Passive 'se' vs Impersonal 3rd person pluralI always equate 'impersonal' with 'passive', as they seem to express the same thing. And, I've always used 'se' to express passive. So using third person is new to me, and I'm confused by this lesson and a question Kwiziq asked me to translate:
'They took ages to build the hospital'
among the choices were:
Han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (correct)
Se han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (incorrect)
Can someone explain why the second one is wrong.
Here are two other similar examples I found on Kwiziq that relate to this:
Tardaron mucho en construír los apartamentos = It took a long time to build the apartments.
Se tardó mucho en construir este hospital = It took (them, whoever built it) a long time to build this hospital.
I understand the notion of using estar rather than ser when the job is temporary, but there is absolutely nothing in the question to indicate that the job is a temporary or permanent position in most of the examples If a job is to be permanent would you use ser rather than estar when referring to an appointment that someone is going to take up? In the test questions and examples, it would seem not but the lesson notes don't explakin why.
Hola,
This lesson is clear in distinguishing the Futuro Próximo, but is there a reason why none of the translations offered use the variation "I am going to buy a house.... / They are going to have a meal tonight.... etc.?
These would be common ways of expressing future arrangements in English, and happily distinguish it very clearly from the present progressive "I am buying a house" which doesn't quite capture the idea of a future arrangement.
Is there some distinction that I'm not aware of?
Saludos. John
Since the question asked for a formal question as I would be addressing an elderly man, I would only use company esta? I would not use question tal? That is a very informal way of asking and means more ‘how’s everything?’
I always equate 'impersonal' with 'passive', as they seem to express the same thing. And, I've always used 'se' to express passive. So using third person is new to me, and I'm confused by this lesson and a question Kwiziq asked me to translate:
'They took ages to build the hospital'
among the choices were:
Han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (correct)
Se han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (incorrect)
Can someone explain why the second one is wrong.
Here are two other similar examples I found on Kwiziq that relate to this:
Tardaron mucho en construír los apartamentos = It took a long time to build the apartments.
Se tardó mucho en construir este hospital = It took (them, whoever built it) a long time to build this hospital.
Why isn't it en EL verano?
You say that Felipe was succeeded as king of Spain by his son Carlos. That is incorrect. Carlos was mentally unstable and conspired against his father by supporting the protestants in the Netherlands. He was imprisoned in 1568 and died the following year. Felipe was succeeded by his second son Felipe 111
What is the difference between ´sufficiente´ and ´lo sufficiente´?
Or rather when should you each either one.
Hola,
Is there a reason why "cuento" cannot be used for "story."
My translator says that "cuento" is used for a fictional tale and "historia" is used for a narrative account. I always thought that they were more or less interchangeable.
Kind Regards
John
I understand your explanations perfectly, but I was surprised to learn that it was correct to use "mitad" and "medio" interchangeably when discussing physical space.
It seems to me that way back when I was first learning those concepts, I was told that medio meant middle and and mitad meant half, and that it was an error to confuse the two. Is this a case of one of those "errors so common among native speakers that now it's not wrong anymore" ? Or was I taught incorrectly to begin with?
Thanks for the insight!
Find your Spanish level for FREE
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard
Find your Spanish level