Passive se or impersonal se? - Spanish (Questions About Your Target Languages) Language Learning Forum

Passive se or impersonal se? - Spanish
Tags: Passive \| Grammar \| Spanish
Share with: Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
Language Learning Forum : Questions About Your Target Languages

60 messages over 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next >>

tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5249 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes

Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin

Message 33 of 60

08 August 2010 at 11:36pm | IP Logged

I can't really see how bringing in leísmo can help explain "Puede considerársela una tierra de transición".
1 person has voted this message useful

mrwarper
Diglot
Winner TAC 2012
Senior Member
Spain
forum_posts.asp?TID=Registered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 5022 days ago
1493 posts - 2500 votes

Speaks: Spanish*, English^C2
Studies: German, Russian, Japanese

Message 34 of 60

09 August 2010 at 12:06am | IP Logged

plaidchuck wrote:

I was the OP and I believe the consensus here and on WR was that it's an impersonal form, since someone out there is able to consider it "a land of transition". The real question came to be whether the "la" made any sense (and many native speakers have said it doesn't)...

Ah, ok. Well, that strikes me as kind of strange, because the word order is certainly _a bit_ unusual (if 100% valid), but it perfectly makes sense to me, JUST because the 'la' is there.

I mean, I'd rather say "se la puede considerar" but that's it.

Quote:

If you check my WR post there is quite a lengthy discussion, of whether the "la" makes any sense at all (or is it laísmo), whether it should be "le" (and if that use is leísmo), etc..

Precisely, "la" in the phrase is what lets you know that we're still saying something about Extremadura. Should you simply say "Se puede considerar una tierra de...", I could understand it, but I might as well be wondering "What can one consider a land of transition? I'll surely find out in the next sentence, maybe we are, maybe we're not discussing Extremadura anymore".

And it is not laísmo. "Laísmo" and "loísmo" are using "la" (or "lo") when "le" should be used, and "leísmo" is using "le" when one of the others should be used. Now, "le" is the pronoun for the IO, and when both DO and IO pronouns are present (case in point) "le" becomes "se", and the DO pronoun is left untouched, so no "-ismos" here. There's a bit more to it, but I don't want to unnecessarily complicate it.

I also agree with your couple of three conclusions.
1 person has voted this message useful

Andy E
Triglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6899 days ago
1651 posts - 1939 votes

Speaks: English*, Spanish, French

Message 35 of 60

09 August 2010 at 12:09am | IP Logged

mrwarper wrote:

which pretty much qualifies as asking if this can be a passive form.

The only passive form you've been talking about is ser + past particple + agent one which is apparently easy to spot. The only passive form pretty much everyone else has been talking about is THE PASSIVE SE CONSTRUCTION which is not the same thing - nary a past participle nor an agent in sight.

3 persons have voted this message useful

Raчraч Ŋuɲa
Triglot
Senior Member
New Zealand
Joined 5614 days ago
154 posts - 233 votes

Speaks: Bikol languages*, Tagalog, English^C1
Studies: Spanish, Russian, Japanese

Message 36 of 60

09 August 2010 at 12:20pm | IP Logged

mrwarper wrote:

¿Can it be 'passive'?
As someone else said, 'passive voice' means someone (the DO: direct object of the
corresponding phrase in the active voice) is the subject, and that same someone is
being [whatever]ed. Easy to spot. So let's check for past participles... none, ergo it
is NOT passive, by the very definition.

So what do you call this use of "se" that is not reflexive and not impersonal?

mrwarper wrote:

So, it should be "impersonal". Shall we check, just in case?

Who is the subject? The verb "Puede" is in the 3rd person, singular, the subject might
be Extremadura... ok, wait a minute, your grammar is fine, but let's check the
meanings... can a region do something like 'consider things'? So it must be someone
else. But who? Anyone who thinks about the region, really. Oh. So... yes, it's
impersonal!

I'm getting the impression that this test cannot be used if both the subject and object
are capable of doing the meaning of the verb, say in this sentence: "Solamente cuando
el individuo ha llegado a este grado de internalización puede considerárselo
miembro de la sociedad." If this is impersonal "se", is it possible to interpret it as
mediopassive "se" as well? If not, why not. If yes, how do you disambiguate?

mrwarper wrote:

Precisely, "la" in the phrase is what lets you know that we're still
saying something about Extremadura. Should you simply say "Se puede considerar una
tierra de...", I could understand it, but I might as well be wondering "What can one
consider a land of transition? I'll surely find out in the next sentence, maybe we are,
maybe we're not discussing Extremadura anymore".

And it is not laísmo. "Laísmo" and "loísmo" are using "la" (or "lo") when "le" should
be used, and "leísmo" is using "le" when one of the others should be used. Now, "le" is
the pronoun for the IO, and when both DO and IO pronouns are present (case in point)
"le" becomes "se", and the DO pronoun is left untouched, so no "-ismos" here. There's a
bit more to it, but I don't want to unnecessarily complicate it.

Can you explain why "la" refers to Extremadura and not to "una tierra
de transición" in grammar terms? And the pronoun "se" what does it refer to? I
understand that the subject of the impersonal "se" is an implied person and indicated
as the 3rd person ending of the verb poder ("puede"), so in my mind the "se" cannot
refer to that implied person as well (it will be reflexive?) or can't refer to nothing
at all. My understanding is that "se" refers to Extremadura. Don't worry if it's
complicated, I will try to understand the line of reasoning. Thanks.

Edited by Raчraч Ŋuɲa on 09 August 2010 at 1:08pm
1 person has voted this message useful

tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5249 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes

Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin

Message 37 of 60

09 August 2010 at 6:26pm | IP Logged

1. Do we all agree that it doesn't matter whether you put the pronouns in front of or after the verb?

Puede considerársela una tierra de transición. = Se la puede considerar una tierra de transición.

2. Do we all agree that como is optional after considerar?

Puede considerársela una tierra de transición. = Puede considerársela como una tierra de transición.

3. Do we all agree that the sentence is grammatically correct with la?

Puede considerársela una tierra de transición.

4. Do we all agree that the sentence would still be grammatically correct without la?

Puede considerarse una tierra de transición.

5. Do we all agree that la refers back to Extremadura and not to una tierra de transición?

6. Do we all agree that "passive se" or "pasiva refleja" is a grammatical construction that exists in sentences
such as:

Se alquila un piso.
Tres mil toneladas se han exportado en los últimos seis meses.
El teatro se inauguró en 1920.

(Examples taken from Manuel Seco: Gramática esencial del español.)

7. Do we all agree that "impersonal se" is a grammatical construction that exists in sentences such as:

Se vive bien aquí.
Se acoge a todo el mundo.

(Examples taken from Manuel Seco: Gramática esencial del español.)

8. Do we all agree that considerar is a transitive verb requiring a direct object?

Edited by tractor on 09 August 2010 at 9:13pm
1 person has voted this message useful

Raчraч Ŋuɲa
Triglot
Senior Member
New Zealand
Joined 5614 days ago
154 posts - 233 votes

Speaks: Bikol languages*, Tagalog, English^C1
Studies: Spanish, Russian, Japanese

Message 38 of 60

09 August 2010 at 10:22pm | IP Logged

tractor wrote:

8. Do we all agree that considerar is a transitive verb requiring a direct
object?

I agree but there are 2 kinds of transitive verbs, monotransitive (takes 1 object) and
ditransitive (takes 2 objects). My understanding is that the verb here is an
attributive ditransitive verb, where the DO (a quality) is attributed to an IO (an
entity). Isn't it right that IO "se" is Extremadura and DO "la" is "una tierra de
transición"? This "sela" is an IO DO sequence, meaning there are 2 objects, IO and DO.

tractor wrote:

2. Do we all agree that como is optional after considerar?

Puede considerársela una tierra de transición. = Puede considerársela como una
tierra de transición.

That actually strenghten my understanding that "se" is Extremadura, (2nd reason now why
this is an attributive ditransitive verb, since "como" means that both IO and DO are
complements of each other). I would be interested to know everyone's opinion.

Edited by Raчraч Ŋuɲa on 09 August 2010 at 10:34pm
1 person has voted this message useful

tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5249 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes

Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin

Message 39 of 60

10 August 2010 at 12:40am | IP Logged

Raчraч Ŋuɲa wrote:

tractor wrote:

8. Do we all agree that considerar is a transitive verb requiring a direct
object?

If a direct object precedes the verb, it usually has to be repeated as a "redundant" pronoun: El coche lo
compro. However, if the direct object follows the verb, there is no direct pronoun: Compro el coche. In
fact, adding a redundant pronoun is usually impossible: *Lo compro el coche, or even worse, *Cómprolo el
coche. In other words, if una tierra de transición is the direct object, it can't be preceded by la.
What we have to deal with instead, I think, is a direct object (la) with an object predicative (una tierra de
transición). La has to refer to something, and that must be Extremadura.

If se is not the passive se nor the impersonal se, but the indirect pronoun le (turned into se before
another pronoun beginning with l), who or what is then the subject of the clause?

Edited by tractor on 10 August 2010 at 11:40pm
1 person has voted this message useful

plaidchuck
Diglot
Groupie
United States
facebook.com/plaidchRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 5101 days ago
71 posts - 93 votes

Speaks: English*, Spanish

Message 40 of 60

10 August 2010 at 6:39pm | IP Logged

tractor wrote:

3. Do we all agree that the sentence is grammatically correct with la?

Puede considerársela una tierra de transición.

This has been the only sticking point, as a few native speakers have said the "la" doesn't sound correct to them in this case.

1 person has voted this message useful

This discussion contains 60 messages over 8 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next >>

Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum

This page was generated in 8.0630 seconds.