# BCS: Ne biste li htjeli biti bogat ?



## Milivoje

Wouldn't you like to be rich?

Interrogative negation in the conditional is tripping me up.
Can I say "ne biste li htjeli biti bogat ?"

Any comment will be appreciated.


----------



## slavic_one

You can say it like that, no problem.


----------



## Dekadent

Milivoje said:


> Wouldn't you like to be rich?
> 
> Interrogative negation in the conditional is tripping me up.
> Can I say "ne biste li htjeli biti bogat ?"
> 
> Any comment will be appreciated.




Ne biste li ht(j)eli biti bogat(i)? *Yes, you can and it's correct.* But... Depending of context, lower/higher register or familiarity with the person you are speaking with (or to) etc, you could say:

A Vi (second person sing.) ne biste želeli da ste bogati?

Ne biste li i Vi želeli biti bogati?

Šta (or zašto, što), ti ne bi (hteo/želeo) da si bogat?

Etc, etc, etc...

All forms are acceptable; again, depending of whom are you speaking to/with.


----------



## Anicetus

The negation and the interrogative clitic are indeed fine -- you simply treat _biste_ as if it were a tense by itself, so _ne_ goes before it and _li_ after it -- but congruence in your sentence isn't. As a part of the predicate, _bogat_ must agree with the gender and number of the verb form, _biste htjeli_, which is masculine plural in this sentence: _ne biste li htjeli biti *bogati*?_ That applies whether the plural is actually used to adress more people or to politely adress a single person.


----------



## Duya

And, somewhat unexpectedly, polite 'vi' is always in masculine plural, even if you address a woman this way: you still need to use _bogat*i*_.

I posted this one before, but it's so good that I have to repeat it  :
http://specgram.com/SoLP/08.schouwiniste-pigge.polite.html


----------



## Milivoje

Anicetus said:


> The negation and the interrogative clitic are indeed fine -- you simply treat _biste_ as if it were a tense by itself, so _ne_ goes before it and _li_ after it -- but congruence in your sentence isn't. As a part of the predicate, _bogat_ must agree with the gender and number of the verb form, _biste htjeli_, which is masculine plural in this sentence: _ne biste li htjeli biti *bogati*?_ That applies whether the plural is actually used to adress more people or to politely adress a single person.



_ne biste li htjeli biti *bogati*?
Indeed, I missed the agreement of bogati.
My intention was to politely address a single person. 
Thanks
_


----------



## Milivoje

Duya said:


> And, somewhat unexpectedly, polite 'vi' is always in masculine plural, even if you address a woman this way: you still need to use _bogat*i*_.
> 
> I posted this one before, but it's so good that I have to repeat it  :
> http://specgram.com/SoLP/08.schouwiniste-pigge.polite.html




Interesting.
I think in Spanish (Castillian) it's a little different:
No quisierais (vos) ser rico ? (Sing)
No quisierais (vosotros) ser ricos ? (Plur)

same in the Latin American version:
No quisiera (Usted) ser rico ?
No quisieran (Ustedes) ser ricos ?

Of course it would be rica and ricas for the femenin.


----------



## sesperxes

> No quisierais (vos) ser rico ? (Sing)


 

I'm afraid but you ought to refresh your Spanish!

In Spain we do use the "Usted" and, since XV century, we don't use the "vos": anyway, the concordances you suggested are OK.


----------



## Milivoje

Oops !
Sorry if I mislead our "foreros"
I am a native Latin American Spanish speaker and  have never been to Spain. 
However I was under the impression that the voseo was alive and well in Andalucia. My daughter spent a year in Granada and came back speaking with a very charming accent !
I am afraid this out of topic though.


----------

