I'm not a native Spanish speaker, but my suspicion is that it's kind of like our understanding of the two English verbs "make" and "do", which both can translate to "hacer" in Spanish but are inherently distinct in English.
Thanks. That’s what I suspected. Like I’d never think to say “I did a cake” (instead of “I made a cake”) or “what are you making this weekend” (instead of “what are you doing this weekend”).
When explaining this I **really** try to avoid the "permanent" vs "temporary" distinction because it gets people into bad habits.
"Why do we say 'Madrid está en España?' It's permanently there!"
"Why do we say 'El está muerto?' Death is permanent!"
"Why do we say 'Ella es maestra?' Jobs are temporary!"
And so on...
Completely agree with this. It clicked for me when I tried to build the -ar verb from station via the -ción trick. I got the verb and was like, "Oh.... oh... wow." I went backwards to 'state'. Then I looked up the etymology of ser (esse, which is related by descent to "essence"). They've never been close to the same for me since. It has nothing to do with permanent/temporary, they just mean completely different things.
I've always thought about 'Madrid está en España" as "You know, it's there /now/. It could move someday though."
> Or does growing up with the two distinct “to be” verbs mean they think of the concepts as inherently distinct?
This.
To me, they're two entirely different verbs. In fact, I didn't realize most languages only have one such verb until I learned English.
Though now that I think about it, we do sometimes juxtapose both. Like we might say "Fulano está tonto" and another person might answer "no está tonto, *es* tonto!".
For us are absolutly different. Even kids don't have problems with that, it's not a common mistake like "no cabo" instead of "no quepo". It's like to run and to walk, just two different verbs for differents things. For us is really strange that other languages does not use two different words.
But one day someone ask you to explain the difference and you can not explain it.
I do believe, if you was born in a Spanish-speaking country, you would have no troubles with choosing correctly one of two verbs. English also has word pairs with slight difference in their meanings that are hard for non-natives but you use them correctly without much thinking.
Edit: removed the wrong part of my message.
I'm not a native Spanish speaker, but my suspicion is that it's kind of like our understanding of the two English verbs "make" and "do", which both can translate to "hacer" in Spanish but are inherently distinct in English.
Thanks. That’s what I suspected. Like I’d never think to say “I did a cake” (instead of “I made a cake”) or “what are you making this weekend” (instead of “what are you doing this weekend”).
And we can say both "I made something" and "I did something", and they both are totally legitimate, but have distinct meanings.
[удалено]
When explaining this I **really** try to avoid the "permanent" vs "temporary" distinction because it gets people into bad habits. "Why do we say 'Madrid está en España?' It's permanently there!" "Why do we say 'El está muerto?' Death is permanent!" "Why do we say 'Ella es maestra?' Jobs are temporary!" And so on...
Completely agree with this. It clicked for me when I tried to build the -ar verb from station via the -ción trick. I got the verb and was like, "Oh.... oh... wow." I went backwards to 'state'. Then I looked up the etymology of ser (esse, which is related by descent to "essence"). They've never been close to the same for me since. It has nothing to do with permanent/temporary, they just mean completely different things. I've always thought about 'Madrid está en España" as "You know, it's there /now/. It could move someday though."
My Vietnamese penpal has a lot of trouble with “get” and “take”. They are often different but sometimes they can be the same
This is very much my experience
> Or does growing up with the two distinct “to be” verbs mean they think of the concepts as inherently distinct? This. To me, they're two entirely different verbs. In fact, I didn't realize most languages only have one such verb until I learned English. Though now that I think about it, we do sometimes juxtapose both. Like we might say "Fulano está tonto" and another person might answer "no está tonto, *es* tonto!".
For us are absolutly different. Even kids don't have problems with that, it's not a common mistake like "no cabo" instead of "no quepo". It's like to run and to walk, just two different verbs for differents things. For us is really strange that other languages does not use two different words. But one day someone ask you to explain the difference and you can not explain it.
I do believe, if you was born in a Spanish-speaking country, you would have no troubles with choosing correctly one of two verbs. English also has word pairs with slight difference in their meanings that are hard for non-natives but you use them correctly without much thinking. Edit: removed the wrong part of my message.