Clarifying whether this lesson is for spoken or written SpanishI understand that dropping the ¨de¨ is something done sometimes in spoken Spanish in Mexico and elsewhere, but it would it be marked incorrect in written Spanish? It seems like there should be some discussion about how this differs from Castilian rules. ChatGPT says re Dropping the de
You may hear:
antes que
or
después que
especially in parts of Latin America.
For example:
Antes que llegues...
Después que terminó...
These forms occur in everyday speech in countries such as Mexico, parts of Central America, the Caribbean, Argentina, Uruguay, and elsewhere, though how common they are varies by region and speaker.
However:
They are considered regional rather than the neutral standard.
In formal writing, education, and when speaking to people from across the Spanish-speaking world, antes de que and después de que are the safer, more widely accepted choices.
If your goal is broadly natural, educated Spanish (which I know you've been working toward), I would recommend keeping the de.
When there is an indirect pronoun in a sentence we use: me, te, le, nos, os, les. However when the indirect pronouns le and les (meaning to him / to her / to them) are accompanied by the direct pronoun lo, la, los or las (meaning it / them) then le and les become se to avoid a clumsy sounding le lo, le la, les los etc, which is tricky to pronounce. Listen to this example.
I would say that this sort of explanation is probably utterly useless to 80% of people. I would bet a lot of money that the majority of first language English people reading this for the firs time have no idea what a direct pronoun is nor an indirect pronoun. It seems that all study guides, and text books assume that people are an expert in the technical language of their own language. They are not.
If someone ever produced material where they explain the 'technical' term before they try to explain how to use that term it would be so much more useful than throwing the terms around with no explanation.
If you read a mechanics' manual and it said "'Locate the second differential gear chain"" would that be helpful if it was the first time that you were looking at tractor's engine?
And the very next thing I read was "With an infinitive, imperative or present participle, se and the direct object pronoun can be either at the end of the verbal structure and attached to the infinitive, imperative or the present participle forming a longer word:
Because for sure, everyone in the world knows what a present participle is.
I have now read the whole thing, and it is clearly written by an expert in the language of an expert to someone who already understands that expert language. There is no attempt to actually explain what is going on to a novice.
It is actually terrible teaching.
Hola Inma, In the 'Fill in the blanks" exercise for "El apóstol Santiago" the final blank of the exercise is: "Incluso había peregrinos que se encontraban años después....." I probably should have taken ore notice of the "met up" suggestion but I have never seen this usage before, and this lesson doesn't include the idea of "meeting up" as requiring the pronominal "encontrarse." As you know it focuses on the location of where people arrange to meet, and the idea of bumping into someone is not appropriate in this example. Would it be an idea to include this in the lesson? It fits with the pronominal notion of meeting "with one another" / "with each other" which is true for the expression "nos vemos entonces" for example, though I am not sure that you would use those words to translate the expression. Saludos. John
Hola Inma, In the 'Fill in the blanks" exercise for "El apóstol Santiago" the final blank of the exercise is: "Incluso había peregrinos que se encontraban años después....." I probably should have taken ore notice of the "met up" suggestion but I have never seen this usage before, and this lesson doesn't include the idea of "meeting up" as requiring the pronominal "encontrarse." As you know it focuses on the location of where people arrange to meet, and the idea of bumping into someone is not appropriate in this example. Would it be an idea to include this in the lesson? It fits with the pronominal notion of meeting "with one another" / "with each other" which is true for the expression "nos vemos entonces" for example, though I am not sure that you would use those words to translate the expression. Saludos. John
Rosalía uses a mix of definite articles and possessive adjectives in "Reliquia". Is this artistic choice? Or a grammar point I'm missing?
Some of the lyrics:
"Yo que perdí mis manos en Jerez, y mis ojos en Roma
...
los heels en Milán, la sonrisa en U.K"
I understand that dropping the ¨de¨ is something done sometimes in spoken Spanish in Mexico and elsewhere, but it would it be marked incorrect in written Spanish? It seems like there should be some discussion about how this differs from Castilian rules. ChatGPT says re Dropping the de
You may hear:
antes que
or
después que
especially in parts of Latin America.
For example:
Antes que llegues...
Después que terminó...
These forms occur in everyday speech in countries such as Mexico, parts of Central America, the Caribbean, Argentina, Uruguay, and elsewhere, though how common they are varies by region and speaker.
However:
They are considered regional rather than the neutral standard.
In formal writing, education, and when speaking to people from across the Spanish-speaking world, antes de que and después de que are the safer, more widely accepted choices.
If your goal is broadly natural, educated Spanish (which I know you've been working toward), I would recommend keeping the de.
A tan solo dos minutos de
Hola, why is con included in the above sentence ? Muchas gracias, Shirley.
Because I kept getting this wrong, I asked Chatgpt: Can one use deber conjugated in El Pretérito Perfecto, followed by an infinitive to express in Spanish that something must have happened, as when making an assumption or wondering what must have happened? The response was: No—not if your goal is to express an assumption ("must have happened").
The pretérito perfecto of deber (ha debido) normally means "has had to" (obligation), not "must have" (probability).
Are there certain countries (e.g. Costa Rica) in which "a" is not used for talking about certain parts of the day like morning, afternoon and evening but only por manana or en la manana would be used. Seethe example below?
A la mañana desayuno cereales.I have cereal for breakfast in the morning.
I appreciate the inclusion of this lesson as an effort to educate us in a nuance. My particular American English formed brain just can’t seem to grasp the subtle differences. I’m wondering if in conversation with a native speaker, it would be an issue if the non-native speaker didn’t differentiate between the two forms. I think if I were speaking in Spanish and trying to explain a situation about not being able to open a door last night, I would choose words that made it clear that number one: He just couldn’t open the door or 2, at first, he couldn’t open the door, but then someone came to help him. Well, now that I’ve written out these examples, I realize how far I am from understanding the nuance. I’m hoping you will say that in conversation with a native speaker it really doesn’t make a lot of difference. Verdad?
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level