# took you so long...



## Masood

How would you say this in idiomatic Spanish of Spain? (referring to a difficult task at work)
*
No wonder it took you so long [to do]. It's a nightmare!*

_No es de extrañar que te tardó tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_ [?]

Thank you


----------



## gamboler

No es de extrañar que *hayas tardado tanto*. ¡Es una pesadilla!


----------



## chileno

...te tardaste/demoraste...


----------



## Amapolas

gamboler said:


> No es de extrañar que *hayas tardado tanto*. ¡Es una pesadilla!


Hola. ¿Diríais también "que *te* hayas tardado tanto" en español de España?


----------



## gamboler

Perdona. chileno, pero me parece que Masood pidió una traducción en español de España. Lo que has escrito es correcto, pero lo decís así en ciertos países de Latinoamérica.  En España nunca diríamos "te tardaste, te demoraste". Solo lo oímos en los doblajes realizados en lo que se ha dado en llamar _español neutro_.
Y la respuesta para Amapolas es que no, que el "*te*" sobra.


----------



## Masood

gamboler said:


> No es de extrañar que *hayas tardado tanto*. ¡Es una pesadilla!


That looks much better, Cheers.


----------



## Valeria Mesalina

Amapolas said:


> Hola. ¿Diríais también "que *te* hayas tardado tanto" en español de España?


 No, no lo diríamos así. Algo parecido sería "no me extraña que* te* haya llevado tanto tiempo".


----------



## Amapolas

Gracias, Valeria.


----------



## Sendro Páez

Lo que me parece más literal es:
_No es de extrañar que te llevara tanto (tiempo). ¡Es una pesadilla!_​
Algo menos literal, pero más probable desde mi punto de vista:
_No me extraña que te llevara tanto (tiempo). ¡Es una pesadilla!_​
Dos observaciones:
─ El uso del verbo _tardar_ es menos neutro que el de _llevar_. _Tardar_ puede conllevar bien un reproche, bien la idea de un retraso.
─ Yo he usado el pretérito imperfecto mientras que gamboler y Valeria Mesalina han usado el pretérito perfecto. Mi versión establece que la unidad temporal en que se llevó a término la tarea es diferente y anterior a la unidad en que está instalado el hablante.​


----------



## Masood

Muchas gracias por las respuestas. 
Creo que prefiero las que empiezan con "_No me extraña_..." Me suenan más naturales a mis oídos Yorkshire.
Un saludo


----------



## Agró

_No me extraña que te haya costado tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_


----------



## Masood

Agró said:


> _No me extraña que te haya costado tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_


Hi
Isn't this one more like "_No wonder you found it so difficult_..."?


----------



## gengo

Doesn't anyone besides me use "con razón" to express "no wonder"?


----------



## BryanCr7Know

Mi español: Con razón te demoraste tanto...


gengo said:


> Doesn't anyone besides me use "con razón" to express "no wonder"?


Me.
And always.


----------



## chileno

gengo said:


> Doesn't anyone besides me use "con razón" to express "no wonder"?



Both express the same thing...


----------



## Agró

Masood said:


> Hi
> Isn't this one more like "_No wonder you found it so difficult_..."?


Not necessarily.
"Costar" may refer to time, money, difficulty...


----------



## Masood

Agró said:


> Not necessarily.
> "Costar" may refer to time, money, difficulty...


I didn't know that.
I've only ever user _costarse _to mean _difficulty _(_me cuesta hacer algo_).
Thanks


----------



## Agró

Me cuesta media hora de autobús ir al cole.
Nos costó un riñón la nueva tele.
Le cuestan mucho las matemáticas.

_Costar*se*_; _costar_.


----------



## Masood

Agró said:


> Me cuesta media hora de autobús ir al cole.
> Nos costó un riñón la nueva tele.
> Le cuestan mucho las matemáticas.
> 
> _Costar*se*_; _costar_.


Why is this _costar _and not _costarse_?
The verb looks reflexive to me.


----------



## Masood

Sendro Páez said:


> Lo que me parece más literal es:
> _No es de extrañar que te llevara tanto (tiempo). ¡Es una pesadilla!_​
> Algo menos literal, pero más probable desde mi punto de vista:
> _No me extraña que te llevara tanto (tiempo). ¡Es una pesadilla!_​


Are these sentences in a different tense? Are they in the present?
Mine's a past tense ('_took so long_').


----------



## Valeria Mesalina

It's quite difficult to explain the accursed "se", Masood. I'll try with two apparently similar verbs:

Acostarse: Yo me acuesto (I go to bed), tú te acuestas (you go to bed), él se acuesta (he goes to bed).  Reflexive _se_.

Costar: A mí me cuesta (literally "it costs me", meaning "it's hard for me"), a tí te cuesta  (it costs you), a él le cuesta. Accursed _se. _

The verbal form does not change, just the pronouns: a nosotros nos cuesta, a vosotros os cuesta, a ellos les cuesta.

Second question: "llevara" is past too, but  subjunctive. Er, accursed subjunctive.


----------



## Elcanario

Masood said:


> Are these sentences in a different tense? Are they in the present?
> Mine's a past tense ('_took so long_').


"Llevara" is "pretérito" (<—past tense), "imperfecto" (which express an action not finished), "de subjuntivo" (subjunctive).


Masood said:


> Why is this _costar _and not _costarse_?
> The verb looks reflexive to me.


That "se" after an infinitive means that that verb is "pronominal" and costar is not one of them.
Un saludo


----------



## Masood

Elcanario said:


> "Llevara" is "pretérito" (<—past tense), "imperfecto" (which express an action not finished), "de subjuntivo" (subjunctive).
> 
> That "se" after an infinitive means that that verb is "pronominal" and costar is not one of them.
> Un saludo


Many thanks, Elcanario.
I've no idea what "pronominal" means, but I'll find out.


----------



## Elcanario

Verbo pronominal.
1. m. Gram. verbo que se construye en todas sus formas con pronombres reflexivos átonos que no desempeñan _ninguna función sintáctica_ y que concuerdan con el sujeto; p. ej., me arrepentí, se levanto.
En el DRAE los verbos pronominales aparecen como "prnl." (Pronominal), por ejemplo, arrepentirse.
_Un saludo_


----------



## iribela

gengo said:


> Doesn't anyone besides me use "con razón" to express "no wonder"?


I do. I was wondering if it hadn't been suggested because Masood asked for Spanish of Spain. Maybe they don't use 'con razón' as much...?


----------



## Masood

Valeria Mesalina said:


> It's quite difficult to explain the accursed "se", Masood. I'll try with two apparently similar verbs:
> 
> Acostarse: Yo me acuesto (I go to bed), tú te acuestas (you go to bed), él se acuesta (he goes to bed).  Reflexive _se_.
> 
> Costar: A mí me cuesta (literally "it costs me", meaning "it's hard for me"), a tí te cuesta  (it costs you), a él le cuesta. Accursed _se. _
> 
> The verbal form does not change, just the pronouns: a nosotros nos cuesta, a vosotros os cuesta, a ellos les cuesta.
> 
> Second question: "llevara" is past too, but  subjunctive. Er, accursed subjunctive.


I _think _I understand.
For a reflexive verb, the verb form will change - so for _acostarse _you will have _nosotros nos costamos_ (we go to bed).
For the prominal verb, costar, you have 'a nosostros nos cuesta'.

I hope that's right.


----------



## levmac

Try to separate these two verbs, they have nothing to do with each other.

*acostarse*

nos *a*costamos

Think of that like nos despertamos, nos levantamos, etc. Sometimes you can stretch it to a "... ourselves" translation in English, but not often.

*Costar*

 As you said, "me cuesta" can be used to mean it's hard for me. The same structure can be used to mean "it costs me €30".  

Think of it like "me gusta", "me parece". It's not pronominal.

"A nosotros nos cuesta" is not pronominal either, it's just highlighting who the indirect object is.

*Pronominal vs reflexive
*
As I understand it, all ...se verbs are dubbed pronominal. That's the technical name for them. Only _some_ of these are reflexive, when the action is done to oneself.

So, acostarse, levantarse, despertarse are pronominal verbs which are also reflexive. The person lays himself down, wakes himself up, gets himself up, (n.b. literal translations)

Other pronominal verbs might not be reflexive. "Irse" for example. "Me voy" does not mean I go myself.


----------



## Masood

levmac said:


> Try to separate these two verbs, they have nothing to do with each other.
> 
> *acostarse*
> 
> nos *a*costamos
> 
> Think of that like nos despertamos, nos levantamos, etc. Sometimes you can stretch it to a "... ourselves" translation in English, but not often.
> 
> *Costar*
> 
> As you said, "me cuesta" can be used to mean it's hard for me. The same structure can be used to mean "it costs me €30".
> 
> Think of it like "me gusta", "me parece". It's not pronominal.
> 
> "A nosotros nos cuesta" is not pronominal either, it's just highlighting who the indirect object is.
> 
> *Pronominal vs reflexive
> *
> As I understand it, all ...se verbs are dubbed pronominal. That's the technical name for them. Only _some_ of these are reflexive, when the action is done to oneself.
> 
> So, acostarse, levantarse, despertarse are pronominal verbs which are also reflexive. The person lays himself down, wakes himself up, gets himself up, (n.b. literal translations)
> 
> Other pronominal verbs might not be reflexive. "Irse" for example. "Me voy" does not mean I go myself.


Thanks for taking the time to reply. What you say makes sense. Cheers


----------



## Elixabete

A bit late but I'd say: No me extraña que tardaras tanto (en hacerlo). ¡Es una pesadilla!


----------



## levmac

The only thing I would add about the original is that, as you will have seen from the natives' answers, tardar is used a lot, so "you took" is preferred to "it took you".

The literal translation is this:

 "no me extraña que* te* haya llevado tanto tiempo".

I have seen that in books, but I don't think I have heard it too much, and I am a bit iffy about using it. I have got used to tardar.


----------



## Sendro Páez

gengo said:


> Doesn't anyone besides me use "con razón" to express "no wonder"?





iribela said:


> I do. I was wondering if it hadn't been suggested because Masood asked for Spanish of Spain. Maybe they don't use 'con razón' as much...?


As for me, it was just it didn't come to mind in time. The translation/adaptation would go like...
_Con razón {te llevó ~ tardaste} tanto (tiempo). ¡Menuda pesadilla!_​
It's worth noting that this construction requires the indicative.

~oOo~​What about the '_tardar_' versus '_llevar_' controversy? As I wrote before (in Spanish, in post #9), they don't imply exactly the same things. By the moment of choosing one of them, you can rely on popularity if you want to, but bear in mind that difference.

~oOo~​I still don't see why you, my fellow forumers (except Elixabete, in #29), do prefer the _pretérito perfecto (compuesto)_ over the _pretérito imperfecto_ in this thread. Since the context is not very clear, both are possible, but the latter seems to cover a wider range than the former.

~oOo~​The first direct object that I can think of when I hear something like "_Me cuesta mucho hacerlo_" is '_esfuerzo_' (_effort_). The second is '_dedicación_', and the third, '_sufrimiento_' (_suffering_), but '_tiempo_', '_energía_', and '_dinero_' are also perfectly possible, as Agró said.

~oOo~​Forget about _reflexive verbs_ ('_verbos reflexivos_'). They don't exist. I don't know where that pretended term came from, but I guess it was Hell or its surroundings, because it's being extraordinary harmful. (However, you can find thousands of Spanish verbs teaming up with _pronombres personales reflexivos_ in sentences ─ there's no problem with it.)

~oOo~​There are _pronominal verbs_ ('_verbos pronominales_') in Spanish. I don't know how many, but if somebody say to me they are 23 (twenty-three), I'll trust them. They are just a handful.

~oOo~​There are many verbs that have pronominal usages, or that can be used "as pronominal." They are hundreds and hundreds. However, I haven't seen any in the translations or suggestions in this thread ─ not even '_extrañar_' is used here in a pronominal way.


----------



## Masood

Sendro Páez said:


> As for me, it was just it didn't come to mind in time. The translation/adaptation would go like...
> _Con razón {te llevó ~ tardaste} tanto (tiempo). ¡Menuda pesadilla!_​
> It's worth noting that this construction requires the indicative.
> 
> ~oOo~​What about the '_tardar_' versus '_llevar_' controversy? As I wrote before (in Spanish, in post #9), they don't imply exactly the same things. By the moment of choosing one of them, you can rely on popularity if you want to, but bear in mind that difference.
> 
> ~oOo~​I still don't see why you, my fellow forumers (except Elixabete, in #29), do prefer the _pretérito perfecto (compuesto)_ over the _pretérito imperfecto_ in this thread. Since the context is not very clear, both are possible, but the latter seems to cover a wider range than the former.
> 
> ~oOo~​The first direct object that I can think of when I hear something like "_Me cuesta mucho hacerlo_" is '_esfuerzo_' (_effort_). The second is '_dedicación_', and the third, '_sufrimiento_' (_suffering_), but '_tiempo_', '_energía_', and '_dinero_' are also perfectly possible, as Agró said.
> 
> ~oOo~​Forget about _reflexive verbs_ ('_verbos reflexivos_'). They don't exist. I don't know where that pretended term came from, but I guess it was Hell or its surroundings, because it's being extraordinary harmful. (However, you can find thousands of Spanish verbs teaming up with _pronombres personales reflexivos_ in sentences ─ there's no problem with it.)
> 
> ~oOo~​There are _pronominal verbs_ ('_verbos pronominales_') in Spanish. I don't know how many, but if somebody say to me they are 23 (twenty-three), I'll trust them. They are just a handful.
> 
> ~oOo~​There are many verbs that have pronominal usages, or that can be used "as pronominal." They are hundreds and hundreds. However, I haven't seen any in the translations or suggestions in this thread ─ not even '_extrañar_' is used here in a pronominal way.


I like the cut of your jib, sir!


----------



## levmac

Sendro Páez said:


> ~oOo~​What about the '_tardar_' versus '_llevar_' controversy? As I wrote before (in Spanish, in post #9), they don't imply exactly the same things. By the moment of choosing one of them, you can rely on popularity if you want to, but bear in mind that difference.
> 
> ~oOo~​I still don't see why you, my fellow forumers (except Elixabete, in #29), do prefer the _pretérito perfecto (compuesto)_ over the _pretérito imperfecto_ in this thread. Since the context is not very clear, both are possible, but the latter seems to cover a wider range than the former.
> ~oOo~​There are many verbs that have pronominal usages, or that can be used "as pronominal." They are hundreds and hundreds. However, I haven't seen any in the translations or suggestions in this thread ─ not even '_extrañar_' is used here in a pronominal way.



1) You took and it took you could have slightly different meanings in English too. I think the difference is similar on both languages.

2) I think the pretérito perfecto has been preferred by most people because "it's a nightmare" suggests that the situation is ongoing. My feeling (just a hunch) was that the person had just arrived.

3) By this I guess you mean that "despertarse" for example is not a pronominal verb, just an ordinary verb with a pronoun on the end? If that's so, I take your point, but it obviously goes against the dictionary, and you would have to tell learners "quedarse" is not pronominal because "quedar" exists, while "arrepentirse" is pronominal because "arrepentir" does not exist. That's just as hard to deal with, in my opinion. I think of any infinitive with ...se as pronominal and then I try not to think about all the various differences that grammars try to make of them.


----------



## Elixabete

No wonder it has taken you so long = No me extraña que hayas tardado tanto ( Whatever that takes long happened recently, probably the result of the activity is in front of your eyes)
No wonder it took you so long = No me extraña que tardaras tanto (whatever that takes long happened at some point in the past known for the speakers)
"It is a nightmare" can indicate an ongoing activity, just as levmac suggests and then de "hayas tardado" translation could make sense, supposing that the English speaker used the past simple of "it took" in that sense too(?) or alternatively, "it's a nightmare" can describe a permanent quality of the "long taking"  activity in question, in this case we should translate "no me extraña que tardaras tanto".


----------



## Masood

levmac said:


> 2) I think the pretérito perfecto has been preferred by most people because "it's a nightmare" suggests that the situation is ongoing. My feeling (just a hunch) was that the person had just arrived.


Yes, it is on-going.
Person A did the work. Person B (who says the sentence in question) is checking A's work to make sure it's correct/makes sense/etc. 
I'm not sure why you think the person had just arrived - maybe you were thinking along the lines of "it took you so long (to get here)?".


----------



## levmac

Yes I did, I didn't read the post properly. It's more fun that way.


----------



## Sendro Páez

Masood said:


> I like the cut of your jib, sir!


I didn't know this idiom! I'll try to make good use of it. Thanks, and... thanks, Masood.

I like both levmac's and Elixabete's reasonings about the verb tense (post #33 point 2, and post #34). I'll write a couple of examples supporting their arguments.
─ _He tenido que escribir yo este año el informe anual que te tocó redactar a ti el año pasado. No me extraña que te llevara tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_
─ _Yo tuve que escribir el año pasado el informe anual que te ha tocado redactar a ti este año. No me extraña que te haya llevado tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_​


levmac said:


> I guess you mean that "despertarse" for example is not a pronominal verb, just an ordinary verb with a pronoun on the end? If that's so, I take your point, but it obviously goes against the dictionary, and you would have to tell learners "quedarse" is not pronominal because "quedar" exists, while "arrepentirse" is pronominal because "arrepentir" does not exist. That's just as hard to deal with, in my opinion. I think of any infinitive with ...se as pronominal and then I try not to think about all the various differences that grammars try to make of them.


Yes, you are right. I'm very strict separating the _hardcore_ pronominal verbs from the rest, and I know I go against, not only the dictionary of the RAE, but the grammar they compile ─ I am "_más papista que el papa_." I also agree with you that this subject is difficult no matter where I trace the borders between pronominal verbs and the rest. The thing is, I teach Spanish, not Spanish grammar, so my students (as well as forumers around here) are to find words like "_quedarse_" within sentences, and I can't let them go by saying, "Oh! That's a pronominal verb." I've seen that mistake too many times, in class and on this forum. It's the very mistake (I'm afraid) you've made, levmac. I think that that finding (I mean, "_¡Eureka, un verbo pronominal!_") acts as an excuse or, at least, is liberating for them ─ once the problem is given a proper name, it is not a problem any more! This is why, in those occasions, I fastidiously ask them, "Is that «_infinitivo_ + -_se_» a pronominal verb, or is it the mark of a passive construction...? An impersonal sentence, maybe...? Is it just a personal pronoun attached to a verb...?" (Well, I'm afraid I've strayed from the main question quite a lot. Sorry for that.)


----------



## Masood

Sendro Páez said:


> ─ _He tenido que escribir yo este año el informe anual* que te tocó redactar a ti el año pasado.* No me extraña que te llevara tanto. ¡Es una pesadilla!_​


Does this mean "that you wrote last year"?


----------



## levmac

Masood said:


> Does this mean "that you wrote last year"?



Te toca has that feeling of "it's your turn", so here it is like "you had to write" in the sense of "it fell to you to write it".


----------



## gengo

levmac said:


> Te toca has that feeling of "it's your turn", so here it is like "you had to write" in the sense of "it fell to you to write it".



Yes, or maybe "This year I had to write the annual report that you got stuck writing last year."  (At least in colloquial AmEn.)


----------



## Masood

levmac said:


> Te toca has that feeling of "it's your turn", so here it is like "you had to write" in the sense of "it fell to you to write it".


Thank you. I've only ever used 'te toca' in the sense of 'it's your turn'. 
Sometimes I'll say (possibly erroneously) during footie "Te toca a ti de ser portero" (because we take it in turns in goal). Anyway, it gets me understood.


----------



## levmac

Te toca a ti + infinitive.

There are a few other uses. They also say "a ver si me toca la lotería" to mean win it.

That might be the best way for a Briton to picture "te toca" actually, like the big hand of the national lottery pointing. "It's you!"


----------

