A maré muda depressa naquela costa, por isso o seguro de viagem menciona possíveis atrasos.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Portuguese grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Portuguese now

Questions & Answers about A maré muda depressa naquela costa, por isso o seguro de viagem menciona possíveis atrasos.

Why does the sentence use “A maré” with the definite article? Could it just be “Maré muda depressa…”?

In European Portuguese, singular countable nouns almost always take an article, even when English leaves it out.

Natural phenomena like a maré (the tide), o vento (the wind), a chuva (the rain) normally appear with the definite article when you’re talking about them in a general/descriptive way.

  • Correct / natural:
    • A maré muda depressa naquela costa.The tide changes quickly on that coast.
  • Without article:
    • Maré muda depressa naquela costa. – Sounds odd/telegraphic, like a headline or a note, not normal speech.

So in normal sentences, keep the article: a maré.


What’s the difference between “maré”, “mar”, and “onda”?

They refer to different things:

  • a maréthe tide

    • The periodic rise and fall of the sea level.
    • A maré muda depressa.The tide changes quickly.
  • o marthe sea

    • The body of salt water in general.
    • O mar está calmo hoje.The sea is calm today.
  • a ondathe wave

    • Individual waves.
    • As ondas são muito grandes.The waves are very big.

In the sentence, we’re clearly talking about the tide, so maré is the right word.


Why is “muda” in the present tense? Does it mean “changes” or “is changing”?

In Portuguese, the simple present often covers both:

  • a general fact/habit (like English simple present), and
  • something that happens repeatedly or typically (where English might also use “is changing”, “tends to change”, etc.).

Here “A maré muda depressa naquela costa” means:

  • The tide changes quickly on that coast.
  • In context, it also carries the idea “the tide tends to change quickly / is quick to change”.

You don’t need a continuous form; present simple (muda) is the normal choice here.


What’s the nuance of “depressa”? How is it different from “rápido” or “rapidamente”?

All relate to speed, but their use is a bit different:

  • depressa – adverb, very common, informal/neutral: quickly, fast

    • Ele anda depressa.He walks fast.
  • rápido – usually an adjective (fast, quick), but also used adverbially in speech:

    • Um carro rápido.A fast car.
    • Ele anda rápido.He walks fast. (common, but more colloquial as an adverb)
  • rapidamente – adverb, more formal or “bookish”:

    • Ele anda rapidamente. – Grammatically fine, sounds a bit more formal.

In this sentence, “depressa” is the most natural everyday choice:
A maré muda depressa…The tide changes quickly…


What exactly is going on in “naquela costa”? How does “naquela” work?

Naquela = em + aquela (in/on + that).

  • em
    • aquelanaquela
  • Literally: “in/on that (far) coast”on that coast.

About the demonstrative aquela:

  • esta – this (near the speaker)
  • essa – that (near the listener / already in context)
  • aquela – that (far from both, or more distant in space/mental distance)

So “naquela costa” suggests a specific coast that is not “here” and is somewhat more distant or “removed” from the current location/context, e.g. a particular remote coastline they’re talking about.


Could you also say “nessa costa” instead of “naquela costa”? Would it change the meaning?

Yes, you could, but there’s a small nuance:

  • nessa costa = em
    • essa costaon that coast (that we’re talking about / closer to you)
  • naquela costa = em
    • aquela costaon that (more distant/that specific) coast

Both can translate as “on that coast”, but:

  • nessa costa feels more like “that coast we’re already talking about / that one there”.
  • naquela costa feels more like “that particular (maybe remote or more clearly pointed-out) coast”.

In many contexts, the difference is subtle, and both are understandable. Here naquela slightly emphasizes a specific, perhaps more distant coastline.


What does “por isso” mean exactly, and where can it go in the sentence?

Por isso is a connector meaning “so / therefore / that’s why”.

In this sentence:

  • …por isso o seguro de viagem menciona possíveis atrasos.
    …so the travel insurance mentions possible delays.

Typical positions:

  • At the start of the result clause, as here:
    • A maré muda depressa naquela costa, por isso o seguro de viagem menciona possíveis atrasos.
  • It can also come at the very beginning (with a pause after it):
    • Por isso, o seguro de viagem menciona possíveis atrasos.

Other similar connectors:

  • por isso é que – often adds emphasis: that’s why
  • portanto – more formal: therefore
  • entãoso (more conversational; can have several uses)

But por isso is the most natural, neutral choice here.


How does “seguro de viagem” work grammatically? Why not something like “*viagem seguro”?

Portuguese doesn’t form noun–noun compounds the same way English does. Instead, it often uses:

  • noun + de + noun

So:

  • seguro de viagem – literally insurance of traveltravel insurance
  • bilhete de aviãoplane ticket
  • cartão de créditocredit card

Saying “*viagem seguro” would be wrong; adjectives usually come after the noun, and viagem is a noun, not an adjective.

The natural pattern is “seguro de [tipo]”:

  • seguro de saúde – health insurance
  • seguro de carro – car insurance
  • seguro de viagem – travel insurance

Why “seguro de viagem” (singular) and not “seguro de viagens” (plural)? Is there a difference?

Both forms exist, but there’s a nuance:

  • seguro de viagem (singular) – the standard, most common term for travel insurance in general, regardless of how many trips.
  • seguro de viagens (plural) – can also be used and may suggest coverage for multiple trips, or be used as a variant by some companies, but it’s less standard.

In everyday language and on most Portuguese websites, you’ll typically see seguro de viagem as the generic product name. That’s why it appears in the sentence.


Why is it “menciona possíveis atrasos” and not something like “fala de possíveis atrasos”?

Both are possible, but they differ in tone:

  • mencionar – to mention, to state

    • More formal/neutral, a bit more precise.
    • Fits legal/contract language like insurance terms.
  • falar de – to talk about

    • More conversational, less formal.

Since we’re talking about what the insurance document says, menciona sounds natural, like “the policy explicitly mentions / refers to possible delays.”

Examples:

  • O contrato menciona possíveis atrasos.The contract mentions possible delays.
  • O guia fala de possíveis atrasos.The guide talks about possible delays. (more informal)

Why is it “possíveis atrasos” (adjective before noun)? Could you say “atrasos possíveis”?

Both orders are grammatically possible, but word order can affect nuance.

  • possíveis atrasos (adjective before noun)

    • Very common with adjectives like possível.
    • Feels like a more fixed / generic combination: possible delays as a category the insurance covers.
  • atrasos possíveis (adjective after noun)

    • Grammatically fine, but sounds a bit more marked or specific, as if you’re focusing on “the delays that are possible (as opposed to others).”

In practice, for the standard phrase in insurance language, “possíveis atrasos” is what you’d expect to see. It matches English “possible delays” closely in feel.


Why is “maré” singular (“muda”) instead of plural (“mudam”)? Could Portuguese use the plural to talk about tides in general?

No, here maré is naturally singular, even though you’re speaking in general:

  • A maré muda depressa naquela costa.The tide changes quickly on that coast.

You’re talking about the tide as a phenomenon on that coast. Portuguese normally uses the singular with the article for such general statements:

  • A água ferve a 100 graus.Water boils at 100 degrees.
  • O vento muda de direção.The wind changes direction.

Using the plural “as marés mudam depressa” would sound like you’re emphasizing different individual tides (e.g., spring tide vs neap tide) rather than describing the general behavior of the tide there.