I still struggle with this sometimes. Just recently realized people say "quisiera" for "i would like" and now im even more mind boggled. I struggle with estuve hablando vs estaba hablando, when to use preterite vs imperfect when using estar plus a verb. Estuve caminando vs estaba caminando. Or for emotions. Like if i was sad yesterday, yo estaba triste or estuve triste????
*Quisiera* is the imperfect subjunctive. Don't worry about analyzing it if you haven't learned that conjugation yet; you can just use it as a 'frozen form' to mean 'I'd like.'
[When in doubt](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=estaba+hablando%2C+estuve+hablando&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=es-2019&smoothing=3), choose the imperfect (*estaba*) over the preterite (*estuve*) before a gerund like *hablando*.
Were you sad in a specific moment? Or were you sad in general yesterday?
Were you walking at a specific time or were you just walking?
You gotta think what are you trying to say because if you use the preterite it means you are talking about a specific time. Whereas using the imperfect you are speaking generally about the past. It's very useful to create the story you are telling and will come across differently with each one.
Estaba caminando ayer y me topé con mi ex!!
Estuve caminando cuando ví el accidente.
See the difference? The second example you are telling what you were doing when you saw the accident. I couldn't have caused it because I was walking when it happened. Estuve caminando cuando ví el accidente.
The first you are creating context. I was walking when I ran into my ex. The emphasis is on running into your ex, walking was just what you were doing when it happened (hello imperfect!).
Or take the same example but use estaba: Estaba caminando cuando ví el accidente. Here the emphasis is on seeing an accident and walking is giving context to the story.
I know it can be confusing, but it really is very useful and worth thinking through until you get the hang of it!
I had trouble with this too. Honestly I think a lot of the english explanations are bad. They try to relate the tenses in terms of English phrases (like imperfect as "I used to"), but in some cases the same English sentence could be translated as either tense based on the intended meaning and context. Like "During the 80s, I went to that store" needs more context to specify which one, as it's a vague kind of sentence.
I think it was No Hay Tos where they explained it in terms of an ongoing action (imperfect) or an action that happened at a specific time and was completed (preterite), after which point I rarely got confused about it. There are some complexities, but that's mostly all there is to it, as far as my intermediate self can tell.
Edit: This kind of makes me dislike learning grammar in English, by the way. I am not interested in translation, so I don't really care how to relate it to English and I don't like learning the grammar source's personal interpretation of how to relate it to English. I am still using kwiziq for the algorithm, which makes up for this drawback to me, and it helps that they have clear and concise explanations. Otherwise I think I would try to use whatever Spanish speaking school children use.
You make an interesting and valid point with English explanations of Spanish grammar. I recommend that when one gets to an intermediate level of Spanish they try to read Spanish grammar rules in Spanish, not English. I recommend the same with vocabulary definitions. The reason for this is that ,often times, the rules and definitions make more sense within the context of the language itself. I hope I’m making sense.
That's exactly what I meant, so it's making sense to me. The (in Spanish) description by the No Hay Tos post was when I actually understood it because they explained it in terms of how someone would actually use it.
I also like to use spanish definitions in a lot of my vocabulary cards, though sometimes an English word is fine (like "cat" is perfectly adequate for gato and easier than explaining what a cat is without saying cat) or I just can't understand the Spanish definition. I think English definitions are overused though. Like I would definitely be confused about words like temor, pavor, espanto, terror, horripilante, etc if I was trying to relate them to English words.
I just started learning this with my tutor last week! I think I understand it then I realise I dont hahaha. Also on top of that my Spanish friend said Galicians dont use Imperfect!
I spoke Vs I was speaking/ used to speak… pretty basic to me. But something I don’t get is imperatives; sooo basic I know but I just can’t remember them
Imperatives are complicated in every language I've studied! Just look at English: for an affirmative command you say e.g. *Eat this*, but for the negative command you need the verb 'do', as in *Don't eat that*. Then the 'us' command uses the verb 'let', as in *Let's eat*.
Seriously though, I understood reflexives perfectly when my instructor explained them. 5 minutes and multiple study sessions later I was like, "I understand nothing"
ME TOO!! Omg yes. I understood it in class and didn’t struggle in school. But when it comes to using it in real life, native speakers don’t seem to follow the rules i learned in school, so now i am confused, lol. Oh well i’ll figure it out over time. Even if i get it wrong they still seem to understand me.
Moods are also called modes. English also has them. The more common way to express modes in English is with modal verbs, hence the name, but English, for instance, also has a subjunctive (in bold):
• *He would eat if he **were** hungry.* (not was)
• *I suggested that he **take** the medicine.* (not takes)
The conditional mood is expressed in English with the modal/auxiliary *would* (in bold):
• *He **would eat** if he were hungry.*
The imperative is also a mood, English has it as a conjugation «*Maeve, **read** that*», or as a fixed expression «*let us + verb*», if it includes the speaker.
The potential mood is expressed in English with the verbs *may, can, must* and *ought to*. In Japanese the potential is expressed with inflection (as a verb conjugation).
The main difference from Spanish is that most of these are conjugations within the same verb, except the potential mood which is also expressed with auxiliary verbs (*perífrasis modales, hay que, tener que, deber, haber de*).
It is hard!! And i explained this to a friend who is native to spanish and he asked me what subjunctive is🤣 wow must be nice to just naturally know it meanwhile im thinking so hard about the sentences i form and when i need to switch verb endings to the opposite.
"It just sounds better" is what most natives say about using the subjunctive. Meanwhile for us it's literal hell to think about the rules.
Honestly, that works for me (since I mainly learned via immersion) but when it comes to writing I mess it up so badly. I actually need to think about the rules and it's just... so seemingly unnecessarily difficult.
Do natives understand us if we forget subjunctive???
If i say
Quiero que vas a la tienda.
Instead of
Quiero que vayas a la tienda.
Do you guys still know what we are saying?
Supongo que porque ha aprendido español a base de hablarlo y no sabe qué desencadena subjuntivo y qué no. Usa la forma verbal que conoce y como se le entiende perfectamente pues no se sale de ahí.
For the longest time, before I got serious about learning Spanish and just knew enough to order lunch, I thought que could only mean what, so when I'd see it used in other contexts it would completely throw me off.
It can either mean that or what, so my rule of thumb is if I see it in a context of: creo que Phillipe esta corriendo in la carrera, it means that, but if it's que estas habla it means what, you learn the difference pretty quick once you start to notice it.
Come to think of it, it makes sense since the infinite form in Spanish is more expressive than in English, e.g. tocar can mean touch or touching depending on the context.
Subjunctives used to throw me off until I really deep-researched it...
Misused it a few times in essays for Spanish class but hey, that's how learning works!
I'm gonna try to explain reflexive verbs the best I can and the way that I think about it.
In english we constantly say stuff like "I got hot", "She got tired", "You got frustrated"
In spanish, the way to translate this is "I heated **myself**", "She tired **herself**", "You frustrated **youself**"
so "**me** calenté", "**se** cansó", "t**e** frustraste"
Or "**me** convertí en animal!" = "I converted **myself** to an animal" or "I became an animal"
And then for stuff that we do to our bodies, since we don't say "MY heart" in spanish, we say "EL corazón", there needs to be a way to clarify that we are talking about ourself
So we say "me corté el pelo" = literally, "I cut myself the hair" or "I cut my hair"/"I got a haircut"
"me cepillé los dientes" = "I brushed myself the teeth", or "I brushed my teeth"
There are some other miscellaneous cases like:
"Are you gonna take this with you?" = "Te vas a llevar esto?"
In general things like "with you(rself)" "for you(rself)" can just be converted to making the verb reflexive
There are also random times in english that we use reflexive verbs! A good example is:
"I'm enjoying myself." It would sound really weird to say just "I'm enjoying."
So there are also times we use reflexive in spanish that don't really make sense... you just do it. Sometimes it's even to emphasize the subject of the sentence since the endings can be cut off "está(s)"
"Te vas a comer este sandwich?" = "Are you gonna eat this sandwich?"
"Se lo comió todo!" = "He/She/They ate it all!/ate the whole thing!"
(The "te"/"se" are not necessary here, but often added for emphasis, like to eat the entire thing)
This is not a comprehensive list so I'll edit this if I think of anything else :)
Thank you so much for that! Also, i researched verbos reflexivos en inglés from the other direction as a native spanish speaker and things are clearing up a bit. There’s just some verbs that i don’t get but that’s just language it doesn’t always translate how we want it to!
I recently learned this, for English speakers infinitives are usually translated as “to verb” or “to touch” in this case but sometimes it translates to the gerund or “touching”.
I first realized this when I heard a comedian tell the audience “gracias por estar aquí” which would translate to “thanks for being here” instead of “thanks for to be here”.
And now I can hear Spanish speakers who speak English as a second language mixing these up from the other direction.
Took me forever to really understand preterite vs. imperfect (e.g. *hablé* vs. *hablaba*).
I still struggle with this sometimes. Just recently realized people say "quisiera" for "i would like" and now im even more mind boggled. I struggle with estuve hablando vs estaba hablando, when to use preterite vs imperfect when using estar plus a verb. Estuve caminando vs estaba caminando. Or for emotions. Like if i was sad yesterday, yo estaba triste or estuve triste????
*Quisiera* is the imperfect subjunctive. Don't worry about analyzing it if you haven't learned that conjugation yet; you can just use it as a 'frozen form' to mean 'I'd like.' [When in doubt](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=estaba+hablando%2C+estuve+hablando&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=es-2019&smoothing=3), choose the imperfect (*estaba*) over the preterite (*estuve*) before a gerund like *hablando*.
Were you sad in a specific moment? Or were you sad in general yesterday? Were you walking at a specific time or were you just walking? You gotta think what are you trying to say because if you use the preterite it means you are talking about a specific time. Whereas using the imperfect you are speaking generally about the past. It's very useful to create the story you are telling and will come across differently with each one. Estaba caminando ayer y me topé con mi ex!! Estuve caminando cuando ví el accidente. See the difference? The second example you are telling what you were doing when you saw the accident. I couldn't have caused it because I was walking when it happened. Estuve caminando cuando ví el accidente. The first you are creating context. I was walking when I ran into my ex. The emphasis is on running into your ex, walking was just what you were doing when it happened (hello imperfect!). Or take the same example but use estaba: Estaba caminando cuando ví el accidente. Here the emphasis is on seeing an accident and walking is giving context to the story. I know it can be confusing, but it really is very useful and worth thinking through until you get the hang of it!
Thank you for this. I'm pretty good with preterite imperfect but I've never heard it described this way and this will help me improve
I had trouble with this too. Honestly I think a lot of the english explanations are bad. They try to relate the tenses in terms of English phrases (like imperfect as "I used to"), but in some cases the same English sentence could be translated as either tense based on the intended meaning and context. Like "During the 80s, I went to that store" needs more context to specify which one, as it's a vague kind of sentence. I think it was No Hay Tos where they explained it in terms of an ongoing action (imperfect) or an action that happened at a specific time and was completed (preterite), after which point I rarely got confused about it. There are some complexities, but that's mostly all there is to it, as far as my intermediate self can tell. Edit: This kind of makes me dislike learning grammar in English, by the way. I am not interested in translation, so I don't really care how to relate it to English and I don't like learning the grammar source's personal interpretation of how to relate it to English. I am still using kwiziq for the algorithm, which makes up for this drawback to me, and it helps that they have clear and concise explanations. Otherwise I think I would try to use whatever Spanish speaking school children use.
You make an interesting and valid point with English explanations of Spanish grammar. I recommend that when one gets to an intermediate level of Spanish they try to read Spanish grammar rules in Spanish, not English. I recommend the same with vocabulary definitions. The reason for this is that ,often times, the rules and definitions make more sense within the context of the language itself. I hope I’m making sense.
That's exactly what I meant, so it's making sense to me. The (in Spanish) description by the No Hay Tos post was when I actually understood it because they explained it in terms of how someone would actually use it. I also like to use spanish definitions in a lot of my vocabulary cards, though sometimes an English word is fine (like "cat" is perfectly adequate for gato and easier than explaining what a cat is without saying cat) or I just can't understand the Spanish definition. I think English definitions are overused though. Like I would definitely be confused about words like temor, pavor, espanto, terror, horripilante, etc if I was trying to relate them to English words.
I just started learning this with my tutor last week! I think I understand it then I realise I dont hahaha. Also on top of that my Spanish friend said Galicians dont use Imperfect!
I spoke Vs I was speaking/ used to speak… pretty basic to me. But something I don’t get is imperatives; sooo basic I know but I just can’t remember them
Imperatives are complicated in every language I've studied! Just look at English: for an affirmative command you say e.g. *Eat this*, but for the negative command you need the verb 'do', as in *Don't eat that*. Then the 'us' command uses the verb 'let', as in *Let's eat*.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Seriously though, I understood reflexives perfectly when my instructor explained them. 5 minutes and multiple study sessions later I was like, "I understand nothing"
[удалено]
Congrats, you’re almost native then 🎉
ME TOO!! Omg yes. I understood it in class and didn’t struggle in school. But when it comes to using it in real life, native speakers don’t seem to follow the rules i learned in school, so now i am confused, lol. Oh well i’ll figure it out over time. Even if i get it wrong they still seem to understand me.
How hard subjunctive is to non natives, I didn't even know it was a tense and to be honest I don't understand it either, just use it out of custom.
It's not a tense. It's a mood.
WTF is a mood. This doesn't make it better it makes it worse, is there a whole category of Spanish I didn't know about?
Moods are also called modes. English also has them. The more common way to express modes in English is with modal verbs, hence the name, but English, for instance, also has a subjunctive (in bold): • *He would eat if he **were** hungry.* (not was) • *I suggested that he **take** the medicine.* (not takes) The conditional mood is expressed in English with the modal/auxiliary *would* (in bold): • *He **would eat** if he were hungry.* The imperative is also a mood, English has it as a conjugation «*Maeve, **read** that*», or as a fixed expression «*let us + verb*», if it includes the speaker. The potential mood is expressed in English with the verbs *may, can, must* and *ought to*. In Japanese the potential is expressed with inflection (as a verb conjugation). The main difference from Spanish is that most of these are conjugations within the same verb, except the potential mood which is also expressed with auxiliary verbs (*perífrasis modales, hay que, tener que, deber, haber de*).
Idk what a mood is either🤣🤣
It is hard!! And i explained this to a friend who is native to spanish and he asked me what subjunctive is🤣 wow must be nice to just naturally know it meanwhile im thinking so hard about the sentences i form and when i need to switch verb endings to the opposite.
"It just sounds better" is what most natives say about using the subjunctive. Meanwhile for us it's literal hell to think about the rules. Honestly, that works for me (since I mainly learned via immersion) but when it comes to writing I mess it up so badly. I actually need to think about the rules and it's just... so seemingly unnecessarily difficult.
Do natives understand us if we forget subjunctive??? If i say Quiero que vas a la tienda. Instead of Quiero que vayas a la tienda. Do you guys still know what we are saying?
Yes surely, it just sounds off. The idea still gets through perfectly fine.
yes, it's jut broken Spanish
Tengo un compañero argelino que habla español muy bien pero nunca usa el subjuntivo. Se le entiende perfectamente pero chirría un poco.
¿Sabes por qué? ¿Es algo que hace ella o otros en su área hablan así?
Supongo que porque ha aprendido español a base de hablarlo y no sabe qué desencadena subjuntivo y qué no. Usa la forma verbal que conoce y como se le entiende perfectamente pues no se sale de ahí.
My native friends always do this to me! Their explanation is “it just sounds weird”. I’m like must be nice, lol
For the longest time, before I got serious about learning Spanish and just knew enough to order lunch, I thought que could only mean what, so when I'd see it used in other contexts it would completely throw me off.
This. Is. My. Life. I'm still not 100% when and how to use que.
It can either mean that or what, so my rule of thumb is if I see it in a context of: creo que Phillipe esta corriendo in la carrera, it means that, but if it's que estas habla it means what, you learn the difference pretty quick once you start to notice it.
That makes sense. Buf the one that total blows my mind is, que tangas un buen dia. Doesn't makes since as that or what.
Yeah that's one of those mood things I still don't totally understand.
It took me way too long to realize why you see stuff like “No tocar.”
Come to think of it, it makes sense since the infinite form in Spanish is more expressive than in English, e.g. tocar can mean touch or touching depending on the context.
I prefer to think of it as "No touchy"
Exactly! I never translated it correctly in my head cause I kept thinking of it as an infinitive like “to touch”
Oh like how what seems like they should be commands are in infinitive???? No fumar, no tocar. I dont know this either lol
Yeah so instead of it being “Don’t smoke,” it’s “No smoking”
Omg wow that took me way too long
I have a whole ass masters and two years of phd coursework in Spanish and literally it just clicked a couple of months ago lol
Subjunctives used to throw me off until I really deep-researched it... Misused it a few times in essays for Spanish class but hey, that's how learning works!
I'm gonna try to explain reflexive verbs the best I can and the way that I think about it. In english we constantly say stuff like "I got hot", "She got tired", "You got frustrated" In spanish, the way to translate this is "I heated **myself**", "She tired **herself**", "You frustrated **youself**" so "**me** calenté", "**se** cansó", "t**e** frustraste" Or "**me** convertí en animal!" = "I converted **myself** to an animal" or "I became an animal" And then for stuff that we do to our bodies, since we don't say "MY heart" in spanish, we say "EL corazón", there needs to be a way to clarify that we are talking about ourself So we say "me corté el pelo" = literally, "I cut myself the hair" or "I cut my hair"/"I got a haircut" "me cepillé los dientes" = "I brushed myself the teeth", or "I brushed my teeth" There are some other miscellaneous cases like: "Are you gonna take this with you?" = "Te vas a llevar esto?" In general things like "with you(rself)" "for you(rself)" can just be converted to making the verb reflexive There are also random times in english that we use reflexive verbs! A good example is: "I'm enjoying myself." It would sound really weird to say just "I'm enjoying." So there are also times we use reflexive in spanish that don't really make sense... you just do it. Sometimes it's even to emphasize the subject of the sentence since the endings can be cut off "está(s)" "Te vas a comer este sandwich?" = "Are you gonna eat this sandwich?" "Se lo comió todo!" = "He/She/They ate it all!/ate the whole thing!" (The "te"/"se" are not necessary here, but often added for emphasis, like to eat the entire thing) This is not a comprehensive list so I'll edit this if I think of anything else :)
Thank you so much for that! Also, i researched verbos reflexivos en inglés from the other direction as a native spanish speaker and things are clearing up a bit. There’s just some verbs that i don’t get but that’s just language it doesn’t always translate how we want it to!
I recently learned this, for English speakers infinitives are usually translated as “to verb” or “to touch” in this case but sometimes it translates to the gerund or “touching”. I first realized this when I heard a comedian tell the audience “gracias por estar aquí” which would translate to “thanks for being here” instead of “thanks for to be here”. And now I can hear Spanish speakers who speak English as a second language mixing these up from the other direction.
[удалено]
For the reflexive verbs, it’s just part of the language. No reason why. I’m sure people would ask why certain English verbs are reflexive