"As long as" - can some one help me with this

[soyricogringo]

is there a frase for (as long as) the only thing I can thnk of is mientras but that doesnt seem right, thanks

[Iris]

I think mientras is the best possible translation for as long as. It can also be si:
e.g. You can go out as long as you promise to be back before 11:00
Puedes salir si me prometes volver antes de las once.

[Rusty]

A general rule for translation of 'as ... as' is 'tan ... como', as in tan largo como mi brazo (as long as my arm) or tan largo como sea posible (as long as possible). There are other forms you can employ, too, like 'tanto ... como', 'siempre que', 'con tal que', 'mientras', 'si', etc.

Here are some ways I could think of to translate 'as long as':
As long as you promise = con tal de que me prometas (or si me prometes, as Iris said)
As long as the war lasted = mientras duró la guerra
Stay as long as you want = quédate todo el tiempo que quieras
As long as you're happy = siempre que seas feliz

[Alfonso]

A very small correction:

Originally Posted by Rusty

As long as you promise = con tal (de) que me prometas (or si me prometes, as Iris said)

I would say con tal de que... Nevertheless, a lot of people omit the preposition de. It's hardly correct. I don't think RAE has already admitted it.
After con tal de que subjunctive is required.

[Tomisimo]

Una pequeñísima corrección:

Originally Posted by Alfonso

I would say con tal de que... Nevertheless, a lot of people omit the preposition de. It's hardly correct. I don't think RAE has already admitted it.
After con tal de que subjunctive is required.

Also, I personally (in my ideolect) wouldn't say It's hardly correct. I'd say It's not really correct.

[Rusty]

Thanks, guys.

[poli]

Originally Posted by Alfonso

A very small correction:


I would say con tal de que... Nevertheless, a lot of people omits the preposition de. It's hardly correct. I don't think RAE has already admitted it.
After con tal de que subjunctive is required.

David is right. It's hardly correct is hardly(broma) used in American
English, but it is understood. You may find hardly used that way more
frequently in Britain. What you really need to pay attention to is the word
already.
This is important. The words already and yet are synonymns,but they work
differently. Yet works with the negative, and already works with the positive. So, you would say, "I dont think RAE has admitted it yet". or
"RAE has yet to admit it" To make it a positive statement you would say,
"RAE has already admitted it." or "RAE has admitted it already.

I think this is a complicated concept, but it's important to know for communication purposes. Don't hesitate to ask if my explanation needs clarification.
In short already translates to ya and yet translates to todavia

Poli

PS: There may be circumstances where yet can be used in the positve and already in the negative, but if you want to
be sure you are understood, follow the example I gave you. In the interrogative form yet and already are interchangable,
but yet is used more frequently. Example:"Have you done your homework yet?" is better than "Have you done your homework already?"

[Alfonso]

Thanks a lot David and Poli,
Some questions come to my mind. I know they are not easy, but I also know you both are clever and good looking .

• A lot of people omit..., but a lot of people is... Aren't a lot of people in both cases third singular persons?
• Poli, your explanation is clear. But you call affirmative phrase to a negative one: I don't think RAE has already admitted it. In this sentence there are two phrases. The main one is a negative one (I don't think), and the subordinated one is an affirmative one (RAE has already admitted it). Can you still say that, in this phrase, affirmative, yet is better than already?

Thanks a lot for your help!

[Rusty]

As far as the 'a lot of' question goes, the solution is to think 'many.' 'Many people are' is another way to say 'a lot of people are.' Alone, the word lot is a singular noun, meaning a unit, or a logical grouping, so there is reason to believe that a singular verb conjugation is needed. However, the phrase 'a lot of' means 'many' and, as such, always requires the plural verb conjugation.

Just to confuse things, if we were to group people together and call that group a lot, then it would be OK to say, "There is a lot of people," just as much as we would say, "There is a lot (a unit) of pills on the shelf." But, we don't usually call a group of people a lot (we don't like to be classified into a unit). Instead, we think about the number of people and say, "There are many (or 'a lot of') people."

[poli]

[quote=Alfonso;6629]Thanks a lot David and Poli,
Some questions come to my mind. I know they are not easy, but I also know you both are clever and good looking .

• A lot of people omit..., but a lot of people is... Aren't a lot of people in both cases third singular persons?
• Poli, your explanation is clear. But you call affirmative phrase to a negative one: I don't think RAE has already admitted it. In this sentence there are two phrases. The main one is a negative one (I don't think), and the subordinated one is an affirmative one (RAE has already admitted it). Can you still say that, in this phrase, affirmative, yet is better than already?

Thanks a lot for your help![/quote

Alfonso
If you are saying "No creo que Rae lo ha permitido todavia" (or something similar) then the way to say it in English is, "I don't think RAE has admitted it yet"or "RAE has yet to admit it." Yet works with the negative much
like todavia. Already works with the positive like ya. If you meant something else, please clarify yourself. I can help

Poli
.