Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

10

Es un vulgarismo que debe ser evitado: por analogía con el resto de los tiempos verbales (dices, decías, dirás...), a la segunda persona (tú) se le añade como vulgarismo una –s final, y así encontramos el vulgarismo: Tú dijistes* En España, es común encontrar esto en la mitad norte, como dice aquí: En el habla de las tierras donde nació ...


8

The reason traces back to the Latin forms (and possibly farther back than that). In Latin, duco/ducere "to lead" changes "c" to "x" (c+s = x) to form the perfect tense: duxi, duxisti, duxit, ... This verb is the root of traducir, conducir, etc. Latin "x" normally corresponds with Spanish "j", hence conduje, condujiste, condujo, .... Although most Spanish ...


8

"Traducir" is an irregular verb that follows the conjugation model of "conducir". In Spanish there are a few irregular verbs, some of them are completely irregular and others just partially. At the conjugation site of Instituto de Verbología Hispánica you can find the 101 conjugation models in Spanish with the list of irregulars; and this data base allows ...


8

Before your question, I never heard nor read about Spanish verbs that change their meaning when used in some preterite verbal tense. So I read about it, and I found out that: This issue is mainly a way to teach Spanish verbs to English speaking students. This issue is not formally stated in Spanish grammar. For example, when you analyse the verb saber, ...


7

Para responder esta pregunta primero es necesario entender el tiempo verbal copretérito. Este tiempo indica: Una acción pasada que sucedió al mismo tiempo que otra. Una acción pasada que no se sabe cuando terminó o que no ha terminado. Basándome en el ejemplo y en el título de la pregunta, infiero que estamos en el primer caso. El primer ...


7

Actually, ¿hicieron usted su tarea para hoy? is incorrect. As you say, for the third person plural the correct way to say it is: ¿Hicieron ustedes su tarea para hoy?


5

Imperfect, always. That is the correct tense to use whenever you have an habitual action in the past. Edit: As César mentioned, a possible literal translation of your example would be Ellos solían viajar todos los días Whether you use solían, and cada día vs. todos los días will depend on how the sentence continues and what is the main point you ...


5

As you say "Supo" means "found out" and "Sabía" means "Knew" which are not the same. But, answering your question, it's about if the action has a stated timeframe. María lo supo ayer. = Maria found out yesterday. This means a completed action. Juan sabía que María venía. = Juan knew that Maria was coming. This doesn't provide definite beginning ...


5

If you check RAE you'll find the answer here and in this othe link with more details. Depending on the different grammars published there are different names. There are 2 simple tenses for past Pretérito imperfecto /Copretérito [de indicativo/ subjuntivo] (Pretérito imperfecto is the most used) E.g. En indicativo, amaba, temía, vivía; en ...


5

No es correcto poner "e" en vez de "he". Ni con la primera persona del verbo, ni con ninguna otra. La razón es que el pretérito perfecto se construye con el presente del verbo auxiliar haber (y el participio del verbo que denota la acción) y este, y todas sus conjugaciones, siempre deben ir con hache.


5

1 - "El hombre hubo de ser comido por Godzilla". It is correct, but it suggest there exists some kind of doubt about what is being said. It's not the most usual way of saying something like that, "El hombre debió haber sido comido por Godzilla" works and it's used. 2 and 3- "Hubo" it's heavily used in my country Uruguay, and in Argentina, as indicating ...


4

First of all, a disclaimer, the usage of 'pretérito perfecto' (se ha roto) and 'pretérito indefinido' (se rompió) varies with the region. Some regions in Spain (like Leon) and I believe most of Latin America prefer the use of 'pretérito indefinido' over 'pretérito perfecto'. Despite having said that, here I will describe the common usage in Spain. Both ...


3

La forma “hubo + participio” (llamada pretérito anterior o antepretérito) sigue vigente en el español escrito en su registro culto y se usa en literatura y en el buen periodismo. La búsqueda con Google de “cuando hubo terminado” recupera 1.400.000 páginas. Es verdad que el pretérito anterior se usa muy poco en el habla, pero se oye a veces, en un registro ...


3

Pretérito simply means past. RAE has an excellent explanation of all of them, but here's a very simplified summary. There are 3 different forms: Pretérito Perfecto (preterite perfect) Pretérito Imperfecto (preterite imperfect) Pretérito Pluscuamperfecto (pluperfect) In turn, preterite perfect subdivides in: a. Preterite [perfect] simple - Ex: ...


3

Pensé/Pensaba and Creí/Creía are just different conjugations of the verbs Pensar/Creer. The first form (pensé/creí) is preterite simple and the second form (pensaba/creía) is preterite imperfect. Here's a link that explains it well. Pensé que me amaba (I thought you loved me) is as valid and has the same meaning as saying Pensaba que me amaba, for ...


3

La respuesta de Sergio es muy exhaustiva. Aun asi, doy mi opinión sobre "uso habitual": No vi nada mientras estaba corriendo : Me suena perfecto. El "mientras" indica una acción de una cierta duración, así que el "estaba corriendo", que indica una acción que quizá aún no hubiera terminado, suena perfectamente. No vi nada mientras corrí : Suena muy forzado, ...


3

Lo primero es clarificar que en español la "h" no se pronuncia. En muchos casos es posible explicar que una palabra se escriba con "h" por razones etimilógicas: el verbo "haber" proviene del latín "habere". el verbo "hacer" proviene del latín "facere". La "f" en "facere" desaparece de la pronunciación, pero la ortografía converva la "h" como un vestigio ...


3

Poder in the imperfect merely expresses the ability to do something. It doesn't express whether it actually happened or not. So if I say, Ayer podía ir al cine, all you know is that I had the time off and the money to go to the movie. Maybe I went, maybe I didn't — neither is implied. In the negative, Ayer no podía ir al cine, though, we know I didn't. ...


3

1) When you say: El hombre ha sido comido por Godzilla You are following this structure: (object) (verb "ser") (participle of verb) (rest of complements) So "hubo sido comido" is not right because you're using another structure: (object) (past of "haber") (participle of "ser") (participle of verb) (rest of complements) Which is not what you want: ...


2

To me, as Randolf and Martin have pointed out in their answers, there is a slight difference in the timeframe. "No supo la respuesta" sounds to me like "no supo qué responder en ese momento". So for example, about an exam, you could say, "me preguntaron X, y no supe la respuesta". It doesn't mean I didn't have the knowledge, but I was unable to give a ...


2

In Spanish you may omit the subject (in this case, ustedes) when the verb hints at it (sujeto tácito), so the commonly used form is the following: ¿Hicieron su tarea de hoy? Why not ¿Hicieron su tarea para hoy??. Let me explain the difference with another example: ¿Construyeron el muro para María?     means to ask if the wall ...


2

As to why people use it being incorrect, I guess it has to do with the second person plural being similar, but ended in s (-asteis, -isteis), mixed with what they hear around them and a certain illiteracy or carelessness about language. And about where it is used, I can´t really tell. I know in Spain there are regions where it is more prevalent (e.g. the ...


2

This one is correct if he broke it this summer and now (3 months later) he STILL can't walk: Este verano mi vecino se rompió la pierna y no ha podido caminar por tres meses. This is correct if he broke it this summer, and he WAS not able to walk for three months (but now can): Este verano mi vecino se rompió la pierna y no pudo caminar por tres meses. This ...


2

“Indefinido” in this case is meant to be the translation of Greek “aoristos”, which means “undefined, unlimited, indeterminate”, and is a verbal tense in Ancient Greek. RAE chose it to highlight the contrast between that verbal tense and its composite counterpart. It wasn't a fortunate naming, and in 1973 they changed it to “pretérito perfecto simple”. ...


2

Unless you're telling it like a story, giving people details and a play-by-play, as if it were from a book, you would use the 2nd example.


2

His books are already written so this nature feeling is past because it is already in his books "quedó reflejado en su obra", and "quedaba" means that it was in his books while he was writing but just in that time, not anymore.


2

First things first: By "pero" you mean "perro" , am i right?. :-) 1) Means he was doing that while talking. Sound to me like: Dijo que estaba comprando... (He/she said he was buying the dog). At the same moment of talking. 2) Means that he/she would buy the dog in the future from the moment of the conversation, but... we still don't know if he really did ...


2

In spanish the first tends to be used when the speaker you are reffering is decided to do it, while the second one is conditioned and he/she won't do it due to something. Maybe with the verb comprar in this example we cannot apply the general rule from Presente to Pretérito Imperfecto del indicativo except if we specify when because the verb itself only ...


1

Nico's explanation about the differences in usage of both tenses is correct. The main difference between both is whether the action has continued until the present, or whether it was just an event that happened and finished in the past. I would also like to mention that, in your translation, it would be better to use durante tres meses, at least in ...


1

Let's start with the ending: you didn't eat exclusively with your friends on the terrace, so you use the imperfect. Eating is a short event repeated an unspecified number of times, so the past perfect sounds wrong to me, unless you really ate for three years with your friends, on the terrace. The "ir a la escuela" bit is more ambiguous, you could argue for ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible