Search from various English teachers...
Profile
Hola. I am an American who has taken to first step to not being "American" by learning a second language. I enjoy cooking, politics and most especially, music. I would love to meet someone to practice Spanish with and would be more than happy to help someone with their
Learning
Spanish
Language Skills
EnglishNative
Lesson Feedback
Lesson history
 Last monthLast 3 monthsAll time
Completed lessons000
Attendance rate100%100%100%
Teacher reviews
No record
Activities
  • Answered
    Not to be more confusing but there is also the word echar with can mean "to throw"
    0 voted
    September 9, 2016
    0
  • Answered
    Agradecido* Yo también
    0 voted
    September 9, 2016
    0
  • Answered
    (Fernando's second answer) I hope this helps: When the pronoun functions as the indirect object, you use the forms le, les (singular and plural, respectively), independently from the gender of the word that the pronoun is referencing. Examples showing that le and les are used even with the noun (e.g. madre) is feminine.
    0 voted
    September 9, 2016
    0
  • Answered
    I would like to be able to give you reasons, but many times we know how it is but we don't know the grammatical reason. The correct one is: Le doy la manzana a John. (In case someone has trouble translating Fernando's answer)
    0 voted
    September 9, 2016
    0
  • Answered
    I saw that you commented and thought, "Yay! Peyton has come to clear up all my confusion." Instead Peyton is just as confused. Very much so my day.
    0 voted
    September 9, 2016
    0
  • Posted
    Are indirect objects a grammatical requirement? (le) In the sentence "Le doy la manzana a John" (I give the apple to John). Does one have to use the indirect object of "le"? I realize that "a John" acts to clarify who the indirect object is referring to, but does an indirect object have to be used whenever there is one, even if the object is named elsewhere? TL;DR Is "Doy la manzana a John" right? Why not?
    September 9, 2016
    9
    1
  • Answered
    Should have. Could have only really makes sense if you are placing the blame somewhere e.g. "The plan could have arrived by now if it wasn't for the bad weather."
    0 voted
    September 8, 2016
    1
  • Answered
    I've never used needn't have.
    0 voted
    September 8, 2016
    0
  • Answered
    Another is used when you want more of something. "I'd like another hotdog, I've eaten the one I had." While other is used to differentiate two things like when you'd like something different "I'd like the other hotdog, this one is burnt."
    0 voted
    September 7, 2016
    2
  • Answered
    Laugh and the world laughs with you is related to "smile and the world smiles with you" and means that is you are happy and joyous, the world around you will be more joyous. To die laughing means to be laughing uncontrollably. As though when you laugh so hard you can't catch your breath you may actually suffocate. Laugh your head off is also a way to say laughing uncontrollably. It could also be "laugh you socks off". Laugh all the way to the bank means you've earned a lot of money doing something others would do. For example, garbage collectors can make a lot of money but most (Americans) wouldn't be willing to do that job. It could be said that "you might not think much is trash men, but they laugh all the way to the bank." Related is "cry all the way to the bank" which is used in the exact same way but the cry is used ironically. To have a laugh up your sleeve means to be laughing inwardly. Perhaps you are in a situation where it would be inappropriate to laugh and so you keep a straight face but you gave a laugh up your sleeve
    0 voted
    September 7, 2016
    1