| Last month | Last 3 months | All time | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Completed lessons | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Attendance rate | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Are you talking about changing the grammatical gender of the entire Spanish language, or just the term Latinx? I mean, the article is just talking about the gender-neutral term for Latin American people, but your comments seem to be talking about a language-wide change.
I'm in favor of some changes to Spanish's structure. I strongly dislike IE grammatical gender (mostly due to randomness - animate/inanimate genders make sense to a degree, but the f/n/m system just seems to have been slapped on with no thought behind it) so I think getting rid of it is an excellent idea. It would probably make it easier for people to learn Spanish. Languages change structure all the time. Just talking about Spanish, LA Spanish has completely dropped a person (vosotros, the second person plural) and replaced it with the formal second person (ustedes), which really simplifies the language and makes it easier to learn, making Spanish more accessible. Then there's the future tense phrase, which has developed a simpler alternative: "[ir] a [infinitive]" (literally "going to [verb]), so instead of "comeré", you can say "voy a comer". According to a friend of mine, that's become very popular to the point of taking over for the future tenses. And just talking about grammatical gender, Spanish is a descendant of Latin, which had three genders. Spanish has mostly dropped the neutral gender, though there are still traces of it.
As for Latinx, I do think it's a great idea to include gender-neutral terms. Not all people are male or female (source: real world), so that doesn't force someone to pick an unfit label. Plus, Spanish's approach to gender is that if a group is all female, they use feminine pronouns, but if one man joins the group, they switch to masculine pronouns. Using Latinx for all Latin Americans includes Latinas more than using Latinos would. I hope it's a starting point for bringing back some neutral pronouns.
0 votedApril 18, 20170Simple: fry one side on the first two, flip one and put in the third piece, then take out the completely fried piece and fry the other side of the second and third pieces.
For something easier to visualize, let the three bread slices be named 1, 2, and 3. Each of them has two sides: side A and side B.
Minute one: frying 1A and 2A.
Then flip 1, take out 2, and put in 3.
Minute two: frying 1B and 3A
Then take out 1, flip 3, and put 2 back in.
Minute three: frying 2B and 3B.
All three are done in three minutes.
0 votedApril 6, 20170"At dinner, the buffet is even cheaper" is correct. The second one is not correct because "the" never comes between a possessive and the thing it owns. "Dinner's the buffet" is wrong, but "dinner's buffet" is correct. If it were correct, it would be "Dinner's buffet is even cheaper." You would also not say "the dinner's buffet" because we don't use articles in front of collective nouns (most of the time) and "dinner's" is a collective noun here.
Other correct sentences:
"The dinner buffet is even cheaper." (Here, "dinner" is an adjective, so "the" belongs to "buffet".)
"The buffet is even cheaper at dinner."
0 votedApril 6, 20170Water park
Hi. Today, my best friend told* me that I, she and our classmates will go to the water park. It will be free. But I don't know, will I go? I don't have a swimsuit. I haven't gone swimming** for a long time. I'm afraid of it. Possibly, I'm afraid to ride a roller coaster. In my opinion, I need to overcome my fear.
P.S. and ask my mom for*** a new swimsuit :)*"My best friend said to me" and "My best friend told me" would both be correct here. "Said" is speaking out loud without directing it to a person, so there has to be a "to" to explain who it is said to. "Told" is talking to a person, so it does not need "to" because that is part of the word.
**"Swum" is also technically correct, but people rarely use it. It is more common to use the phrase "go swimming" to describe the activity.
***Both "ask my mom for a new swimsuit" or "tell my mom that I want a new swimsuit" would be correct.
0 votedApril 5, 20170For letters not in my alphabet, I grabbed a text expander plugin for my browser and set it to turn certain key combinations into the target letters. They're normally meant to turn small bits of text into larger phrases so that people can type more quickly, but they can pretty much be set to turn any combination of letters into anything else. The only problem is making sure it's not something you use in other contexts. For instance, it would be a bad idea to use the letter i for í, because that would change every i you use into an í.
I'm learning Spanish and Norwegian, so the letters I needed were á, é, í, ó, ú, ñ, æ, å, and ø. For the first five, it's the vowel immediately followed by a / because the slash looks like the diacritic, so i/ for í. (It's not turning into the character there because I typed them separately and got rid of the space between. It only works if they're typed together.) The ñ is the tilde right before the n, so ~n, which some people use in place of ñ. For the Norwegian letters, they're the typical transliteration of the letter (ae, aa, oe respectively) followed by an i (e.g. aei for æ) because I haven't seen any words with those vowel clusters in NO, ES, or EN. Granted, it does take a tiny bit more effort than just using ae for æ, but I'd rather use the correct letters and it's easier for me than using the alt codes.
0 votedApril 5, 201701) Not important. Other than political stuff, it's only a(n annoying) factor when people try to convert me or involve me in rituals designed to figure out which members of the pantheon are my spiritual family. Still not sure what that one was about.
2) I'm an atheist, so I don't have one. That should probably answer the question of born again or evangelical.
3) Only when there's a major event. For instance, I went for my great-grandmother's funeral (Catholic) and I'd probably go for a wedding, but I wouldn't go regularly or for holidays.
4) Definitely liberal, but not sure if I'm very or somewhat. I'm strongly for certain liberal social values. I also don't like conservative fiscal values, so I'm not libertarian (liberal on social values, conservative on fiscal values and guns; it's the third largest party in the US). If you're curious, though, most born-agains and evangelicals tend to be conservative, though there are certainly some exceptions.
0 votedMarch 20, 20170You were close on both of them, but too mild. "Enorme" and "necesitar" are both stronger words.
"Enorme" is a cognate for the English word "enormous". It doesn't just mean big, but bigger than big: gigantic, humongous, immense, colossal. Lions are big. An elephant is enormous. "Huge" and "enormous" are close synonyms, and most apps and dictionaries will accept both translations for the same word.
"Necesitar" is similar to "need", which is closer to the word "require" than "want". If you are very hungry, then you require a sandwich. It can overlap with "want" at times, but it's usually much stronger. If you want something, then you desire it, but there won't be negative consequences if you don't get it (besides disappointment). If you need something, then there will be negative consequences if you don't get it. For example, if you need a sandwich but don't get one, you might be too distracted from hunger to keep working well, or you might even pass out from lack of food.
The two Spanish words can be used whenever you would use their English counterparts, though you would only use "enormes" for plural words and "necesito" when you need to use the first-person present-tense singular.
0 votedMarch 13, 20170A bit of British History
Hello guys!
I'm writing again and I want to tell you which book I'm reading. Its name is "A History of Britain" by Fiona Beddall, published by Penguin Readers and I've read to chapter 2. I've learnt about the arrival of the Romans to the island, Angles and Saxons (who came from what are now known as the lands of Germany and Denmark), the invasion of Vikings and the Normans. This was in chapter 1 but in chapter 2 I learnt about the countries that formed the United Kingdom. I'd known a bit of history of these countries but now I am able to say more about them.
In my opinion, the most interesting history was the Irish because it was really important how Ireland has separated into two parts, the Protestant and the Catholic. At the same time, the reasons for the fights for seven centuries until in 1922, Ireland finally won independence from the United Kingdom.
Tomorrow, I'll continue with the book and I'll start chapter 3.
I'm going to write to you over the next days.
Kisses!Pretty good overall. Two things:
If there's a number after "chapter", then you don't need "the" before it. If you're saying "I read the chapter" without a number, then you use "the", but if you mention the number, "I read chapter three", then you don't use "the".
Also, "actually" in English is more like realmente or verdaderamente than actualmente. Actualmente is "currently", "at present", "now", or "nowadays". The phrase I changed it to is commonly used when you're talking about something that had a different name in the time you're talking about (when they arrived in the British Isles), but you want to use the modern name.
0 votedMarch 13, 20170
