Porqué - Por qué - Porque // El terror de muchos aprendices del Español. Me he percatado que la gente que aprende español tiene dificultades con el uso del "Porqué - Por qué - Porque ", ya que, son muy parecidos. Hoy, les daré ejemplos para que sean expertos en el uso de estos. 1. Porqué: Lo utilizamos para determinar algo en una oración. Es un sustantivo masculino que equivale al uso de causa, motivo, razón y/o circunstancia. Ejemplos; Singular: No comprendo el porqué de tu actitud [= la razón de tu actitud]. Plural: Hay que averiguar los porqués de ese cambio de actitud. 2. Porque: Conjunción átona, por lo que no lleva tilde. Puede utilizarse de dos formas. 2.1 Se utiliza como respuesta a las preguntas hechas con la secuencia "Por qué" Ejemplo; -¿Por qué no viniste? -Porque no tenía ganas. 2.2 También se emplea en oraciones que expresan causa o caso. Ejemplo; No fui a la fiesta porque no tenía ganas [= ya que no tenía ganas]. 3. Por qué: Secuencia interrogativa y exclamativa. Quiero decir, que se puede usar tanto para preguntar como para expresar algo. Ejemplos; ¿Por qué no viniste a la fiesta? ¡Por qué calles más bonitas pasamos!

Meaning of "Ain't"

Hello, there. 

It is very confusing for me the word "Ain't", even some native speakers friends tried to explain me but it is complicated to explain for them. So you have a clear example or explanation? 

Loosing weight In March, I realised that I was very fat. I was 93kg (205 pounds) so I started to lose weight. First of all, I stopped to eat bread and started to control my meals and the portions of. In April I was 83kg (183 pounds) I lose 10 kg! I was very happy and I started to run and no I'm 78kg. My goal is to lose 10kg more.

Massacre in the Araucania Araucan people are tired of tolerating invasions of their territories. This problem has turned into a war against the “people of the earth”. More than four hundred years have passed since Spaniard conquerors arrived in Chile and, with them a tremendous conflict, the famous “Guerra de Arauco” or war of Arauco. Nacla (n.d.) explains that with the return to democracy in 1990, the government gave a name to this problem; “Mapuche’s conflict”, a new version of the war. A very clear example is that now, in the south, there are police troops fighting against Mapuches. In spite of that fact, Chilean authorities don’t give us signals that they want to change the situation. According to Jorge Contesse (2004), “Documents show how the Chilean state has been the main actor in suffocating indigenous claims”. All these facts and more, represent “double standard”, the effrontery of the government and how they lie to our society about a cultural conflict. It's time to act against those who crush people, those who don’t respect others rights, closer to genocide. Mapuche people in the south of Chile are suffering because they are dealing with abuse of power from the police, who protect the interest of great enterprises and not innocent people’s life. Also, the government has excused its attacks on any person who says “I have a testimony”. According to Emmerson, B. (2013), “Chilean police were guilty of a systematic use of excessive force” The governments after the 70’s have been supporting attacks in Araucanía, especially during the dictatorship when not just indigenous were abused. Due to the power abuse, some people from Mapuche’s tribes created several “organisations” to fight the government and the police, such as “Coordinadora Territorial Lafkenche” and “Coordinadora Arauco Malleco” whose mission is take the power back in their territory to create a new nation with their own laws and respecting their culture. The Chilean government has created a conflict with the Mapuche and is guilty to keep the conflict on fire. The Chilean government has been the main character putting pressure into Mapuche to leave the territory. Finally, Mapuches created rebel organisations to fight against the oppressor government. The government should stop the awful killing of the Mapuche people and let them in peace and respect their beliefs.