Estuviera vs. estuviese
Clueless in Seattle
I'm perplexed that in my verb conjugation manual, there are two ways
to conjugate the imperfecto de subjuntivo in Spanish.
For example: estuviera and estuviese.
Are both forms used with the same frequency?
Is one form more common is some countries while the other form more
common in other countries?
Should I try to learn both forms, or would I be ok just learning one
of them?
--
Please post your reply to this newsgroup.
All emails sent to spamless_...@yahoo.com are automatically deleted as spam prevention. If you would like to email me personally, please post a request for my email address in this newsgroup.
Ray Chason
>I'm perplexed that in my verb conjugation manual, there are two ways
>to conjugate the imperfecto de subjuntivo in Spanish.
>
>For example: estuviera and estuviese.
>
>Are both forms used with the same frequency?
>
>Is one form more common is some countries while the other form more
>common in other countries?
>
>Should I try to learn both forms, or would I be ok just learning one
>of them?
This page made it fairly clear to me:
http://spanish.about.com/library/questions/blq-imperfect-subjunctive.htm
but I question the claim that the -se- form is "literary"; browse a few
web forums in Spanish and you'll run into it sooner or later.
You should of course be able to recognize both forms; but when composing
your sentences, you'll probably never go wrong with the -ra- form.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
Patrick Hens
more correct, while the -ra form is more 'lengua de la calle'.
"Ray Chason" <johnn...@southland.smart.net.SPAMMEN.VERBOTEN> wrote in
message news:u61gnhj...@corp.supernews.com...
Irma Villanueva
"Clueless in Seattle" <spamless_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3C60A583...@oco.net...
Special Agent Orange
<spamless_...@yahoo.com> nos ha sacado de nuestra profunda
ignorancia con el mas apestoso pensamiento que podria imaginar en
alt.usage.spanish; escribiendo:
>
>I'm perplexed that in my verb conjugation manual, there are two ways
>to conjugate the imperfecto de subjuntivo in Spanish.
>
>For example: estuviera and estuviese.
I have read (here) that the "se" form can be considered snobbish and
that it is used in some spanish speaking soap operas. I find it alot
in the spanish Bible, but I think the version I read is considered old
spanish.
My ancestors swung by their necks, not their tails.
I suport publick skool
Remove "dont_spam_" from the email address, per favore
Angelico
de dont_spam...@mindspring.com (Special Agent Orange) y como
consecuencia del golpe surgió esto:
> En la fecha de Tue, 05 Feb 2002 19:39:47 -0800, Clueless in Seattle
> <spamless_...@yahoo.com> nos ha sacado de nuestra profunda
> ignorancia con el mas apestoso pensamiento que podria imaginar en
> alt.usage.spanish; escribiendo:
>
> >
> >I'm perplexed that in my verb conjugation manual, there are two ways
> >to conjugate the imperfecto de subjuntivo in Spanish.
> >
> >For example: estuviera and estuviese.
>
> I have read (here) that the "se" form can be considered snobbish and
> that it is used in some spanish speaking soap operas. I find it alot
> in the spanish Bible, but I think the version I read is considered old
> spanish.
In Spain they are both well and alive. It's a matter of personal
preference. If you need two subj. imperfects in a sentence, you use
both forms to avoid cacophony.
--
¡Teruel existe! http://www.eltorico.com/teruelexiste/inicio.html
Ángel Arnal
Valencia, España (hablante nativo)
Read the a.u.s. FAQ at http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/aus/
Ted Johnson's AUS Website: http://altspanish.cjb.net/
--------------------------------------------------------
Siento aquí en este foro, y en otros que visito, que la
nacionalidad se ve no como algo que defina a uno, sino
como una característica accidental, como el color de los
ojos.
John M. Estill, a.k.a. Greybeard
--------------------------------------------------------
Ismael
news:a44bdb$1b90ep$9...@ID-90593.news.dfncis.de...
> El día Sat, 09 Feb 2002 03:50:18 GMT, la musa acertó con el colodrillo
> de dont_spam...@mindspring.com (Special Agent Orange) y como
> consecuencia del golpe surgió esto:
>
> > En la fecha de Tue, 05 Feb 2002 19:39:47 -0800, Clueless in Seattle
> > <spamless_...@yahoo.com> nos ha sacado de nuestra profunda
> > ignorancia con el mas apestoso pensamiento que podria imaginar en
> > alt.usage.spanish; escribiendo:
> >
> > >
> > >I'm perplexed that in my verb conjugation manual, there are two ways
> > >to conjugate the imperfecto de subjuntivo in Spanish.
> > >
> > >For example: estuviera and estuviese.
> >
> > I have read (here) that the "se" form can be considered snobbish and
> > that it is used in some spanish speaking soap operas. I find it alot
> > in the spanish Bible, but I think the version I read is considered old
> > spanish.
>
> In Spain they are both well and alive. It's a matter of personal
> preference. If you need two subj. imperfects in a sentence, you use
> both forms to avoid cacophony.
Yes, but not in any order. If I remember correctly, both terminations can be
used in the own "condition" ("si hubiera" or "si hubiese"), but not to
substitute the conditional verb: in this case, only the "-ra" is correct.
For example, you can say: "seguramente me hubieran castigado, si no hubiese
ido", but not "seguramente me hubiesen castigado, si no hubiera ido" ... in
case of doubt, it is better to use always the "-ra", perhaps this is the
reason the other one is less used.
Ismael
Angelico
colodrillo de "Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> y como consecuencia del
golpe surgió esto:
Both are correct, it's indifferent which one you use first. It's true
that we tend to use it in the way they've taught you as correct, but
the other way is correct too.
However, the "when in doubt" rule is fine as well. It just sounds a
bit strange, but what the hell, subjunctive is difficult enough.
Nobody will reprehend you for a question of style.
Ismael
Excuse me, but they aren't. For example, in "La Norma castellana del
español" by Santiago de los Mozos (Editorial Ambito, 1984), it is said:
----------
No obstante, es muy frecuente que se usen como formas equivalentes,
"cantara, cantase", confusión quizá estimulada por las gramáticas, que
proponen como forma del imperfecto subjuntivo "cantara o cantase". Para
muchos, la eleccción entre ambas es libre y dictada por razones estilísticas
[....] pero, si la variación es libre, ¿por qué no está auotrizado "hubiese
venido de saberlo", y sólo "hubiera (o habría) venido de saberlo"? No está
"autorizado" porque ambas formas (cantara, cantase) no son funcionalmente
equivalentes. Son formas en oposición, lo cual puede en ciertos momentos
dejar de funcionar, suspenderse, neutralizarse.
[....]
Supongamos que alguien dice "cuando llegue, ..." ; "si me apoyas, ...";
"aunque no sea tiempo ..."; "para que me esperes, ..." o que no se oye la
primera parte de "... que llueve"; "... llueva". Éstos no son enunciados, no
se predica nada en ellos; hay verbos, pero no predicados; son subpredicados
o, como dice Martinet (disculpándose por lo cacofónico del término)
"predicatoides" [....] La regla -regla del español- es bien simple:
"cantase" sólo con predicatoides, "cantara" con predicados, y también con
predicatoides."
[...]
"La forma "cantaría" (o la forma compuesta correspondiente "habría cantado")
puede, en ciertos enunciados, sustituirse por la forma "cantara" (o "hubiera
cantado"); pero nunca por "cantase":
Lo diría si lo supiese (o supiera)
Lo dijera si lo supiese (o supiera)
Lo habría dicho si lo hubiese (o hubiera) sabido
Lo hubiera dicho si lo hubiese (o hubiera) sabido
[...]
La forma "dijese" (o "hubiese dicho") no puede usarse como equivalente de
"diría" (o "habría dicho"):
Te hubiera esperado de saber tu llegada (pero no "te hubiese esperado")
Te habría esperado de saber tu llegada (pero no "te hubiese esperado")
--------------------------
Ismael
Ismael
news:a4ddlv$1cv7lu$1...@ID-80357.news.dfncis.de...
> > Both are correct, it's indifferent which one you use first. It's true
> > that we tend to use it in the way they've taught you as correct, but
> > the other way is correct too.
>
> Excuse me, but they aren't. For example, in "La Norma castellana del
> español" by Santiago de los Mozos (Editorial Ambito, 1984), it is said:
As the original question was in English, I have made a translation, as best
as I have been able:
------------------
However, it is very frequent that "cantara, cantase" are used as equivalent
forms, confusion perhaps stimulated by the grammars, that propose as
subjunctive imperfect "cantara o cantase". For many, the election between
both is free and dictated for stylistic reasons [.... ] but, if the
variation is free, why is it not correct "hubiese venido de saberlo", and
is it "hubiera (o habría) venido de saberlo"? It is not "authorized" because
both forms (cantara, cantase) are not functionally equivalent. They are
forms in opposition, an opposition which can at certain moments to be
suspended, or neutralized.
[.... ]
Let us suppose that somebody says "cuando llegue, ..." ; "si me apoyas,
..."; "aunque no sea tiempo ..."; "para que me esperes, ..." or that you
don't hear the first part of "... que llueve"; "... llueva". These are not
sentences, nothing is preached (?) in them; there are verbs, but not
predicates (?); they are subpredicates or, as Martinet says (apologizing by
the cacophony) "predicatoides" [.... ] the rule -rule of the Spanish
language- is well simple: "cantase" only with predicatoides, "cantara" with
predicates, and also with "predicatoides.
[... ]
The form "cantaría" (or the corresponding compound form "habría cantado")
can, in certain statements, be replaced by the form "cantara" (or "hubiera
cantado"); but never by "cantase":
Lo diría si lo supiese (or supiera)
Lo dijera si lo supiese (or supiera)
Lo habría dicho si lo hubiese (or hubiera) sabido
Lo hubiera dicho si lo hubiese (or hubiera) sabido
[...]
The form "dijese" (or "hubiese dicho") cannot be used as equivalent of
"diría" (or "hubiera dicho"):
Te hubiera esperado de saber tu llegada (but not "te hubiese esperado")
Te habría esperado de saber tu llegada (but not "te hubiese esperado")
--------------------------
Regards
Ismael
Clueless in Seattle
> As the original question was in English, I have made a translation, as best
> as I have been able:
>
> ------------------
> However, it is very frequent that "cantara, cantase" are used as equivalent
> forms, confusion perhaps stimulated by the grammars, that propose as
> subjunctive imperfect "cantara o cantase". For many, the election between
> both is free and dictated for stylistic reasons [.... ] but, if the
> variation is free, why is it not correct "hubiese venido de saberlo", and
> is it "hubiera (o habría) venido de saberlo"? It is not "authorized" because
> both forms (cantara, cantase) are not functionally equivalent. They are
> forms in opposition, an opposition which can at certain moments to be
> suspended, or neutralized.
Many thanks, Ismael, for taking the time to translate that passage for
me and provide me with so many helpful examples.
I'm afraid, that at my stage of mastery, these distinctions are more
than just a bit beyond me. But I've decided to keep studying Spanish,
even though I probably will never be able to travel again, just
because it gives me so much enjoyment. So maybe in a few years I'll
be able to come back to the a.u.s. archives and dig out this thread be
able to master this usage.
Thanks again, I found this very interesting to read about, even if
it's beyond my practical skill level.
Angelico
[snip]
> Excuse me, but they aren't. For example, in "La Norma castellana del
> español" by Santiago de los Mozos (Editorial Ambito, 1984), it is said:
Wow, impressive... anyway, speakers have lost those distinctions and
use both anytime. The rule can "dictate" whatever it wants, but if we
attend to usage (as the name of the NG says), they are the same. Feel
safe to use only the -ara forms, the -ese are fading away and I think
we only use them in the Peninsula.
Ray Chason
>Let us suppose that somebody says "cuando llegue, ..." ; "si me apoyas,
>..."; "aunque no sea tiempo ..."; "para que me esperes, ..." or that you
>don't hear the first part of "... que llueve"; "... llueva". These are not
>sentences, nothing is preached (?) in them; there are verbs, but not
>predicates (?); they are subpredicates or, as Martinet says (apologizing by
>the cacophony) "predicatoides" [.... ] the rule -rule of the Spanish
>language- is well simple: "cantase" only with predicatoides, "cantara" with
>predicates, and also with "predicatoides.
I think for "preached" you wanted "predicated" or something like it.
It appears from context that "predicate" here means "main clause", and
"predicatoid" (a strange word to my ears) means "subordinate clause".
So that rule at the end becomes: "cantase" only in subordinate clauses,
"cantara" in main or subordinate clauses.
It may be claimed that the -ra subjunctive, when it replaces the
conditional, isn't really a subjunctive. The -ra form was pluperfect
indicative in Latin, and the corresponding verb form still has that
role in Portuguese; as conditional, then, it resumes some part of its
old role. The -se form was pluperfect subjunctive, and in Spanish can
only be a subjunctive.
Ismael
> El día Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:06:54 +0100, la musa acertó con el
> colodrillo de "Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> y como consecuencia del
> golpe surgió esto:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Excuse me, but they aren't. For example, in "La Norma castellana del
> > español" by Santiago de los Mozos (Editorial Ambito, 1984), it is said:
>
> Wow, impressive... anyway, speakers have lost those distinctions and
> use both anytime.
Well, not everybody ... you begin to understand why someones affirm we, in
Valladolid, speak the best Spanish, don't you? :-))))
Ismael
Ismael
"Ray Chason" <johnn...@southland.smart.net.SPAMMEN.VERBOTEN> escribió en
el mensaje news:u6m136c...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >Let us suppose that somebody says "cuando llegue, ..." ; "si me apoyas,
> >..."; "aunque no sea tiempo ..."; "para que me esperes, ..." or that you
> >don't hear the first part of "... que llueve"; "... llueva". These are
not
> >sentences, nothing is preached (?) in them; there are verbs, but not
> >predicates (?); they are subpredicates or, as Martinet says (apologizing
by
> >the cacophony) "predicatoides" [.... ] the rule -rule of the Spanish
> >language- is well simple: "cantase" only with predicatoides, "cantara"
with
> >predicates, and also with "predicatoides.
>
> I think for "preached" you wanted "predicated" or something like it.
> It appears from context that "predicate" here means "main clause", and
> "predicatoid" (a strange word to my ears) means "subordinate clause".
> So that rule at the end becomes: "cantase" only in subordinate clauses,
> "cantara" in main or subordinate clauses.
Well, I don't know so much about grammatics. It is possible ... still, it
may be some slight difference, if Martinet & de los Mozos need to invent a
new word. Looking at the net, it seems Latin grammars speak about "protasis"
& "apodosis"
> It may be claimed that the -ra subjunctive, when it replaces the
> conditional, isn't really a subjunctive. The -ra form was pluperfect
> indicative in Latin, and the corresponding verb form still has that
> role in Portuguese; as conditional, then, it resumes some part of its
> old role. The -se form was pluperfect subjunctive, and in Spanish can
> only be a subjunctive.
Well, it seems this is (was) the case, in
http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/sle2001/abstracts/webbranza.htm
there is the abstract of a paper in a recent symposium, who seems to affirm
the same thing.
Ismael
CARPE DIEM
"Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:a4fv29$1eoc58$1...@ID-80357.news.dfncis.de...
¡HUY! ¡La que vais a liar! :))
Aquí puede haber tortazos entre los mismos españoles, y tortazos entre Brits
y gringos :))
Yo me mantengo al margen :)
--
NO OS TOMÉIS LA VIDA MUY EN SERIO. TOTAL, NO SALDRÉIS VIVOS DE ÉSTA.
Frank
>
>Well, it seems this is (was) the case, in
>http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/sle2001/abstracts/webbranza.htm
>there is the abstract of a paper in a recent symposium, who seems to affirm
>the same thing.
>
>Ismael
>
>
what you are trying to say here. En español, porfa! Un extracto, an
extract?
Bueno, acabo de consultar un diccionario y dice allí, "an abstract of
his speech was printed in the paper -el periódico publicó un extracto
de su discurso. Para mí todavía suena muy raro. :-( Yo diría "there
is an extract from a paper...", pero no te fíes de mí!. Hola , los
colonos en territorio norteamericano, ¿Qué pensáis?
Which seems to state the same thing??? Affirm es una palabra poca
usada en este sentido.
Leopoldo Perdomo
en este caso "abstract" se traduce por extracto. Es una especie de resumen
sobre el contenido de un texto. No se trata de una abstración o del
adjetivo abstracto. Abstract truths, abtract concepts, verdades
abstractas, conceptos abstractos.
leopoldo
--
URL: http://leopoldo.perdomo.com/short-stories.html
Claudia B.
para indicar un resumen del mismo.
--
Claudia B.
"Frank" <pa...@pembs.com> wrote in message
news:gmkn6usobepf8abu3...@4ax.com...
Angelico
> "Angelico" <esten...@terra.es> escribió en el mensaje
> news:a4epsr$1e1jjv$7...@ID-90593.news.dfncis.de...
> > El día Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:06:54 +0100, la musa acertó con el
> > colodrillo de "Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> y como consecuencia del
> > golpe surgió esto:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Excuse me, but they aren't. For example, in "La Norma castellana del
> > > español" by Santiago de los Mozos (Editorial Ambito, 1984), it is said:
> >
> > Wow, impressive... anyway, speakers have lost those distinctions and
> > use both anytime.
>
> Well, not everybody ... you begin to understand why someones affirm we, in
> Valladolid, speak the best Spanish, don't you? :-))))
Para muestra, tu último párrafo =P
Greybeard
<soy-car...@terra.de> wrote:
<ñac>
>¡HUY! ¡La que vais a liar! :))
>Aquí puede haber tortazos entre los mismos españoles, y tortazos entre Brits
>y gringos :))
>
>Yo me mantengo al margen :)
Pues si van a pelear con tortas -- las de la cocina -- yo me meto.
¿Quién necesita ayuda más?
Saludos,
Greybeard
--
John Estill
Inglés nativo, español al estilo mexicano
Millersburg, Ohio, EE.UU.
AUS FAQs: http://teleline.terra.es/personal/angelarn/
Ted Johnson's AUS Website: http://altspanish.cjb.net/
Fanático: Él que hace lo que Dios haría, si Dios tuviera
todos los datos. -- Gordon Shull
Ismael
> En ciencia y en UK usan mucho lo de "abstract" de un artículo o un "paper"
> para indicar un resumen del mismo.
Incluso en España se utiliza el mismo "abstract", sin traducir ...
entre otras cosas, porque suele exigirse que sea en inglés, aunque el
artículo en sí sea en español :-)
Hasta luego
Ismael
Ismael
> > Well, not everybody ... you begin to understand why someones affirm we, in
> > Valladolid, speak the best Spanish, don't you? :-))))
>
> Para muestra, tu último párrafo =P
"si llegaría, me mojaría"? Pero es que es palentino, no vallisoletano
... a veces pienso que Palencia tiene también idioma propio: "estaban
los chiguitos escolingándose por el arambol ...." y cosas así :-)))
Ismael
Ismael
> > > Wow, impressive... anyway, speakers have lost those distinctions and
> > > use both anytime.
> >
> > Well, not everybody ... you begin to understand why someones affirm we, in
> > Valladolid, speak the best Spanish, don't you? :-))))
> >
> > Ismael
>
>
> ¡HUY! ¡La que vais a liar! :))
> Aquí puede haber tortazos entre los mismos españoles, y tortazos entre Brits
> y gringos :))
>
> Yo me mantengo al margen :)
Que no, hombre, que es sólo un chiste ... aunque seguro que a alguno
le da pena que no líe :-)))
Ismael
Claudia B.
--
Claudia B.
"Ismael" <is...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:731a660a.02021...@posting.google.com...
Bob Ashley
> Incluso en España se utiliza el mismo "abstract", sin traducir ...
> entre otras cosas, porque suele exigirse que sea en inglés, aunque el
> artículo en sí sea en español :-)
Estoy curioso. ¿Cual es el significado de "en sí" (en inglés) en esa
oración de Ismael? No lo entiendo.
Gracias,
rib
--
Frank
wrote:
although the article itself is in spanish.
Angelico
is...@my-deja.com (Ismael) y como consecuencia del golpe surgió esto:
Oñe... ¿y eso en castellano cómo se dice? :)
VernonH
<ax...@chebucto.ns.ca> writes:
"en sí" quite like our "in itself" or in this case just "itself".
"Even though the article itself be in Spanish."
Some times it can mean "by itself".
El trabajo en sí... = The work by itself ( or as it is....) could be followed
by explanation that it(is boring or what ever.
El apoyarse en sí mismos. The depending on their or your (plural) selves.
una comida completa en sí misma = a complete meal (all) by itself.
Si piensa más en el rival que en sí mismo, le va a ir mal. If you think more
about your (or the) rival than yourself, it will go bad for you. (Could also be
he or she in this sentence)
Cuando volvió en sí. When he came to. (Making fun sometimes Spanish speakers
will change "sí" to "yes". Cuando volvió en "yes" ) :=))
Ya gotta hang loose
Vern
McAllen & LaJoya, TX
diaspar
>
> Que no, hombre, que es sólo un chiste ... aunque seguro que a alguno
> le da pena que no líe :-)))
>
> Ismael
A mi no me mires, que aqui estoy muy modoso y formalito.
Voz en off dirigiendose al Ismael:
-¡¡Alubiero!!*
Voz en on explicando:
*Alubiero: Que come alubias, planta papilonacea conocida tambien como
judia. Las hay pintas (rojas) y blancas, cocinandose de forma distinta,
las primeras con chorizo y las segundas con almejas, produciendo ambas
gran cantidad de gases. Por eso conocen asi en Palencia a los de
Valladolid, dos poblachos castellanos, pues es una forma retorcida de
llamarles pedorros. Como soy andaluz no entro en ello, ya que el
gazpacho no produce fermentaciones gastricas, sino que mas bien excita
el ingenio.
--
Desde Malaga Costa del Sol.
el diaspar... limpio, lustro y doy esplendor.
http://www.100mbps.es/diaspar
Ismael
news:3C6FD77E...@100mbps.es...
> Ismael ha escrito:
> >
> > Que no, hombre, que es sólo un chiste ... aunque seguro que a alguno
> > le da pena que no líe :-)))
> >
> > Ismael
>
> A mi no me mires, que aqui estoy muy modoso y formalito.
> Voz en off dirigiendose al Ismael:
> -¡¡Alubiero!!*
> Voz en on explicando:
Bueno, más bien, los de Valladolid me llaman "manta" o "siberiano". Te dejo
que descifres el significado de esta última :-)
Ismael
Ismael
> > "si llegaría, me mojaría"? Pero es que es palentino, no vallisoletano
> > ... a veces pienso que Palencia tiene también idioma propio: "estaban
> > los chiguitos escolingándose por el arambol ...." y cosas así :-)))
>
> Oñe... ¿y eso en castellano cómo se dice? :)
Bueno
"Chiguito" es niño ... supongo que es una forma de pronunciar "chiquito".
"Escolingarse" sería colgarse, columpiarse ...
Y "arambol" es el pasamanos de una escalera, la barandilla de un balcón ...
Por cierto, que un "vecino" ha puesto una página con el vocabulario básico
http://palmera.pntic.mec.es/~jcampo5/vocabulario.html
Hasta luego
Ismael