Dear anyone,
Your duolingo forum registration isn't automaticaly transferred to duome forum so in order to join duome forums you need to register with your existing or any other username and email; in any case it's advised that you choose a new password for the forum.
~ Duome Team

Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Moderators: Stasia, xillegas

Jimbo

Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Jimbo »

"Did you write to them often?"

Duolingo sentence discussion: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/27836741

Default translation: ¿Les escribiste a menudo?

My answer (marked also correct): ¿Les escribías a menudo?

I just don't understand the default answer though - when would you pair a preterite conjugation like 'escribiste' with 'a menudo'? I must be missing something somewhere.

Native language: 🇬🇧. Novice getting towards rookie: 🇪🇸. Beginner: 🇬🇷, 🇯🇵.

Cifi

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Cifi »

I think that one of the most misleading "rules" is that repeated actions would require imperfect tense.

This isn't quite the way it works as far as I can tell, it's whether there is a determined start and end point of something rather, plus whether it matters to the speaker.

Overall, imperfect vs preterite is the hardest part of Spanish grammar in my opinion. I found subjunctive actually mostly easy to cope with in comparison.

Native: :de: Intermediate: :uk: Lower intermediate: :es: Beginner: :fr: Absolute beginner: 🇬🇷
(If there are errors in what I'm writing in either language, please do correct me - I'll never take it as offense or something like that.)

User avatar
gmads
Mexico

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by gmads »

Jimbo wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 9:04 am

"Did you write to them often?"

Duolingo sentence discussion: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/27836741

Default translation: ¿Les escribiste a menudo?

My answer (marked also correct): ¿Les escribías a menudo?

I just don't understand the default answer though - when would you pair a preterite conjugation like 'escribiste' with 'a menudo'? I must be missing something somewhere.

A question first. Do you see any problem with the English sentence, "did you write to them often?" when compared to "did you used to write to them often?"

Yes, the general rule says that the imperfect is the preferred tense when describing repeated, habitual actions in the past (regardless of specific time frames: "ella solía llegar tarde"; "ella siempre solía llegar tarde"), and that the preterite is mainly used to describe single completed actions within a specific time frame ("el mes pasado fui al cine con mi novia").

However, sometimes the preterite may also be used for repeated actions within a time frame ("el mes pasado fui tres veces al cine"), even if it is implied ("el mes pasado me inscribí a un nuevo gimnasio; también fui tres veces al cine").

It's always best to follow the general rules, and to gradually start taking note of the exceptions ;)



:hash:  ㆍespañol ㆍgramática ㆍSentenceDiscussion

Last edited by gmads on Fri Jun 09, 2023 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

🦎  Imagination is the only weapon in the war with reality.  🦎
Antinomy - Imagination

🇲🇽 :us:  ·  :it: 🇧🇷  ·  :ru: 🇦🇪

Jimbo

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Jimbo »

First of all, many thanks everyone.

Cifi wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 6:35 pm

I think that one of the most misleading "rules" is that repeated actions would require imperfect tense.

This isn't quite the way it works as far as I can tell, it's whether there is a determined start and end point of something rather, plus whether it matters to the speaker.

The problem is that the sentence doesn't give a start or end point, just that it's asking whether the writing was a common event.

Overall, imperfect vs preterite is the hardest part of Spanish grammar in my opinion. I found subjunctive actually mostly easy to cope with in comparison.

When it comes to the subjunctive, I can usually manage English into Spanish, but unless it's a conditional + 'si' sentence (which is structured the same way in English) I have terrible trouble going the other way.

For imperfect v. preterite however, I wonder if I'll ever finish grasping that.

I mean, even ones that should be obvious, like, 'sabía' means 'I knew' while 'supe' means something like 'I became aware of', but I don't know whether that's 'I knew' in the sense of 'Of course I knew that - I've known it since I was six!' or 'I'm sure I knew that once, but I've forgotten it.' or even 'I knew that then, but I've since forgotten it', or any combination thereof.

gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm
Jimbo wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 9:04 am

"Did you write to them often?"

Duolingo sentence discussion: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/27836741

Default translation: ¿Les escribiste a menudo?

My answer (marked also correct): ¿Les escribías a menudo?

I just don't understand the default answer though - when would you pair a preterite conjugation like 'escribiste' with 'a menudo'? I must be missing something somewhere.

A question first. Do you see any problem with the English sentence, "did you write to them often?" when compared to "did you used to write to them often?"

Yes, the general rule says that the imperfect is the preferred tense when describing repeated, habitual actions in the past (regardless of specific time frames: "ella solía llegar tarde"; "ella siempre solía llegar tarde"), and that the preterite is mainly used to describe single completed actions within a specific time frame ("el mes pasado fui al cine con mi novia").

Honestly, I do see, well, maybe not a problem but a clear difference between "did you write to them often?" and "did you used to write to them often?".

In the case of 'Did you write to them often?', whether the writing to them is continuing is outside the scope of the question while 'Did you used to write to them often?' is a form which is a near exact equivalent of the past perfect 'Had you written to them often?' - 'used to' means that the action is definitely no longer happening.

Given that everything I know about the imperfect tense in Spanish states that it cannot carry an ending (that would make it, by definition, perfective), I would think it unwise to translate 'Did you used to write to them often' as '¿Les escribías a menudo?', at least if there weren't any other qualifiers, but the question posed was 'Did you write to them often?', and while that might not be as clear about an action continuing into the present as the present perfect 'Have you written to them often?', it doesn't explicitly say it's ended either. I thought when beginning and endings were irrelevant in Spanish that the imperfect was the default go-to even without the 'often' in there?

However, sometimes the preterite may also be used for repeated actions within a time frame ("el mes pasado fui tres veces al cine"), even if it is implied ("el mes pasado me inscribí a un nuevo gimnasio; también fui tres veces al cine").

What time frame though (even implicit)?

The first of those forum examples only has one person ask about tenses, and nobody answered. The main discussion there was the absence of the indirect object preposition. Here's a detail their discussion didn't include however.

While to someone Stateside, that would be understood as 'Did you write [something] [to] him every day?', to my English eyes, while I understood it after a moment, I first read it as 'Did you write him {an already established male fictional character*} every day?' and now I'm wondering if it could translate it into Spanish, with that exact meaning, as '¿Lo escribías** todos los días?'?

*Possibly with a daily release schedule like a newspaper comic strip but that's not necessary because the point is about 'you' writing it every day, not the publication.
**Or 'escribiste'.

In the second forum example, quite a few of the commentators seem to agree with me, and someone even takes the time to explain why 'used to' is a really bad marker for the imperfect tense.

Although, now that I think about it, I have seen the imperfect tense used to refer to interrupted actions, the problem is that all the examples that I've seen of that use 'when' rather than 'but then', 'but now', 'until' or 'before', which is what 'used to' would require, and furthermore, don't actually indicate that the interrupted action was stopped so much as faded into the background (that part might just be a fault of Spanishdict's example sentences however).

Once again, I feel like I've somehow managed to learn something and simultaneously been left with yet more questions.

Native language: 🇬🇧. Novice getting towards rookie: 🇪🇸. Beginner: 🇬🇷, 🇯🇵.

Cifi

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Cifi »

Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am

The problem is that the sentence doesn't give a start or end point, just that it's asking whether the writing was a common event.

Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am

What time frame though (even implicit)?

Once again, I think the problem is that Duolingo sentences lack context, so you have to set up one which might fit.

Here's my try:

A: "De 1991 a 1999 viví en Bolivia. Debido a los vuelos caros, solo vi a mis padres dos veces durante este tiempo."

B: " Pero... ¿les escribiste a menudo?"

[mention]gmads[/mention]: Would it work this way? Is that what you mean by implied time frame?

Native: :de: Intermediate: :uk: Lower intermediate: :es: Beginner: :fr: Absolute beginner: 🇬🇷
(If there are errors in what I'm writing in either language, please do correct me - I'll never take it as offense or something like that.)

Cifi

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Cifi »

Long ago, I think it was back when Duolingo's forums still existed, we practiced together by putting a short Spanish text written in present into the past. It was really challenging, and we needed a lot of help from a native speaker to correct or confirm us and explain things. If enough Spanish learners are interested, perhaps we could repeat this with another text?

Native: :de: Intermediate: :uk: Lower intermediate: :es: Beginner: :fr: Absolute beginner: 🇬🇷
(If there are errors in what I'm writing in either language, please do correct me - I'll never take it as offense or something like that.)

User avatar
gmads
Mexico

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by gmads »

Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am

First of all, many thanks everyone.

gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm
Jimbo wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 9:04 am

"Did you write to them often?"

Duolingo sentence discussion: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/27836741

Default translation: ¿Les escribiste a menudo?

My answer (marked also correct): ¿Les escribías a menudo?

I just don't understand the default answer though - when would you pair a preterite conjugation like 'escribiste' with 'a menudo'? I must be missing something somewhere.

A question first. Do you see any problem with the English sentence, "did you write to them often?" when compared to "did you used to write to them often?"

Honestly, I do see, well, maybe not a problem but a clear difference between "did you write to them often?" and "did you used to write to them often?".

In the case of 'Did you write to them often?', whether the writing to them is continuing is outside the scope of the question while 'Did you used to write to them often?' is a form which is a near exact equivalent of the past perfect 'Had you written to them often?' - 'used to' means that the action is definitely no longer happening.

I asked because to me both the Spanish ("¿les escribiste a menudo?") and English ("did you write to them often?") versions transmit the same idea: a concluded action that was repeatedly done in the past, but without transmitting the idea of habituality.

As we know, there are general rules that, as I said, it is always best to follow them. However, at least to me, the issue in here is more about habituality than anything else.

On the one hand, the Spanish preterite speaks of a known concluded action (or repeated non-habitual actions).

For example, someone went on a two-month trip, returns home and starts talking about his trip with someone else.

a: ¿Cómo estuvo tu viaje?
b: Muy bien, gracias.
a: ¿Les escribiste a menudo a tus papás?
b: Sí, les escribí lo más seguido que pude.

a: How was your trip?
b: Very good, thank you.
a: Did you often write to your parents?
b: Yes, I wrote to them as often as I could.

On the other hand, the Spanish imperfect emphasizes that an action was habitual.

For example, someone lived abroad for two years, returns home and starts talking about his experience with someone else.

a: ¿Cómo estuvo tu viaje?
b: Muy bien, gracias.
a: ¿Les escribías a menudo a tus papás?
b: Sí, les escribía lo más seguido que podía.

a: How was your trip?
b: Very good, thank you.
a: Did you used to write often to your parents?
b: Yes, I used to write to them as often as I could.

Take note of the cases and examples described in the following article.

ACCIÓN PUNTUAL EN EL PASADO = PRETÉRITO

[...] aunque algunas acciones pueden significar o implicar que se realizan en un largo espacio de tiempo, al usar el pretérito no describimos tal hecho como durativo sino como puntual.

3) Cuando era pequeña, fui a Andalucía tres veranos para visitar a mis abuelos maternos.

Note that even if the action is not described as durative but as punctual, the example does describe an action that was repeated, though not in an habitual way:

  • fui: a concluded action
  • tres veranos: that action was done/repeated a number of times
  • cuando era pequeña: within a time-frame

Regardless of actions being concluded or not in a certain time frame, the tenses being discussed talk about the past, but neither one precludes the action from happening again.


Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am
gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm

Yes, the general rule says that the imperfect is the preferred tense when describing repeated, habitual actions in the past (regardless of specific time frames: "ella solía llegar tarde"; "ella siempre solía llegar tarde"), and that the preterite is mainly used to describe single completed actions within a specific time frame ("el mes pasado fui al cine con mi novia").

Given that everything I know about the imperfect tense in Spanish states that it cannot carry an ending (that would make it, by definition, perfective), I would think it unwise to translate 'Did you used to write to them often' as '¿Les escribías a menudo?', at least if there weren't any other qualifiers, but the question posed was 'Did you write to them often?', and while that might not be as clear about an action continuing into the present as the present perfect 'Have you written to them often?', it doesn't explicitly say it's ended either. I thought when beginning and endings were irrelevant in Spanish that the imperfect was the default go-to even without the 'often' in there?

The action definitely ended —within whichever time frame the action happened to happen—: "les escribiste" ("you wrote to them"). The verb makes it explicitly.


Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am
gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm

However, sometimes the preterite may also be used for repeated actions within a time frame ("el mes pasado fui tres veces al cine"), even if it is implied ("el mes pasado me inscribí a un nuevo gimnasio; también fui tres veces al cine").

What time frame though (even implicit)?

The first sentence establishes the time frame:

  • el mes pasado... (last month...)

so it is implied in the second one:

  • también fui [¿cuándo?] tres veces al cine (I also went [when?] three times to the cinema)

🦎  Imagination is the only weapon in the war with reality.  🦎
Antinomy - Imagination

🇲🇽 :us:  ·  :it: 🇧🇷  ·  :ru: 🇦🇪

Jimbo

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Jimbo »

Again, thank you.

gmads wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:05 pm
Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am

First of all, many thanks everyone.

gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm

A question first. Do you see any problem with the English sentence, "did you write to them often?" when compared to "did you used to write to them often?"

Honestly, I do see, well, maybe not a problem but a clear difference between "did you write to them often?" and "did you used to write to them often?".

In the case of 'Did you write to them often?', whether the writing to them is continuing is outside the scope of the question while 'Did you used to write to them often?' is a form which is a near exact equivalent of the past perfect 'Had you written to them often?' - 'used to' means that the action is definitely no longer happening.

I asked because to me both the Spanish ("¿les escribiste a menudo?") and English ("did you write to them often?") versions transmit the same idea: a concluded action that was repeatedly done in the past, but without transmitting the idea of habituality.

You've made me understand the Spanish at least. I can see '¿Les escribiste a menudo?' as 'a concluded action that was repeatedly done in the past', the problem is the English 'Did you write to them often?' still reads to me as 'an action that was repeatedly done in the past', and even if we assumed there was a possible conclusion, nothing's saying whether it was to the writing or to the frequency of the writing.

Oh, I think I've had a breakthrough. Is this Spanish exchange correct?

a: ¿Estás ocupada?
b: Estoy pintando un cuadro.
a: ¿Lo pintaste ayer también?
b: Sí. Toma mucho tiempo para pintar algo bueno.

Because yesterday is concluded even though the painting (in both verb and noun forms) is not? And also, that the preterite in questions doesn't truly mean asking if someone's closed the door on whatever it was they'd been doing, (which, incidentally, 'used to' implies in English,) so much as that doesn't matter to that question?

(Again though, Duo's question was English to Spanish, not Spanish to English, and lacking any such qualifier.)

As we know, there are general rules that, as I said, it is always best to follow them. However, at least to me, the issue in here is more about habituality than anything else.

On the one hand, the Spanish preterite speaks of a known concluded action (or repeated non-habitual actions).

For example, someone went on a two-month trip, returns home and starts talking about his trip with someone else.

a: ¿Cómo estuvo tu viaje?
b: Muy bien, gracias.
a: ¿Les escribiste a menudo a tus papás?
b: Sí, les escribí lo más seguido que pude.

a: How was your trip?
b: Very good, thank you.
a: Did you often write to your parents?
b: Yes, I wrote to them as often as I could.

On the other hand, the Spanish imperfect emphasizes that an action was habitual.

For example, someone lived abroad for two years, returns home and starts talking about his experience with someone else.

a: ¿Cómo estuvo tu viaje?
b: Muy bien, gracias.
a: ¿Les escribías a menudo a tus papás?
b: Sí, les escribía lo más seguido que podía.

a: How was your trip?
b: Very good, thank you.
a: Did you used to write often to your parents?
b: Yes, I used to write to them as often as I could.

I have doubts about the use of 'used to' in that last sentence. I'm not sure it shows habituality, but more than that, it emphasises that the time of writing to the parents was over. The likely follow-up question would be:

a: And was it coming back that caused you to stop writing to them?

If I'm understanding correctly, 'Yes, I would write to them as often as I could' would be a better way of emphasising that, or better still, 'Yes, I would write to them whenever I could'.

Take note of the cases and examples described in the following article.

ACCIÓN PUNTUAL EN EL PASADO = PRETÉRITO

[...] aunque algunas acciones pueden significar o implicar que se realizan en un largo espacio de tiempo, al usar el pretérito no describimos tal hecho como durativo sino como puntual.

3) Cuando era pequeña, fui a Andalucía tres veranos para visitar a mis abuelos maternos.

Note that even if the action is not described as durative but as punctual, the example does describe an action that was repeated, though not in an habitual way:

  • fui: a concluded action
  • tres veranos: that action was done/repeated a number of times
  • cuando era pequeña: within a time-frame

Regardless of actions being concluded or not in a certain time frame, the tenses being discussed talk about the past, but neither one precludes the action from happening again.

First of all, thanks for the link. Certainly the part comparing their continuous forms was helpful to see what was going on. I suspect it will take me a long time to get used to the others though, not least because the problems often stem from the English sentences rather than issues with the Spanish.

Also, you'll be pleased to know that you've found a time when 'used to' actually does translate into the Spanish imperfect, because 'Back when I used to be small, we went to Andalucía during(?) three summers, in order to visit my maternal grandparents' does work as a translation of that, although 'Back when I was small' or just 'When I was small' is more common (and 'When I used to be small' is awkward).

Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am
gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm

Yes, the general rule says that the imperfect is the preferred tense when describing repeated, habitual actions in the past (regardless of specific time frames: "ella solía llegar tarde"; "ella siempre solía llegar tarde"), and that the preterite is mainly used to describe single completed actions within a specific time frame ("el mes pasado fui al cine con mi novia").

Given that everything I know about the imperfect tense in Spanish states that it cannot carry an ending (that would make it, by definition, perfective), I would think it unwise to translate 'Did you used to write to them often' as '¿Les escribías a menudo?', at least if there weren't any other qualifiers, but the question posed was 'Did you write to them often?', and while that might not be as clear about an action continuing into the present as the present perfect 'Have you written to them often?', it doesn't explicitly say it's ended either. I thought when beginning and endings were irrelevant in Spanish that the imperfect was the default go-to even without the 'often' in there?

The action definitely ended —within whichever time frame the action happened to happen—: "les escribiste" ("you wrote to them"). The verb makes it explicitly.

The uncertainty wasn't in 'Escribiste' - I already knew that that meant it was completed. It was that there was nothing to express that in the English sentence Duolingo was asking me to translate.

Jimbo wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:58 am
gmads wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:44 pm

However, sometimes the preterite may also be used for repeated actions within a time frame ("el mes pasado fui tres veces al cine"), even if it is implied ("el mes pasado me inscribí a un nuevo gimnasio; también fui tres veces al cine").

What time frame though (even implicit)?

The first sentence establishes the time frame:

  • el mes pasado... (last month...)

so it is implied in the second one:

  • también fui [¿cuándo?] tres veces al cine (I also went [when?] three times to the cinema)

Sorry, I was a bit unclear on that one, I meant in Duo's sentence where no timeframe was established. Your example was clear enough.

Native language: 🇬🇧. Novice getting towards rookie: 🇪🇸. Beginner: 🇬🇷, 🇯🇵.

User avatar
gmads
Mexico

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by gmads »

Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

Again, thank you.

You are welcome!

Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

Oh, I think I've had a breakthrough. Is this Spanish exchange correct?

a: ¿Estás ocupada?
b: Estoy pintando un cuadro.
a: ¿Lo pintaste ayer también?
b: Sí. Toma mucho tiempo para pintar algo bueno.

Because yesterday is concluded even though the painting (in both verb and noun forms) is not?

It sounds strange.

The expression "lo pintaste" implies that the painting (as a noun) was finished (hence the action was also finished, at least with respect to that particular painting).

To ask about having painted yesterday, the "lo" DOP (direct object pronoun) would have to be omitted: "¿pintaste ayer también?"

Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am
gmads wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:05 pm

a: Did you used to write often to your parents?
b: Yes, I used to write to them as often as I could.

I have doubts about the use of 'used to' in that last sentence. I'm not sure it shows habituality, but more than that, it emphasises that the time of writing to the parents was over.

Yes, the { used to + infinitive } structure is used to talk about concluded (ended/changed) past situations, however, I was taught that it also talks about habitual actions/situations, thus the expression "used to," would mean, "I was accustomed to or habituated to." For example, "when I was a child, I used to ride my bicycle every day," meaning, riding it was an habitual action for me.

Used to or would?

We can use used to or would to talk about people’s habits in the past. When we use them both together, used to most commonly comes first, as it sets the scene for the actions being reported:

When we were kids, we used to invent amazing games. We would imagine we were the government and we would make crazy laws that everyone had to obey.

Used to, but not would, can describe a state or situation which is no longer true:

We used to live in Manchester.


Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am
gmads wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:05 pm

3) Cuando era pequeña, fui a Andalucía tres veranos para visitar a mis abuelos maternos.

Also, you'll be pleased to know that you've found a time when 'used to' actually does translate into the Spanish imperfect, because 'Back when I used to be small, we went to Andalucía during(?) three summers, in order to visit my maternal grandparents' does work as a translation of that, although 'Back when I was small' or just 'When I was small' is more common (and 'When I used to be small' is awkward).

I could be mistaken but I don't think that "Back when I used to be small" would be a valid expression. I don't think that the state of "being small" could be included in the previous definition: "Used to, but not would, can describe a state or situation which is no longer true." It should be, "Back when I was small," shouldn't it?

🦎  Imagination is the only weapon in the war with reality.  🦎
Antinomy - Imagination

🇲🇽 :us:  ·  :it: 🇧🇷  ·  :ru: 🇦🇪

Jimbo

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by Jimbo »

gmads wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:29 pm
Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

Oh, I think I've had a breakthrough. Is this Spanish exchange correct?

a: ¿Estás ocupada?
b: Estoy pintando un cuadro.
a: ¿Lo pintaste ayer también?
b: Sí. Toma mucho tiempo para pintar algo bueno.

Because yesterday is concluded even though the painting (in both verb and noun forms) is not?

It sounds strange.

The expression "lo pintaste" implies that the painting (as a noun) was finished (hence the action was also finished, at least with respect to that particular painting).

To ask about having painted yesterday, the "lo" DOP (direct object pronoun) would have to be omitted: "¿pintaste ayer también?"

So would that be understood to be talking about the same painting?

Hang on, new guess. Should I have instead said…

a: ¿Trabajaste en este ayer también?

…in order to convey that meaning in Spanish - used a different verb rather than relying solely on tenses?

Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am
gmads wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:05 pm

a: Did you used to write often to your parents?
b: Yes, I used to write to them as often as I could.

I have doubts about the use of 'used to' in that last sentence. I'm not sure it shows habituality, but more than that, it emphasises that the time of writing to the parents was over.

Yes, the { used to + infinitive } structure is used to talk about concluded (ended/changed) past situations, however, I was taught that it also talks about habitual actions/situations, thus the expression "used to," would mean, "I was accustomed to or habituated to." For example, "when I was a child, I used to ride my bicycle every day," meaning, riding it was an habitual action for me.

As your link shows, it takes that meaning when it's a past participle used with the verb 'to be'. The phrase 'I'm used to' corresponds with 'I'm accustomed to'.

Used to or be used to?
Used to refers to actions and situations in the past which no longer happen or are no longer true. It always refers to the past:

She used to sing in a choir, but she gave it up. (She sang, but she doesn’t sing any more)

Be used to means ‘be accustomed to’ or ‘be familiar with’. It can refer to the past, present or future. We follow be used to with a noun phrase, a pronoun or the -ing form of a verb:

I work in a hospital, so I’m used to long hours. (I am accustomed to/familiar with long hours.)

She lives in a very small village and hates traffic. She’s not used to it.

He was a salesman, so he was used to travelling up and down the country. (He was accustomed to/was familiar with travelling.)

We can also say get used to or (more formally) become used to:

University is very different from school, but don’t worry. You’ll soon get used to it. (or, more formally, You’ll soon become used to it.)

Notice how those constructions look passive? As the last example showed, you can lose the 'be' if it's talking about the act of gaining that status, but only because it uses other auxiliary verbs - 'to become' or 'to get'. There's no active function of 'used to' that conveys the same meaning.

(And even 'to accustom', when used as a standalone verb, is an active version of the act of 'getting used to' something, rather than 'being used to' something.)

Used to or would?

We can use used to or would to talk about people’s habits in the past. When we use them both together, used to most commonly comes first, as it sets the scene for the actions being reported:

When we were kids, we used to invent amazing games. We would imagine we were the government and we would make crazy laws that everyone had to obey.

Used to, but not would, can describe a state or situation which is no longer true:

We used to live in Manchester.

I'm going to point something out here. Given the rules presented in El pretérito y el imperfecto, at least as far as I can understand them, I would translate "When we were kids, we used to invent amazing games" into Spanish as:

Cuándo éramos niños, creamos unos partidos asombrosos.

'Éremos', translating from 'were' - imperfect. More pressingly, 'creamos', translating from 'used to invent' - preterite.

That said, I think the rest of it would be:

'Fingimos que fuéramos el gobierno y creamos leyes locas que todas las personas tendrían que obedecer'.

But I'm in no way sure.

(Hopefully final edit - 'creamos', me, not 'creáramos' - the laws weren't what they were imagining but what they were doing whilst imagining, if that makes sense, and 'Fingimos' instead of 'Fingíamos' because its duration was set by the earlier sentence. I just hope I'm right.)

Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am
gmads wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:05 pm

Also, you'll be pleased to know that you've found a time when 'used to' actually does translate into the Spanish imperfect, because 'Back when I used to be small, we went to Andalucía during(?) three summers, in order to visit my maternal grandparents' does work as a translation of that, although 'Back when I was small' or just 'When I was small' is more common (and 'When I used to be small' is awkward).

I could be mistaken but I don't think that "Back when I used to be small" would be a valid expression. I don't think that the state of "being small" could be included in the previous definition: "Used to, but not would, can describe a state or situation which is no longer true." It should be, "Back when I was small," shouldn't it?

It's doesn't flow as well as 'Back when I was small', but 'being small' is a state of being (as evidenced by the Spanish using 'era' over 'estaba') and it can be assumed to no longer be true, because if the speaker was still small there would be no point in mentioning it, so it's not wrong. Certainly "I used to be small" is a valid phrase, it's the 'When' that causes trouble with it.

Native language: 🇬🇧. Novice getting towards rookie: 🇪🇸. Beginner: 🇬🇷, 🇯🇵.

User avatar
gmads
Mexico

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by gmads »

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am
gmads wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:29 pm
Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

Oh, I think I've had a breakthrough. Is this Spanish exchange correct?

a: ¿Estás ocupada?
b: Estoy pintando un cuadro.
a: ¿Lo pintaste ayer también?
b: Sí. Toma mucho tiempo para pintar algo bueno.

Because yesterday is concluded even though the painting (in both verb and noun forms) is not?

It sounds strange.

The expression "lo pintaste" implies that the painting (as a noun) was finished (hence the action was also finished, at least with respect to that particular painting).

To ask about having painted yesterday, the "lo" DOP (direct object pronoun) would have to be omitted: "¿pintaste ayer también?"

So would that be understood to be talking about the same painting?

Given the initial statement, yes.

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am

Hang on, new guess. Should I have instead said…

a: ¿Trabajaste en este ayer también?

…in order to convey that meaning in Spanish - used a different verb rather than relying solely on tenses?

Yes, you could say that. You could also say, "¿Trabajaste en { él (el cuadro) / ella (la pintura) } ayer?"

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am
gmads wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:29 pm
Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

I have doubts about the use of 'used to' in that last sentence. I'm not sure it shows habituality, but more than that, it emphasises that the time of writing to the parents was over.

Yes, the { used to + infinitive } structure is used to talk about concluded (ended/changed) past situations, however, I was taught that it also talks about habitual actions/situations, thus the expression "used to," would mean, "I was accustomed to or habituated to." For example, "when I was a child, I used to ride my bicycle every day," meaning, riding it was an habitual action for me.

As your link shows, it takes that meaning when it's a past participle used with the verb 'to be'. The phrase 'I'm used to' corresponds with 'I'm accustomed to'.

Yes, you are right, I misinterpreted their meanings. Anyway, from what I learned, I always use, "used to," to imply repeated usual/habitual actions.

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am

I'm going to point something out here. Given the rules presented in El pretérito y el imperfecto, at least as far as I can understand them, I would translate "When we were kids, we used to invent amazing games" into Spanish as:

Cuándo éramos niños, creamos unos partidos asombrosos.

That sentence conveys the idea that a fixed, countable set of games were invented.

Given the meaning of "used to," I (and I'm sure that most Spanish speaking persons also would) translate it as, "Cuando éramos niños, solíamos inventar unos juegos asombrosos". How many games did they invent? An unknown quantity, but that is not relevant because the emphasis is about how creative they were.

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am

'Éremos', translating from 'were' - imperfect. More pressingly, 'creamos', translating from 'used to invent' - preterite.

That said, I think the rest of it would be:

'Fingimos que fuéramos el gobierno y creamos leyes locas que todas las personas tendrían que obedecer'.

But I'm in no way sure.

(Hopefully final edit - 'creamos', me, not 'creáramos' - the laws weren't what they were imagining but what they were doing whilst imagining, if that makes sense, and 'Fingimos' instead of 'Fingíamos' because its duration was set by the earlier sentence. I just hope I'm right.)

I'd say it could rather be something like, "Fingíamos que éramos del gobierno y creábamos leyes locas que todas las personas tenían/tendrían que obedecer".

Jimbo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:40 am
gmads wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:29 pm
Jimbo wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 am

Also, you'll be pleased to know that you've found a time when 'used to' actually does translate into the Spanish imperfect, because 'Back when I used to be small, we went to Andalucía during(?) three summers, in order to visit my maternal grandparents' does work as a translation of that, although 'Back when I was small' or just 'When I was small' is more common (and 'When I used to be small' is awkward).

I could be mistaken but I don't think that "Back when I used to be small" would be a valid expression. I don't think that the state of "being small" could be included in the previous definition: "Used to, but not would, can describe a state or situation which is no longer true." It should be, "Back when I was small," shouldn't it?

It's doesn't flow as well as 'Back when I was small', but 'being small' is a state of being (as evidenced by the Spanish using 'era' over 'estaba') and it can be assumed to no longer be true, because if the speaker was still small there would be no point in mentioning it, so it's not wrong. Certainly "I used to be small" is a valid phrase, it's the 'When' that causes trouble with it.

From my point of view, there is not an actual, voluntary action in "being small," so, I think I will keep on disagreeing on this one :D ;)

Cheers!

🦎  Imagination is the only weapon in the war with reality.  🦎
Antinomy - Imagination

🇲🇽 :us:  ·  :it: 🇧🇷  ·  :ru: 🇦🇪

User avatar
EranBarLev
Israel

Re: Did you write to them often? (en → es)

Post by EranBarLev »

🇮🇱N 🇬🇧C1 🇪🇸B2 🇵🇹B1 🇫🇷B1 🇸🇦A1 🇷🇺A1

Post Reply

Return to “Sentence discussions”