Answer:
For this exercise we have to answer lógico (logical) or ilógico (illogical), according to the audio
Explanation:
1. Paco y Francisco son la misma persona.
answer: lógico
2. Los amigos de Paco tenían correo de voz.
answer: ilógico
3. Gabriela y Francisco viajaron juntos a la Costa del Sol.
answer: ilógico
4. Gabriela tenía una cámara digital.
answer: ilógico
5. Gabriela se divirtió en su viaje.
answer: lógico
1. Paco and Francisco are the same person.
answer: logical
2. Paco's friends had voicemail.
answer: illogical
3. Gabriela and Francisco traveled together to the Costa del Sol.
answer: illogical
4. Gabriela had a digital camera.
answer: illogical
5. Gabriela had fun on her trip.
answer: logical
Answer:
CLAUDIO (Yo) <em><u>tengo</u></em> (tener) ganas de ver un partido del Real Madrid en el estadio con mis amigos,pero no <u><em>consigo</em></u> (conseguir) los boletos.Tú <em><u>sigues </u></em>(seguir) trabajando (working) en el estadio,¿no? SILVIA Sí,<u><em>sigo</em></u> (seguir) trabajando allí. CLAUDIO ¿Y puedes conseguir boletos? SILVIA Sí, pero no es fácil conseguir los boletos. CLAUDIO Vamos, Silvia, por favor. Yo nunca (never) <u><em>pido</em></u> favores. SILVIA Está bien, <u><em>voy</em></u> (ir) a conseguir los boletos.CLAUDIO ¡Gracias! Estoy feliz. ¡Mis amigos y yo<u><em> vamos </em></u>(ir) a ver un partido del Real Madrid en el estadio!
Explanation:
- (Yo) <em><u>tengo</u></em> (tener) .
I put <em>I have (</em>Yo <em><u>tengo)</u></em> because Claudio is the one who wants to watch the game.
-
but I don't get (no consigo) the tickets.
-
are You still working (sigues) on the stadium?seguir+gerundio is one of the most frequently used constructions in Spanish. In most contexts it can be translated into English as 'to carry on', 'to continue', or 'still'.
-
SILVIA Yes, I still (continue) working there. CLAUDIO
-
I never (never) ask for (favors) favors.
-
Okay, I'm going to get the tickets.
-Thank you! I am happy. My friends and I are going (going) to watch a Real Madrid match at the stadium!
in this execice they are using gerund : Non-personal form of the verb that expresses the duration of the verbal action; It works as an adverb and as a verb.
Answer:
1. Mario les presta dinero.
<em>Mario lends you money.</em>
2. Ellos me escriben mensajes electrónicos.
<em>They write me emails.</em>
3. Juana le vende una cartera.
<em>Juana sells him a bag.</em>
4. La vendedora nos dice dónde comprar trajes.
<em>The seller tells us where to buy suits.</em>
5. Lola te da los calcetines.
<em>Lola gives you the socks.</em>
6. El vendedor les ofrece un descuento.
<em>The seller offers them a discount.</em>
<em />
Explanation:
This is an exercise to practice Indirect Object Pronouns. In all of the sentences above, we can observe how the pronoun comes immediately before the conjugated verb, something that always happens in affirmative statements with one verb.
Answer:
D - 1. Yo tengo el pelo castaño y soy baja. ¿Cómo <em><u>erres</u></em>? ¿<em><u>Erres</u></em> alta o baja, rubia o pelirroja?
C. - 2 Yo tengo dieciséis <em><u>anos</u></em> y usted tiene quince. Soy grande y usted es pequeña y bonita.
3. Me llamo Erica. Tengo quince años. Soy alta y bonita. Yo soy de Mexico.
4. Maribel, tú eres bonita y guapa. Tienes 28 años y eres de Lima, Perú.
Explanation:
I'm scratching my head here.....
As for A (needs capitalization) and B (needs accent), neither sentence 3 nor sentence 4 has such an error!!!!
While you <em><u>could</u></em> argue that 'Mexico' needs an accent mark, you certainly could add one (and not be wrong by doing so) though it is by no means wrong if you don't add one.
So, then that leaves sentence 4 needing some sort of capitalization which it most definitely does <em><u>not</u></em> need.
And, of course, the reverse of what I just said is equally true. Sentence 3 does <em><u>not</u></em> have a capitalization error, and sentence 4 already has the required accents: tú and Perú.
