Mañana lo hago o lo haré
Simple present tense and future.
We can sometimes use the simple present tense to talk about the future. This is common when we are talking about events which have already been planned or decided, or which are part of a timetable or a regular schedule.
The summer term starts on April 10th.
My plane leaves at eight tomorrow morning.
What time does the bus arrive in London?
Exams begins on 10th Dec.
It's clear in English but, in Spanish'.
How people sometimes say translation ** **correct Spanish grammar
Mañana lo hago. Tomorrow I'll do it. Mañana lo haré.
Voy para allá. I'll be right there. Iré para allá.
Ahora bajo. I'll be right down. Ahora bajaré.
Ahora le llamo. Now I'll call him. Ahora le llamaré.
Enseguida vuelvo I'll be right back. Enseguida volveré.
Ahora te veo. I'll see you in just a minute. Ahora te veré.
Si puedo lo hago. If I can, I'll do it. Si puedo lo haré.
Mañana llueve seguro. Tomorrow it's going to rain Mañana lloverá seguro.
for sure.
A Spanish teacher would say the correct way would be to use only the future tense. However we often use the simple present tense to talk about the future.(more than we should). Am I right'
35 Answers
It's clear in English but, in Spanish'.
How people sometimes say translation ** **correct Spanish grammar
To use the present tense to talk about the future is PERFECTLY CORRECT in formal and standard Spanish, as it is to talk about the past. This tense is used when the future situation is so much under our control, that we state as a fact. "Mañana me jubilo" (past). "Julio César invade las Galias en el año 55 antes de Cristo" (future). Funny enough, present tense is not normally used to talk about actions in curse with a clear end that are happening right now.
On the other hand, we use the future tense to make predictions about the present or the future; the name of this tense is deceiving, because people would expect the "future" tense to be the tense for the future, but it doesn't work like that: it is the tense for predictions. In "Estará en su casa", we are not saying that he will be at house, but guessing that he is probably at home.
[b]
A Spanish teacher would say the correct way would be to use only the future tense. However we often use the simple present tense to talk about the future.(more than we should). Am I right'Hola mi amigo iluso
Well, having said that...jeje, I think that is so much so, that I actually teach my students, to avoid confusion, that you can never ever use the present simple in the future in English, as we almost never use the future tense in Spain. ( I do point out that there are exceptions to the rule)
So sentences like:
mañana voy al cine.
Este verano me voy a la playa.
etc. are invariably translated as:
Tomorrow I go to the cinema.
Next summer I go to the beach.
(sic)
So I am drastic: present in the future is wrong, that's it. Punto pelota.
Heidita, it is quite common in English to use the present progressive tense to refer to the future:
They are having their estate sale next week.
Tomorrow, we are planting tulips in the morning before it gets hot.
Present simple tense? Not so much, but we don't use the present simple nearly as much in English as in Spanish anyway. It does sometimes occur, for emphasis or for something considered certain:
Tomorrow the bottom falls out of the market.
Next week we do or die.
Next month, the biggest tournament ever takes place in our city.
Heidita,
I think that your never ever rule is a bit severe, as in English we use the present simple extensively. When I found out that present simple is used to express future in Spanish, I was delighted because I thought, "This is easy--just like English!" In informal usage, the present simple ("going to") is preferable to future ("will"). And, unfortunately in America, the shortcut "gonna" is largely replacing "going to," even in some high-level speeches.
Here are some examples:
This cold front indicates that it will rain tomorrow. --A weather forecaster on TV formally predicting the weather, although "is going to" would be acceptable also.
Those clouds tell me that it's going to rain. --Less formal in conversation.
I will go to the movie tonight. --Implies determination, as in "I will go to the movie even though I can't afford it."
I'm going to go to the movie because I think I'll like this film. --I am planning to go, and my "formal reason" is that I will like it.
I will succeed at learning Spanish even though it's hard. -- I'm determined to do it.
I'm going to learn Spanish. --I'm planning to start doing it soon.
The experimental automobile shall get at least 50 miles per gallon. --Here, a formal specification ("shall," not "will") poses a firm requirement; "is going to" would be unacceptable.
My new car is going to get 50 miles per gallon! --That's what I'm telling my friend. There's no need to be formal here.
Trespassers will be shot! --Yes, they WILL! Strength is needed here. "Are going to be shot" does not carry the same weight.
So in summary:
Shall/will: Formal, determined, strong -- often a bit too formal for normal conversation.
Going to: Informal, relaxed -- the normal case for conversation and informal writing.
BUT, with all this having been said, the boundary between "will" and "going to" is not rigorous and in most cases, they may be used interchangeably. The intent of the sentence carries a lot of weight and is difficult to quantify. In fact, depending on how it is said, "going to" may carry a lot of strength. I base all this on personal experience, not on any rulebook. But I can say that the use of present simple to express future in English is commonly used and is entirely acceptable, just as it is in Spanish.
--Eeek
Do you mean':
Tomorrow I am going to the cinema
Next summer I am going to the beach
Yees, robert, this is what I mean, but my students don't understand this very well, that is the problem! 
Iker,
The way I understand it, using the future tense all the time, as our grammar teachers would like us to do, sounds overly formal to the man in the street. Is this right? I love the approach taken by the author of Breaking Out of Beginner's Spanish, who says that in everyday conversation we can just forget about the future tense altogether and use the present tense instead. 
The translations "It sounds Chinese" or "It sounds like Chinese" are both fine for me. I am not sure what James meant but I think that he was saying that in English it doesn't sound Chinese per se but merely doesn't sound correct. Is "Esto suena a chino" an expression in Spanish that people use to indicate that something sounds wrong or did you actually mean that it sounded Chinese?
Not really, Robert, we use the phrase to indicate that you don't understand something.
I am having lunch with my mom and later I am going to the cinema.
Sound both perfectly Chinese over here.
I tried to say that:
Mañana estoy comiendo con mi madre y luego me estoy yendo al cine......sounds like some Chinese guy is talking and you don't understand a thing....jeje
I mean, I am sure a Spanish person would probably even understand this, as we always try to understand....but the tense used would be so weird....that it would be rather difficult to find out if this person is eating right now or if he is going to eat tomorrow...as the tenses are not correct.
Which reminds me of an anecdote by an English native who never got to get the conjugation of the verbs right so he would say:
Mañana yo vas.
I think only I understood him, as I know, that first things first: subject! jejej
So it was: Mañana Yo voy. Not "tú vas" as others thought. All a matter of mentality I guess. 
well, not really, we use this expression for written or spoken things we simply don't understand, as we would something spoken or written in Chinese.
Another point you made was interesting, when you said that with more advanced students you can explain other possibilities or usages for various verb tenses. This is something that I know as "review and expansion", whereby you teach, for example, "will" as simple future to basic level students but later explain that it can be used to make predictions, talk about spontaneous decisions, etc. So, when you said that you teach your lower level students to never use the simple present to talk about the future (obviously so as not to confuse them) again I totally see that it makes sense. However, back to my original point, these are the sensibilities of an E.S.L. teacher rather than a linguist.
thanks for the input, robert, very interesting indeed
By the way, I used the Spanish expression:
Esto suena a chino.....in one of my posts.
How would you say that in English'? I said it sounds Chinese but James said it didn't work here but gave no possible translation.
If you mean "this is completely unintelligible", the usual phrase in English is "This is Greek to me." If, on the other hand, you mean that you more-or-less understand what's being said but that the syntax is bizarre, I don't think that there is a universal expression. However, some possibilities (in certain contexts) would be "Franglish", "Spanglish, "Japanglish" (or, in the most general case, "broken-English").
The translations "It sounds Chinese" or "It sounds like Chinese" are both fine for me. I am not sure what James meant but I think that he was saying that in English it doesn't sound Chinese per se but merely doesn't sound correct. Is "Esto suena a chino" an expression in Spanish that people use to indicate that something sounds wrong or did you actually mean that it sounded Chinese?
Another point you made was interesting, when you said that with more advanced students you can explain other possibilities or usages for various verb tenses. This is something that I know as "review and expansion", whereby you teach, for example, "will" as simple future to basic level students but later explain that it can be used to make predictions, talk about spontaneous decisions, etc. So, when you said that you teach your lower level students to never use the simple present to talk about the future (obviously so as not to confuse them) again I totally see that it makes sense. However, back to my original point, these are the sensibilities of an E.S.L. teacher rather than a linguist.
Hello Heidita. I think you are suffering from the same problem that I have suffered from on this site. In my opinion we both think and express ourselves like English teachers and not like linguists.
Your original post was about how best to get students to express themselves with English as a second language. To do this you NEED to simplify which is basically what you have done with your rule about never using the present simple to talk about the future. .
Hi Robert, I had no idea you were a teacher too
Acutally I showed your "corrections" to my post of "I go to the cinema and eat with my mom...." to my student
I agree with most of the posters, of course, that this is a pure and simple* very drastic* simplification. I sometimes have to simplify so much that I feel I am not even teaching English properly.
Latest subject: Conditionals, possible conditions. I taught, ok, take simple present, imperatives, will or modals, like can , may etc.
Well, the book only uses "will" ...so we had to simplify again and I told my student not to use simple present just in case...(sigh) 
I did say I am using a very "drastic approach" on this, so as to teach them especially the different usage of the present progressive in English. With excellent results, I might add and I am happy to say. At higher levels I can then expand on the other possibilities.
By the way, I used the Spanish expression:
Esto suena a chino.....in one of my posts.
How would you say that in English'? I said it sounds Chinese but James said it didn't work here but gave no possible translation.
Hello Heidita. I think you are suffering from the same problem that I have suffered from on this site. In my opinion we both think and express ourselves like English teachers and not like linguists.
Your original post was about how best to get students to express themselves with English as a second language. To do this you NEED to simplify which is basically what you have done with your rule about never using the present simple to talk about the future. I personally totally understand your reasons for doing this and if it works in your classes and gets students talking English properly then fantastic.
Other bloggers (posters) on this site are more concerned with a linguistic approach to how language works. In fact I believe the definition of linguistics is "The study of how language works". Language is complicated and the people that have posted saying that the present simple used to describe the future cannot be justified with a couple of overly simplistic rules are also absolutely correct.
I think the key here is that if someone asks a question about English usage and said person is learning English then a simplistic English teacher response would probably help them a lot whereas a complicated linguistic type response would leave them with their head spinning. So for me it is just a matter of responding to people's needs and if a debate drifts into an area where it becomes too complicated to really teach somebody something then just let them know that the responses given are more linguistic and not necessarily suitable to help them aquire a simple grammar rule in English. I personally have had to stop reading some threads about Spanish usage because the explanations became too complicated but at the same time was able to learn something and appreciate the incredible grammatical knowledge of the bloggers (posters).
So, to summarise, English teachers are English teachers and linguists are linguists and never the twain shall meet.
The use of shall and will is even more complicated than I outlined above. If anyone is interested, here is a fairly concise explanation. But it underscores my point about why we sometimes choose not to use a "future tense" and use the simple present instead.
Usage Note: The traditional rules for using shall and will prescribe a highly complicated pattern of use in which the meanings of the forms change according to the person of the subject. In the first person, shall is used to indicate simple futurity: I shall (not will) have to buy another ticket. In the second and third persons, the same sense of futurity is expressed by will: The comet will (not shall) return in 87 years. You will (not shall) probably encounter some heavy seas when you round the point. The use of will in the first person and of shall in the second and third may express determination, promise, obligation, or permission, depending on the context. Thus I will leave tomorrow indicates that the speaker is determined to leave; You and she shall leave tomorrow is likely to be interpreted as a command. The sentence You shall have your money expresses a promise ("I will see that you get your money"), whereas You will have your money makes a simple prediction.·Such, at least, are the traditional rules. The English and some traditionalists about usage are probably the only people who follow these rules, and then not with perfect consistency. In America, people who try to adhere to them run the risk of sounding pretentious or haughty. Americans normally use will to express most of the senses reserved for shall in English usage. Americans use shall chiefly in first person invitations and questions that request an opinion or agreement, such as Shall we go? and in certain fixed expressions, such as We shall overcome. In formal style, Americans use shall to express an explicit obligation, as in Applicants shall provide a proof of residence, though this sense is also expressed by must or should. In speech the distinction that the English signal by the choice of shall or will may be rendered by stressing the auxiliary, as in I will leave tomorrow ("I intend to leave"); by choosing another auxiliary, such as must or have to; or by using an adverb such as certainly.·In addition to its sense of obligation, shall also can convey high moral seriousness that derives in part from its extensive use in the King James Bible, as in "Righteousness shall go before him and shall set us in the way of his steps" (Ps 85:13) and "He that shall humble himself shall be exalted" (Mt 23:12). The prophetic overtones that shall bears with it have no doubt led to its use in some of the loftiest rhetoric in English. This may be why Lincoln chose to use it instead of will in the Gettysburg Address:"government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."
Thank you so much, James for your explanation.
I didn't know that "shall" is the original way to express future tense. That should be traditional because the teacher didn't teach me this way to use "shall" or "will" when I was in the school.
Marco
And I am surprised you should not be aware of the rule of using your own tenses. You can use the tenses you wish in spoken language, but there is no doubt you yourself would not pass an exam over here if you do not even know the rules.
I'm sorry, Heidita, I'm afraid you're just wrong about this one.
The published paper you referenced is clearly an attempt to set down some guidelines for English Language Learners about when to expect the present simple tense. This is not an accepted rule for standard use of the English language.
Here is another example taken from [email=http://leo.stcloudstate.edu/grammar/tenses.html]this page[/email]:
*We can also use the present tense form with an adverb or adverbial phrase to show future time.
The president speaks tomorrow. (Tomorrow is a future time adverb.)*
This is perfectly acceptable in both written and spoken language. I'm afraid that attempts at over-simplification are going to misinform and confuse English language learners.
No James, I did not give any examples of the present used in the future, I gave expamples of how the present is wrongly used by students, and I was duely corrected by Robert:
So sentences like:
mañana voy al cine.
Este verano me voy a la playa.
etc. are invariably translated as:
Tomorrow I go to the cinema.
Next summer I go to the beach.
(sic)
So I am drastic: present in the future is wrong, that's it. Punto pelota.
Do you mean':
Tomorrow I am going to the cinema
Next summer I am going to the beach
And there is no way at all that I am going to agree to that the present is commonly used in English to express future. And there is no question about a sentence like:
I go to the cinema tomorrow.
being marked as wrong.
You yourself gave this example of the "present simple" used in the future:
No, they're not coming today. The game is tomorrow.
A Spanish person would have said: They don't come today.
And I am surprised you should not be aware of the rule of using your own tenses. You can use the tenses you wish in spoken language, but there is no doubt you yourself would not pass an exam over here if you do not even know the rules.
This is published by the Oxford University.
Which reminds of the regional uses of the past tenses in Spanish. People from Galicia almost never use the present perfect, in Madrid we almost never use the past simple. However, if a student needs to do an exam, we need to know the rules of its usage which is nowhere as restrictive as in English, but it still exists.
Heidita, punctual means "on time" in English. I am guessing that you intended to say "occasional," not "punctual." You may be getting confused with punctuated, which is a different word.
jejej, false friend Nati, thanks!
puntual : occasional
...that is exactly what I am trying to get over, with not much success I must admit, as we almost always use the present simple. NEVER the progressive tense which sounds like Chinese to a Spanish native.
But what you said was " I think that is so much so, that I actually teach my students, to avoid confusion, that you can never ever use the present simple in the future in English." You gave some examples of using the present simple for future events, but called them exceptions to the rule. There is no such rule, and the examples you gave are not exceptions, but just ordinary English. Using the simple present tense for the future is extremely common in English, and while using it in a way that sounds natural can be very complicated and probably takes years to learn, my point all along is merely that it is wrong to say that we never use the present tense for the future in English.
As an aside, while I know it sounds fine in Spanish, saying that something sounds like Chinese doesn't really work in English.
And yes, James, I do think usage of present simple is punctual, not "usual" in English.
Nothing could be more "usual" than to use the present tense for the future in English.
This is the rule:
Present Simple
The Present Simple is used for events that are part of a timetable or schedule. While the events are in the future, their existence is already established in the present so we use the Present Simple. For example:
The train arrives at 8:00 this evening.
There's a good concert on next week.
That is an example of someone trying to force a simple explanation onto a complicated subject. The use of the present simple for future events is most certainly not limited to "events that are part of a timetable or schedule." Obviously, the event must be expected to occur at some time, or we wouldn't be talking about it, but it doesn't have to be on a schedule.
It certainly sounds perfectly natural to a Spaniard to say:
I go to the cinema next week.
I have lunch with my mom tomorrow.
and
I am having lunch with my mom and later I am going to the cinema.
Sound both perfectly Chinese over here.
I think everyone agrees that the simple present is used more frequently in Spanish than in English for the future, but it is still common in English.
