join words, phrases or clauses of
equal grammatical rank.
CORRELATIVE CONJUNCTIONS
Are coordinating words that are
used in pairs to join words, phrases,
clauses or whole sentences.
SUBORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS
Join clauses that are not equal in
rank. A clause introduced by a
subordinate conjuction is called a
dependent, or subordinate clause,
and cannot stand on its own as a
sentence. It must be joined to a main
or independent clause
We left the party early because we were tired
If the roads are icy, we will have to drive very
carefuly
Whether we like it or not, this affair must end.
Coordinating Correlative Subordinating
and, but, or both.........and after, although, as, as if
nor, for, so either........or as though, because, if,
neither.......nor before, even though,
not.............but even if, rather than, sin
not only......but also ce, in order that, so that,
than, that, though, until,
unless, when, whenever,
where, wherever, while,
whether.
CONJUNCTIVE ADVERBS
When an adverb is used to relate
and/or connect main clauses to a
sentence it is called a conjunctive
adverb.
Conjunctive adverbs, unlike
coordinating and subordinating
conjunctions, are movable and
thus occupy different positions
within the main clause in which
they stand.
The most common conjuctive adverbs
are: Also, consequently,
furthermore, hence, thence, however, indeed, instead, likewise,
moreover, nevertheless, otherwise, still, then, therefore, thus.
______________________________________________________________
__________ ____________________________________________________
_____________________________ _________________________________
________________________________________________ ______________
______________________________________________________________
_ _____________________________________________________________
____________________ __________________________________________
_______________________________________ _______________________
__________________________________________________________ ____
______________________________________________________________
___________ ___________________________________________________
______________________________ ________________________________
_________________________________________________ _____________
______________________________________________________________
__ ____________________________________________________________
_____________________ _________________________________________
________________________________________ ______________________
CLAUSES AND CONJUNCTIONS
Let's switch to Spanish now:
UNA CLAUSULA ES CUALQUIER COMBINACION DE PALABRAS QUE CONTENGA SUJETO Y VERBO.
LAS CLAUSULAS SE CLASIFICAN DE ACUERDO
A SU RANGO COMUNICATIVO.
SI LA CLAUSULA TIENE SENTIDO COMPLETO
SIN NECESIDAD DE OTRA CLAUSULA SE
LLAMA CLAUSULA PRINCIPAL
SI CARECE DE SENTIDO COMPLETO Y
NECESITA OTRA CLAUSULA SE LE LLAMA
CLAUSULA SUBORDINADA
Sergio gets very impatient when he helps
Ivanka with her homework
"Sergio gets very impatient" es una cláusula principal (o independiente),
porque es una afirmación breve que tiene
sujeto y verbo y tiene sentido completo.
"when he helps Ivanka with her homework",
aunque tiene sujeto y verbo
le falta sentido completo. Por ejemplo,
para saber quien es el sujeto HE
que ayuda a Ivanka se necesita la
información contenida en la cláusula
principal.
Las oraciones se clasifican de acuerdo a las cláusulas que contengan.
Una ORACION SIMPLE tiene una sola cláusula principal.
Sergio gets very impatient
Una ORACION COMPUESTA tiene dos o más cláusulas principales
Sergio gets very impatient and his wife gets
angry.
Como las dos cláusulas son principales
(igual rango gramatical) solo pueden ser
unidas por una conjunción coordinativa
como and.
Una ORACION COMPLEJA tiene una cláusula principal y una o más
cláusulas subordinadas
Sergio gets very impatient when he helps
Ivanka with her homework before they
watch the 10 PM news on TV.
Las dos cláusulas subordinadas "he helps
Ivanka with her homework" y "they watch
the 10 PM news on TV" son unidas por las
dos conjunciones subordinadas when-before.
Una ORACION COMPUESTA-COMPLEJA tiene
una o más cláusulas principales y una o más cláusulas subordinadas.
Sergio gets very impatient and his wife gets
angry when they help Ivanka with her home
work before they all watch the 10 PM news
on TV.
CLAUSULAS Y CONJUNCIONES
Conjunciones coordinadas uniendo palabras (enbat norforsoyet)
words:
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
Conjunciónes coordinadas uniendo frases
phrases:
1-
2-
3-
4-
Conjunciones coordinadas uniendo oraciones
Sentences:
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
Conjunciones correlativas (Bozeniderornidernor natbatnaronlybarolso)
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
GRUPOS DE TRANSITIONAL
MARKERS
ADDING
CAUSE AND EFFECT
COMPARISON
CONCESSION
CONTRAST
SPECIAL FEATURES
OR EXAMPLES
SUMMARY
TIME RELATIONSHIPS
NOTES
| | |
| GAIUS,10.11.2005 | COORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS
AND, BUT, OR, NOR, FOR, SO
Memorizing Tip: Enborornorforsó
CORRELATIVE
BOTH.....................AND
EITHER...................OR
NEITHER............... ..NOR
NOT...................... BUT
NOT ONLY.............. BUT ALSO
SUBORDINATING
After, Although, as, as if, as though
because, if, before, even though,
even if, rather than, since, in order that.
so that, than, that, though, until, unless
when, whenever, where, wherever, while,
whether. | | |
| Alexandra_Riera,24.11.2005 | Problems with your grammar? does your car go funny in the mornings? does your wife/husband look strange in the evening??? All these questions and more are answered in the links that I mention below...
Here are a couple of good links that will help with words:
thesaurus.com.
Another place is:
search cambridge dictionaries on line
Here is another one:
wordreference.com - It is an English/Spanish - Spanish/English dictionary
ENJOY!
| | |
| malomo,01.12.2005 | Curso Rapido de Inglés Aprobado por: British Council, UK ===========================================1 - Módulo básico: Tres brujas miran tres relojes Swatch. ¿Qué bruja mira qué reloj?
En inglés: Three witches watch three Swatch watches. Which witch watch which Swatch watch?
2 - Módulo avanzado: Tres brujas "travestis" miran los botones de tres relojes Swatch. ¿Qué bruja travesti mira los botones de qué reloj Swatch?
En inglés: Three switched witches watch three Swatch watch switches. Which switched witch watch which Swatch watch switch?
3 - Maestria: Tres brujas suecas transexuales miran los botones de tres relojes "Swatch" suizos. ¿Qué bruja sueca transexual mira a qué botón de qué reloj "Swatch" suizo?
En inglés: Three Swedish switched witches watch three Swiss Swatch watch switches. Which Swedish switched witch watch which Swiss Swatch watch switch?
There is actually a mistake in all three. The same mistake.
Can you find it?
*********************
Thanks to Lori for send me this funny exercise. | | |
| GAIUS,01.12.2005 | This is more a logic (semantic) component than
a sintactic one, although the semantics, some
how, impinge on the spelling because of the
verbal formal change on the third person singular.
The logic part that can be lost amid all the
tonguetwisting is that the word Which in each
and every case works as an Interrogative adverb
implying a selective, isolated look on ONE of the
buttons.
Due to the fact that (In Spanish is a lot easier
to pinpoit the mistake, because the singularity
of the look is more forcefully indicated in romance
languages that imply singularity not by formal
endings in the verb but, rather, by the number
of the respective article or pronoun) the singularity
of the look (and this is the logic part at work)
inferred by the logic of the context tells us that
Which is singular, then the verb watch, being in
the present tense, must add the ES ending pro
per to the third person singular conjugation in
the present tense.
The verb, therefore, should be Watches in every
case. | | |
| GAIUS,01.12.2005 | I forgot to add that the final case switches the
singularity of the question from Which (restricted)
button is being watched to Which (isolated, indi
vidual) witch is doing the watching.
But it doesn't change the end result.
That's the beauty of the Witcheries of Grammar. | | |
| GAIUS,01.12.2005 | Now, how would you say in English:
SI NO LO HUBIERA SABIDO ANTES NO LO
HABRIA PODIDO CREER AHORA.
Don't change any of the verbs and their
tenses.
Go Ahead, make my day. | | |
| Finch,02.01.2006 | | If I wouldn't have known it before, I wouldn't have believed it now. | | |
| GAIUS,05.01.2006 | Very nice try Finch.
Although your version keeps the semantic value
of the original sentence in English, there are two
details that make it a little different.
First, the equivalent of the auxiliary form Would
in Spanish is the suffix "ría", not the suffix "era".
The ending "era" in Spanish (hubiera) belongs to
the subjuctive of verbs ending in "er-ir" like in
comer=comiera/escribir=escribiera.
Since the subjunctive in English is the same form
used to indicate the past, hubiera the equivalent
of hubiera in English is HAD.
If it is in the negative it would be HADN'T.
IF I HADN'T KNOWN IT
Now, in the dependent clause of this conditional
sentence we have the Spanish Podido, which opens
a can of worms in English because, unlike Spanish,
English differentiate between Poder in the sense
of having the possiblity and Poder in the sense of
having the capacity.
Since having known "it" before gives the speaker
the possiblity and his mental and emotional well
being seems to be normal, we could use the
verbal phrase being able to, which gives English
speakers a way out of a glitch when talking about
the verb to Can in tenses other than the present
and the Past.
So, having to keep the Spanish wording, which
was the requirement, it would have to be:
I wouldn't have been able to believe it
It is a little constrained in English, but it is the
most faithful translation possible.
The English differentiation between PODER as
CAN and PODER as BEING ABLE TO is one of the
most complex and hard to resolve differences
between germanic languages y romance languages
evolved from Latin.
It all goes to the heart of the differences in the
approach to life typical of indo-germanic cultures
and their languages and Latin and its pack.
I hope I'll have an opportunity to debate the point
with the bilingual writers in this Site. | | |
|
![]() |
To post messages you have to log in
|