Gracias, Nadia.I have actually said so numerous times "suela de zapato" the it already sounds herbal to me, and I even think the is correct.

You are watching: Los temerarios te dire que no


*
michealt

Good translation, Rosa. One mis-spelling and also one error the grammar.Stanza 1 heat 2: "sole" have to be "soul" . These words v the exact same sound yet different spellings and also meanings room a pain.Stanza 2 heat 1: "not" must be "no" (or "not any"). Greatly "not" on its own can"t come between "there is" and also the match of "is", due to the fact that after there is" take away a quantifier (multiple indigenous quantifiers choose "not the least bit of" or "not any" occupational if you want some extra sylables, however a straightforward "no" is far better if the extra length isn"t needed. (stanza 4 heat 1).I check out you fixed "soul" while ns was keying this comment.


*
sandring

Tom, a typo is simply a typo. Rosa and I space teachers. After correcting a hundred of our students" functions I can hardly remember what ideal English words have to look like. and being teacher Rosa and also I can tell you the "There is not rancor" is perfectly correct. Where are you always picking up together strange ideas about English grammar? share the link


*
roster 31

Tom, a typo is simply a typo. Rosa and I room teachers. After ~ correcting a hundreds of our students" functions I have the right to hardly psychic what appropriate English words must look like. and being teachers Rosa and I can tell you that "There is no rancor" is perfect correct. Where room you constantly picking up together strange ideas around English grammar? re-publishing the connect


Thank you, Nadia, for your defense. Yet I understand what Tom says.I intend I to be concentrating ~ above the verbal form but, if i look at the substantive, it would be "no rancor", sure.I imagine the to express the idea putting focus in the verb, I could have said "there won"t be any type of rancor", right?

Thanks to you, both.


*
michealt
*
michealt

Nadia,Rosa and also I are an excellent friends that are supplied to correcting each other"s work. She has actually corrected more of mine than I have of hers, and told me i ought to talk about her translations more often than I have done - and because I"ve to be concentrating on Gaelic and on English to French translation for a whiile now I"ve fallen also further behind on feather at her translations, therefore I"d be surpised if she objected come me commenting now.

And I"m afraid you space wrong. "There is no rancor" is perfectly incorrect.

See more: What You Going To Do With The Big Fat Butt Memes, What Are You Gonna Do With That Big Fat Butt

A google search for "There is no rancor" finds 5 pages top top the web. A google find for "There is no rancor" finds 14,300 pages ~ above the web. That on that is own need to make that clear that "There is no rancor" is abnormal usage. A quick examine using the older (but tho valid) assignment "rancour" to watch if that confirms the figures derived for "rancor" it is intended 10,500 come 5, so the full score is 24,800 for "There is no rancor/rancour" and also 10 for "there is not rancor/rancour". Then 3 that the "not rancor" pages turn out to contain duplicates of the same paper, so over there are just 3 distinct uses, not 5; and also one that the "not rancour" pages is a blog quoting the previous days blog which included "not rancour", therefore there are 4 independent instances there, no 5. So only 7 world have created "there is not rancor" or "there is not rancour" top top the whole of the at this time searchable web, as opposed to plenty of thousands which have "no" instead of "not".It"s usually not a good idea to write points that will make world react with "hey, that"s strange, I"ve never ever seen the before" or "what on planet does that mean - every little thing it means, that"s not just how we to speak it". And also "there is not rancor" is together a thing, together the outcomes of google search clearly indicate.

If you want to discover out what the grammar of English actually looks choose (which is nothing lot like what is teach in british schools and even less like what is teach in American schools) you have to consult a severe text-book. The one I would certainly recommend is The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language through Rodney Huddlestone and also Geoffrey pool room - I"m hope to obtain a copy because that myself some time following year, however may not. Most publications on English grammar are pure nonsense, sadly, for this reason one has to try to get publications by writer who recognize what they space doing and the trouble then is knowing who is actually skilled to wrtie such a book. Pool room is good (it"s worth looking for him top top the web and reading several of his posts), and Huddlestone has a good reputation, for this reason that publication should be dependable - but that has ensured the its price is also high for most people; however there"s no guarantee the it covers eveything, so it might not cover the isue of an adverse existence statements with non-count noun (which is what"s behind that "not rancor" vs "no rancor" issue).


*
sandring
Like

Tom, dear, i don"t mind her corrections. I totally agree with you that "There"s no rancour" is the best way to to speak it. I mind your meaning that it"s a grammar mistake since it is not. I"m no advocating for Rosa since she doesn"t need it. I"m advocating because that students of English who may take the seriously and start in search of answers. International students are incredibly grammar conscious. Any type of affirmative have the right to be do into negative with one of two people the fragment not or an adverse pronouns prefer no, no one etc. You"ve been talking not around a grammar rule however frequency the occurance or a much more natural way of saying that. No bones broken, ns hope. As for grammar publications - I compose them myself.