#187576 - 11/02/09 08:33 AM
Weighing in (run for your lives!) ;0)
[Re: AnnaStrophic]
|
old hand
Registered: 02/28/08
Posts: 724
Loc: western NY
|
Here ya go, Anna:
They are both correct and in the imperative. Negative tú commands are different than positive.
Cantar = to sing
present: canto, cantas, canta, cantamos, cantan
subjunctive: cante, cantes, cante, cantemos, canten
commands: tú: canta; Usted (Ud.): cante
neg. commands: tú: no cantes; Ud.: no cante
Yes, it's confusing! Plus, there are irregular verbs and all the usual nonsense, but in regular verbs it's just the negative tú that is different.
:0)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187577 - 11/02/09 09:10 AM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
old hand
Registered: 02/28/08
Posts: 724
Loc: western NY
|
seems to me cante would be the imperative since the infinitive is cantar.
Cante is the 3rd person singular imperative 'let her/him sing'. Wrong! As far as I know, the only imperatives are second person. If you address a third person, s/he becomes second. You might say a third person should do something, but that would not be the imperative. Canta is the 2nd person singular informal 'sing (you)'. Wrong again! The second person singular is "cantas", as shown in my previous post. "Canta" is the third person singular. Wow! I got to say "wrong" to Zmjezhd, twice! I better figure out what "Zmjezhd" is in numbers and get a lottery ticket... ;0) and if I'm wrong, I'll have a heap o' slinkin' away to do...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187582 - 11/02/09 10:28 AM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: twosleepy]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 2270
Loc: R'lyeh
|
Wow! I got to say "wrong" to Zmjezhd, twice!I am wrong on occasion and when I am I admit it. The second error was one of omission. I left out the mood: i.e., imperative. I've fixed that. Now about imperatives in Spanish in persons other than the 2nd person. Spanish, as other Romance languages, has imperatives in more than the 2nd person. For example: ¡Viva el rey! Just as the present subjunctive ( no llores) is used for the negative imperative ("don't cry"), the present subjunctive is used for 3rd person imperatives, which usually have to be translated in English as, "let her/him X". References Wikipedia articleDiscussion of the third person imperative
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187584 - 11/02/09 11:46 AM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
old hand
Registered: 02/28/08
Posts: 724
Loc: western NY
|
I checked both of those links. The first appears to be incorrectly written, as it says the plural third person is vosotros, where vosotros is actually the plural second person (informal), that is, the plural form of tú. I'm not sure I trust that page.
You're referencing Wikipedia! I thought you were on my Wiki-haters list....
There may be some confusion and/or controversy regarding the "third person" label. In Spanish, the forms for the third person are the same as those for the second person formal (Usted and Ustedes). I don't believe the imperative forms are truly third person, but the forms are used for Usted and Ustedes. Since the labels are debatable, I'll leave it at you pick yours and I'll pick mine.
Regarding ¡Viva el rey!, I believe it is a shortening of ¡Que viva el rey!, which can be translated "That the king (should) live" but is generally "Long live the king". This would be the subjunctive.
On a personal note, zmjezhd, my intent was to be humorous about the corrections, with a little added jubilation (I rarely get to be the "expert"), which should indicate to you that I rarely see mistakes from you, and that your knowledge base is deep and awe-inspiring. I did not intend any disrespect, so if you felt that, I do apologize, as I did not wish to even imply any such thing! :0)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187587 - 11/02/09 12:04 PM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: twosleepy]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 2270
Loc: R'lyeh
|
You're referencing Wikipedia! I thought you were on my Wiki-haters list....Moi? Nope, I find Wikipedia useful, and cite it often. here may be some confusion and/or controversy regarding the "third person" label.Agreed. I was using it because that's how I have often seen it referred to in linguistics texts and grammars. But, if you're going to call no llores a 2nd person negative imperative, then I guess I can call llore a 3rd person imperative. Latin had these, too. Vivat rex 'let the king live', fiat lux 'let there be light', etc. The problem in the end is one of terminology. Some people like their terminology to be based on forms. And others on function. my intent was to be humorous about the corrections, with a little added jubilation (I rarely get to be the "expert")I appreciated that you pointed out some problems with my post, and I tried to rectify them. I hope I did not seem to be taking umbrage. [ Addendum: a discussion of imperative mood in the Gramática de la lengua castellana by Real Academia Española ( link), including examples of 3PS and 1PP.]
Edited by zmjezhd (11/02/09 01:31 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187596 - 11/02/09 05:06 PM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: AnnaStrophic]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/23/06
Posts: 3387
Loc: Netherlands, the Hague
|
With compliments from the Mexican connection: "Sing and don't cry", ay ay ay ay
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187602 - 11/02/09 08:55 PM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
old hand
Registered: 02/28/08
Posts: 724
Loc: western NY
|
[ Addendum: a discussion of imperative mood in the Gramática de la lengua castellana by Real Academia Española ( link), including examples of 3PS and 1PP.] You are one FUNNY guy! Thanks for the chortle... Nothing like a text over 100 years old to help me brush up on my grammar... I know these guys, anyway. They probably changed most of what's in there in the last 100 years. Heck, they even deleted 2 letters from the alphabet in 1994! :0)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187614 - 11/03/09 06:03 AM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: twosleepy]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 12381
|
Nothing like a text over 100 years old to help me brush up on my grammar. So, how old is the song Cielito Lindo? I would say consulting a grammar book that's over 100 years old would be perfectly appropriate for examining the grammar of a song that's over 100 years old. But that's just me. YMMV.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#187627 - 11/03/09 08:00 PM
Re: Spanish grammar question:
[Re: zmjezhd]
|
old hand
Registered: 02/28/08
Posts: 724
Loc: western NY
|
centenarian grammarian.  Okay, now that's cute! Sounds like something from Grammar Rock! I really loved that Schoolhouse Rock stuff... classic! So, how old is the song Cielito Lindo? My question is: What the heck were they smokin' when they wrote it???
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
7151 Members
16 Forums
12706 Topics
187591 Posts
Max Online: 853 @ 10/23/07 11:39 AM
|
|
|
0 registered (),
12
Guests and
23
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Re: Spanish grammar question: [Re: zmjezhd]
Previous Topic
Index