# passive voice...



## aedude94

Hey! ok, I dont understand the passive voice in spanish at all. I mean i understand the "true passive voice" (ex: La ventana fue abierta por el viento.) but i dont get stuff like "Aquí se habla español." does that mean Here, spanish is spoken? and if it does, can you put the aquí after se habla español? i cant find any websites that throrougly address this issue. jaja. thanks!!


----------



## Residente Calle 13

aedude94 said:
			
		

> Hey! ok, I dont understand the passive voice in spanish at all. I mean i understand the "true passive voice" (ex: La ventana fue abierta por el viento.) but i dont get stuff like "Aquí se habla español." does that mean Here, spanish is spoken? and if it does, can you put the aquí after se habla español? i cant find any websites that throrougly address this issue. jaja. thanks!!



I don't think you can say "la ventana fue abierta" in Spanish. That sounds very odd to me and I think it's incorrect according to the grammar books too.

"Aqui se habla español" is correct and it means "Spanish spoken here."

"En la oficina no se duerme." = "In the office one can not sleep." (More natural would be : "You're not allowed to...")


----------



## Neldabarba

You may say in spanish: "la ventana fue abierta por el viento" , it is correct. Is like a metaphor. If this action is doing by a person you would say: "Yo abrí la ventana" or "Estoy  abriendo la ventana", for example.
About "Aquí se habla en español" in english es "Spanish is spoken here" , no as you say using a coma "Here, sapnish is spoken" , this last construction is wrong.
Bye!!


----------



## over

aedude94 said:
			
		

> Hey! ok, I dont understand the passive voice in spanish at all. I mean i understand the "true passive voice" (ex: La ventana fue abierta por el viento.) but i dont get stuff like "Aquí se habla español." does that mean Here, spanish is spoken? and if it does, can you put the aquí after se habla español? i cant find any websites that throrougly address this issue. jaja. thanks!!


I'm not a native Spanish speaker but I agree with Neldabarba in that "la ventana fue abierta..." is grammatically correct, but in Spanish the passive voice is often avoided, preferring instead the construction "la ventana se abrió..."

Edit: Sorry, you said you already understood about that...


----------



## Residente Calle 13

My grammar book says the following sentence is wrong:
_
*La ventana fue rota por una piedra._

The explanation: the stone has no intention.

On the other hand, it says that
_
La casa fue destruida por la bomba._

is correct (28.2.2) 

*Butt, John and Carmen Benjamin. A Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish.  4th ed. Chicago: NTC, 2004. *

I would avoid expressions like that. It looks like quite a mess, if you ask me.


----------



## over

Hi Residente, do you think the book says that the second sentence is correct because the agent is "*la* bomba" (and not "una bomba") or because bombs are seen to have some inherent malicious intent that stones don't have?
(I agree with you anyway that those types of expressions are usually best avoided).


----------



## Residente Calle 13

over said:
			
		

> Hi Residente, do you think the book says that the second sentence is correct because the agent is "*la* bomba" (and not "una bomba") or because bombs are seen to have some inherent malicious intent that stones don't have?
> (I agree with you anyway that those types of expressions are usually best avoided).


I think the authors of my book are kind of confused themselves. Here's an exact quote:
*
The GDLE's [Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española] explanation, 26.3.12, is that bombing is 'intentional' but a stone has no 'intention'; but where is the intention in el cráter fue producido por un meteoro 'the crater was produced by a meteor.' ?*

In the next paragraph, it says it's beyond "the scope" of the book to get into which verbs can be passive with ser and which can't.

I personally don't like those kinds of sentences anyway--if a rock goes through a window, I want to know who threw it, if a bomb goes off, I want to know who set it, and as far as I'm concerned, the meteor made the crater --so I don't think it's a big deal.

But it looks like a complete mess to me.

P.S. I really don't know what the _Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española_ is except that it was written by the RAE so it's a bit out of their area of expertise in my humble opinion.


----------



## aedude94

so basically people that speak spanish, as their native language, dont really use the "ser + past participle" construction (ex: la ventana fue abierta...)? they use the se abre one? so how is that used? just put it anwhere? i have another thread about this and im still confused. jaja...


----------



## Residente Calle 13

aedude94 said:
			
		

> so basically people that speak spanish, as their native language, dont really use the "ser + past participle" construction (ex: la ventana fue abierta...)? they use the se abre one? so how is that used? just put it anwhere? i have another thread about this and im still confused. jaja...



I don't know. I grew up speaking Spanish and to me "la ventana fue abierta" sounds as odd as "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." I feel, and this is just what _*I*_ think, that even if somebody tells me that it's technically grammatically correct, there is something somewhat retarded about it.

The word is that these types of sentences are rare in Spanish. Some people complain that because of English the sentence "Esta cama fue dormida en." is going to be common in a matter of months. Don't bet on it. Spanish doesn't "roll" like that, jajaja.


----------



## over

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> I think the authors of my book are kind of confused themselves. Here's an exact quote:
> 
> *The GDLE's [Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española] explanation, 26.3.12, is that bombing is 'intentional' but a stone has no 'intention'; but where is the intention in el cráter fue producido por un meteoro 'the crater was produced by a meteor.' ?*


I had to read that paragraph a couple of times just to be sure you weren't taking the piss. Hmm, maybe God has a special remote control device for individual meteors (hence the intention) but not for stones...who knows. I agree that it seems pretty messy anyway. The RAE should stick to basketball...


----------



## Residente Calle 13

over said:
			
		

> I had to read that paragraph a couple of times just to be sure you weren't taking the piss. Hmm, maybe God has a special remote control device for individual meteors (hence the intention) but not for stones...who knows. I agree that it seems pretty messy anyway. The RAE should stick to basketball...


Well, they are very good at saying "Don't say that, only the riff-raff say that." But they are not very good at describing how the language actually works.

Back to the topic!

It has to do with the combination of ser and the other verb.

Ella fue abandonada por su marido.
Ella fue enviada una carta.

They are both intentional but that last one is retarded. I think the problem is the difference between "abandonar" and "enviar". 

Speakers will disagree on what's right or wrong and I have done this experiment here before but they all agree on *ella fue enviada una carta* being wrong and that one should stay away from these kinds of sentences anyway.

Take a look at that thread. I think it's wicked fun!


----------



## over

Cheers for the link, Residente... interesting thread.  

Looking in Google (<yeah, I know that's a bad sentence starter, lol), I have found a few examples of "la ventana fue abierta", but not from very reliable sources... Although there is one from an article about the Pope in Terra.com's Mexican website that goes likes this:

La ventana fue abierta para que el pontífice soltara un par de palomas, símbolos de la paz, hacia la Plaza de San Pedro. 

Would you say that the use of the passive tense still sounds pretty bad in that context? I mean, it's a bit different from when the door is opened in your house to pay the pizza delivery guy or whatever... So I just wondered if it sounds equally as bad to you and other Spanish speakers in that context, or not.

Thanks.


----------



## Residente Calle 13

over said:
			
		

> So I just wondered if it sounds equally as bad to you and other Spanish speakers in that context, or not.


I suspect it varies from country to country and maybe even from person to person. I have a strong personal bias against passive sentences. I think they can often be almost tantamount to lying. The famous Reagan Iran-Contra cop-out "Mistakes were made." is a memorable example of this. It's a deceptive of saying "I @#$%ed up."

_*La ventana fue abierta para...
Dos personas fueron preguntadas...
Serás pagado cada dos semanas.
*__*Sólo hay un imperio a ser obedecido: el imperio de la Ley.*_

All of those sentences sound, to me, like they were written by a perfectly good mind that was ruined by formal education. 

I would advise anyone from Europe/the Middle East to listen closely to what the Spaniards say sounds and doesn't sound odd to them for geographical reasons. Unless, of course, they are specifically interested in visting Latin America or interacting with Latin Americans.

I didn't detect a pattern in this case and I think I was looking for one when I started that thread I posted a link to. I noticed "personas fueron preguntadas" while watching a program on Spanish [from Spain] televsion but I was playing close attention to the person who said it. I'm in love with the hostess of the show!


----------



## over

Okay, thanks a lot for the clarification. 
(Btw, I've watched a bit of TVE and I think I might know who you're talking about...she is fit ).


----------



## jmx

aedude94 said:
			
		

> ... i understand the "true passive voice" (ex: La ventana fue abierta por el viento.) but i dont get stuff like "Aquí se habla español." does that mean Here, spanish is spoken? and if it does, can you put the aquí after se habla español?


La ventana fue abierta por el viento  
- Common in newspapers, etc., not so much in a conversation.

Aquí se habla español  
Se habla español  
Se habla español aquí   
Español se habla


----------



## natasha2000

jmartins said:
			
		

> La ventana fue abierta por el viento
> - Common in newspapers, etc., not so much in a conversation.
> 
> Aquí se habla español
> Se habla español
> Se habla español aquí
> Español se habla


 
Una pregunta:

¿Por qué la última no es correcta?

Español se habla en todos los países de Sudamérica....

¿Esta frase no es correcta?


----------



## Residente Calle 13

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Una pregunta:
> 
> ¿Por qué la última no es correcta?
> 
> Español se habla en todos los países de Sudamérica....
> 
> ¿Esta frase no es correcta?



Espero que no te enojes pero te falta el artículo.
*
El*_ español se habla en muchos países de Sudamérica.

_Si no entiendes el porqué, me avisas, ¿vale?


----------



## natasha2000

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> Espero que no te enojes pero te falta el artículo.
> 
> *El*_ español se habla en muchos países de Sudamérica._
> 
> Si no entiendes el porqué, me avisas, ¿vale?


 
Jejeje... No me enfado, Residente, ya he dicho mil veces que los artículos no son mi fuerte... Como no los tengo en mi propio idoma, simplemente todavía no pillo como y cuando se usan...

Pero es que lo he copiado del post de jmartins....
Mira:



> Aquí se habla español
> Se habla español
> Se habla español aquí
> Español se habla


 

Y mi pregunta se refería a la última frase. Admito que la frase "Español se habla" suena un poco raro, si suponemos que eso es todo, y que después de "habla" va un punto. Pero en una frase como la mía, ¿Tampoco es correcto?

Esa era mi pregunta.

PS: Por cierto, ya que estamos con artículos... En las primeras tres, tampoco hay artículo, y sin embargo, son correctas....


----------



## Residente Calle 13

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Y mi pregunta se refería a la última frase. Admito que la frase "Español se habla" suena un poco raro, si suponemos que eso es todo, y que después de "habla" va un punto. Pero en una frase como la mía, ¿Tampoco es correcto?
> 
> Esa era mi pregunta.
> 
> PS: Por cierto, ya que estamos con artículos... En las primeras tres, tampoco hay artículo, y sin embargo, son correctas....



Con el artículo la frase : *El español se habla en muchos países*, para mí, es correcta.


----------



## natasha2000

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> Con el artículo la frase : *El español se habla en muchos países*, para mí, es correcta.


 
Si, pero otras frases no tienen artículo y son correctas... ¿Por qué?

Además, me parece que el enfoque de la frase es en el orden de las palabras, y no en el artículo (sí, tiene que tener el artículo, pero no era esto el tema)... 
Uff.. A veces tengo la impresión de que no sé explicarme bien...


----------



## Residente Calle 13

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Si, pero otras frases no tienen artículo y son correctas... ¿Por qué?
> 
> Además, me parece que el enfoque de la frase es en el orden de las palabras, y no en el artículo (sí, tiene que tener el artículo, pero no era esto el tema)...
> Uff.. A veces tengo la impresión de que no sé explicarme bien...


Te explicaste bien. La respuesta a tu pregunta es bien larga y como no tiene nada que ver con la voz pasiva... 

Pero una respuesta corta e incompleta sería que las otras frases no llevan artículo, creo yo, porque «español» en esos casos viene después de un verbo.

*El* *español *se habla en Puerto Rico.
Juan habla *español *en su casa.


----------



## natasha2000

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> Te explicaste bien. La respuesta a tu pregunta es bien larga y como no tiene nada que ver con la voz pasiva...
> 
> Pero una respuesta corta e incompleta sería que las otras frases no llevan artículo, creo yo, porque «español» en esos casos viene después de un verbo.
> 
> *El* *español *se habla en Puerto Rico.
> Juan habla *español *en su casa.


 
Okis. Muchas gracias.


----------



## aedude94

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> Te explicaste bien. La respuesta a tu pregunta es bien larga y como no tiene nada que ver con la voz pasiva...
> 
> Pero una respuesta corta e incompleta sería que las otras frases no llevan artículo, creo yo, porque «español» en esos casos viene después de un verbo.
> 
> *El* *español *se habla en Puerto Rico.
> Juan habla *español *en su casa.


 


Are you guys sure that "El espanol se habla en Puerto Rico" is right?? i mean i was taught that you can NEVER put the Espanol before the se habla, ever, not even with a definite pronoun before it. i mean maybe my teacher is wrong, i dont know, but ya, shouldnt it be Se habla espanol en Puerto Rico, or no? also, that translates to Spanish is spoken in Puerto Rico, no? it seems really confusing because "spanish" is after the verb, and when i process it in my head it seems like it is saying Is spoken spanish in Puerto Rico. does anyone else think it seems like that? and if you do, what do you do to make it seem right? or does it just seem right after speaking spanish for a while? i really hope that that whole message wasnt tooooo confusing. haha. thanks everyone!!! you're all such a big help!


----------



## Residente Calle 13

aedude94 said:
			
		

> Are you guys sure that "El espanol se habla en Puerto Rico" is right?? i mean i was taught that you can NEVER put the Espanol before the se habla, ever, not even with a definite pronoun before it. i mean maybe my teacher is wrong, i dont know, but ya, shouldnt it be Se habla espanol en Puerto Rico, or no? also, that translates to Spanish is spoken in Puerto Rico, no? it seems really confusing because "spanish" is after the verb, and when i process it in my head it seems like it is saying Is spoken spanish in Puerto Rico. does anyone else think it seems like that? and if you do, what do you do to make it seem right? or does it just seem right after speaking spanish for a while? i really hope that that whole message wasnt tooooo confusing. haha. thanks everyone!!! you're all such a big help!


I think that you should listen to what you teacher told you and that you make sure what you think the teacher told you is what the teacher actually did tell you. Well, if you're still in that class.

Here's a quote from of very reputable source:

Como dato curioso                convendría recordar que *el español se habla* en Marruecos desde 1492,                momento en que se establecen colonias de judíos y musulmanes procedentes                de la península Ibérica; este dato, que no por evidente deja de                ser tenido en cuenta lo suficientemente, acaba de ser puesto de                relieve por el profesor Antonio Quilis en su libro recientemente                publicado _La lengua española en el mundo._ 

The emphasis is mine. The source is : Centro Virtual Cervantes


----------



## COLsass

I was thinking of this stuff yesterday and I was hoping some bilingual speaker could verify what my attempted bilingual mind has decided:

La ventana estaba abierta: The window is open.
La ventana fue abierta: The window was opened.

Although most adjectives in English don't work like this, this is a helpful case that gives us the "intentionality" schtick that Residente was talking about before.

In the crater example, a crater is not a "state" it is a "result" therefore it must use ser. Craters only happen when something else causes them to happen. Superficially it seems to go against the typical ser=permanent state and estar=temporary, but not really because the action was a one-time deal that happened and had to happen for the description to occur.

La ventana estaba rota: I noticed the window was broken.
La ventana fue rota: Someone/something smashed the window.

To make it seem right: forget about English. Think in Spanish, absorb it the way it is and read lots and lots of texts WITHOUT translating them in your head. Then the Spanish will start to flow and you'll wonder why English is so fiestily attached to its word order (though it makes sense considering our lack of subject clues in our verb conjugations). 

It's just a matter of emphasis--in Residente's example, which is PERFECT, because it even admits it in the text it says: 

Como dato *curioso* convendría recordar que *el español se habla* en Marruecos desde 1492

A curious bit of information that would behoove you to remember is that Spanish has been spoken in Morrocco since 1492. 

The writer is emphasising the curiousness of Spanish's being spoken there so he puts it first. He's surprised and thinks you should be too so he juts it into the front and screams NOTICE THIS.

Sorry about the behoove thing, I couldn't resist.


----------



## Residente Calle 13

To me "la ventana fue abierta" sounds as bad as "la persona fue matada."
But then again "las personas que fueron preguntadas" sounds terrible to me even when Mamén Mendizábal says it TVE.

Pero a Mamén yo le perdonaría lo que sea.


----------



## COLsass

Residente Calle 13 said:
			
		

> To me "la ventana fue abierta" sounds as bad as "la persona fue matada."
> But then again "las personas que fueron preguntadas" sounds terrible to me even when Mamén Mendizábal says it TVE.
> 
> Pero a Mamén yo le perdonaría lo que sea.


 
Maybe you're just oversensitized to the fact that the passive voice is bad writing.


----------



## Residente Calle 13

COLsass said:
			
		

> Maybe you're just oversensitized to the fact that the passive voice is bad writing.



Es muy posible. Pero estoy seguro que nadie en mi círculo dice "dos personas fueron preguntadas" sino "a dos personas le preguntaron." No es solo que no se deba escribir.

Miento. La gente en mi círculo dicen "a do persona le preguntán."


----------

