por v. para 4"Lo hago por ti" implies
"I do it for your sake, because of you and for you, altogether".
"Lo hago para ti"
suggests nothing about the true motivation,
which may well lay outside the addressee;
it only designates ti 'you' as the destination of the "doing".
I have found this in:
"Delbecque - Towards a cognitive account of the use of the prepositions por and para in Spanish 1996".
This, I hope, might explain why
"sacrificios por sus hijos"
is prefered to
"sacrificios para sus hijos".
In both cases hijos are the recipients, but the attitude toward the recipients seem to matter.
Google search gives 88,500 hits to "sacrificios por sus hijos"
and 39 to "sacrificios para sus hijos",
suggesting that "para" is a very poor (ungramatical?) choice here.
The time is last month, why don't we use Era posible and lead to other hubiera PP?
Justin
I don't understand what the following excerpt from the lesson is supposed to mean:
Es + bueno [adjective]Está + bien [adverb]
Can you please clarify what this means in prose rather than abreviated notation?
What is "el halda"? The only definition in my dictionary is skirt or sackcloth, and it is listed as feminine, not masculine.
Hi everyone!
I am a new member of the community and would like to know what to use the forums for? What are the guidelines, who are the mods etc? Thanks!
I think I've managed to wrap my head around how the passive works in a basic sense, but I'm wondering if anyone can offer, or refer me to, any guidance on WHEN to use different passive/impersonal forms, or how the nuances change? I know this is a rather broad question, so I'll try to narrow it down to a couple examples:
When is it prefered to use the true passive versus the se refleja form? for example, I was reading an article that said "las piedras habían sido extraídas de rocas que se formaron hace miles de millones de años." Here we have two different forms used in the same sentence! Could the writer have instead said "las piedras se habían extraído de rocas que fueron formado"--or some other combination--and if so are there different nuances?! Is one simply more formal? Or is there another specific reason the se pasiva wasn't use for one but it was used for the other?
Also, I know this is a lot at once, but I'm struggling to grasp how the use of the passive with "se" differs from the use of the "ellos" impersonal construction. For example, if a house is under construction down the street, would you say "se construye una casa" or "construyen una casa" and if both are equally valid, how are the nuances different? And are there cases where one is possible but the other isn't? For instance, I've often noticed that when the object of an action is a person rather than a thing the action is often not expressed with se--the ellos form seems to be the choice in some cases like "le robaron" (but not "se robó"?). And yet... we do have "se buscan secretarias"? I can't quite see what is going on here...
Mil gracias in advance for any help on any of these questions...
You said the answer was supé and not supe. I have been unable to find an example in your lesson that uses the accent mark. What am I missing here and where can I find an example of supe with the accent mark along with an explanation_
Just took the weekly quiz on 'El futbolin' and got everything right just by using my instinct and what sounded right to my ear. And, though I had read and kwizzed this lesson before, it is a very different matter to use that knowledge without being able to scroll up and read the explanation as needed.
So, thank you for this lesson which explains clearly the difference between muy and mucho. Another review was very helpful.
Si mue gusta. Cuando era niña comi toda las gaetas del mundo
Hello, this is a more advanced topic but I've come back to review.
Why do we use the subjunctive in this statement:
Ustedes pueden comprar lo que quieran.
Thanks.
"Lo hago por ti" implies
"I do it for your sake, because of you and for you, altogether".
"Lo hago para ti"
suggests nothing about the true motivation,
which may well lay outside the addressee;
it only designates ti 'you' as the destination of the "doing".
I have found this in:
"Delbecque - Towards a cognitive account of the use of the prepositions por and para in Spanish 1996".
This, I hope, might explain why
"sacrificios por sus hijos"
is prefered to
"sacrificios para sus hijos".
In both cases hijos are the recipients, but the attitude toward the recipients seem to matter.
Google search gives 88,500 hits to "sacrificios por sus hijos"
and 39 to "sacrificios para sus hijos",
suggesting that "para" is a very poor (ungramatical?) choice here.
Find your Spanish level for FREE
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard
Find your Spanish level