# position of reflexive pronouns



## nat88

Hi,

Having a little trouble with this. I would like to know where to place the reflexive pronoun in a sentence like this:

*No futuro,gostaria de casar-me*

Or, *no futuro, gostaria de me casar*


----------



## Vanda

Ai ai ai Nat, this is the most complex usage in Portuguese, there are soooo many rules...
From our resources above:



> Colocação pronominal:
> colocação pronominal 1 / colocação pronominal 2 / colocação pronominal 3


A little more.

*No futuro, gostaria de casar-me. *

N*o futuro, gostaria de me casar*.


----------



## Ricardoreis

The rules really are crazily complicated. One of the harder parts about Portuguese, if you ask me, and not helped by the fact that they differ in European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese. Additionally, it seems (I might be wrong!) that much of the placement is about stylistic choice rather than concrete rules.

From what I can gather, a phrase like "gostaria de casar-me" is, at least in Brazilian Portuguese, a little more formal than "gostaria de me casar", which would be a more colloquial way of saying it.

Where I get hopelessly confused is in the fact that there seem to be two conflicting rules and I've never worked out which one takes priority:
1 - certain prepositions (like 'de') 'suck' the pronoun towards them and thus in front of the verb.
2 - verbs in their infinitive form 'suck' the pronoun after them (hence casar-me)

I know there is a wealth of material about this and a whole load of rules but if I ever found something definitive I'd be a happy man, either it's all a muddle or I'm just a bit simple!


----------



## Vanda

> I know there is a wealth of material about this and a whole load of rules but if I ever found something definitive I'd be a happy man, either it's all a muddle or I'm just a bit simple!



That is is, everytime a foreigner learner make questions about this subject I tremble 'in the basis' because it is a so complex matter that even natives don't master it! My reccomendation is - and some people are going to throw stones at me - do the Brazilian way: go always the informal usage: first the pronoun then the verb: me casar. If you have to write formally, so, better check the kilometer rules about the usage.


----------



## Dom Casmurro

Ricardoreis said:


> Additionally, it seems (I might be wrong!) that much of the placement is about stylistic choice rather than concrete rules.


I agree with you. It has to do with whether you are writing or speaking, or whether your text is formal or colloquial. In most of the cases, the only rule to be observed is the one that brings about a nice turn of phrase. Ultimately, pronoun placement is a matter of sounding well, not of sounding right. 



Ricardoreis said:


> From what I can gather, a phrase like "gostaria de casar-me" is, at least in Brazilian Portuguese, a little more formal than "gostaria de me casar", which would be a more colloquial way of saying it.


You are right again. "Gostaria de casar-me" is formal and, even worse, unromantic, as it conveys the impression that you don't love your bride as much as you would if you had said "gostaria de me casar".  



Ricardoreis said:


> Where I get hopelessly confused is in the fact that there seem to be two conflicting rules and I've never worked out which one takes priority:
> 1 - certain prepositions (like 'de') 'suck' the pronoun towards them and thus in front of the verb.
> 2 - verbs in their infinitive form 'suck' the pronoun after them (hence casar-me)


I know, I know...  But be consoled in the fact that this _sucks_  for the natives as well. BTW, I've just read bits of the Wikipedia article on Colocação pronominal , recommnended by Vanda. Seems quite ok to me.


----------



## white_ray

Hello nat88, very interesting issue! 

According to some teachings in Portugal the pronoun should follow the main verb and not the auxiliary… (PTP/PTE)
Following this rule, I would thus recommend the use of *‘**No futuro, gostaria de casar-me*.*’*
As Dom Casmurro points it sounds like a more formal level of language for the majority of the people. I presume this happens for the reason that orally the other clause *‘No futuro, gostaria de me casar.’*is more often used and as a result, people would tend to say that this form is the most correct.

However note that in other sentences the phrasal structure can chance, e.g:
- imperative tenses ‘Não *te* cases’  instead of ‘Não cases-te’ 
- relative clauses ‘No dia em que *me* casei’  isntead of ‘No dia em que casei-me’ 
- phrases including (interrogative) adverbs ‘Quando *te* casas/casaras?’  istead of ‘Quando casar-te-as?’ 
- among others…
[You can check the ‘Suberduvidas’ on Sapo.pt about ‘pronomes atonos’ though this might bring up many other questions…]

In the meantime, if you want to keep it simple, know that both are accepted, so you’re not making a mistake! 
wr

Dom Casmurro, please allow me to gently disagree with you (for the fist time I think! ) when you say:



Dom Casmurro said:


> "Gostaria de casar-me" is formal and, even worse, unromantic, as it conveys the impression that you don't love your bride as much as you would if you had said "gostaria de me casar".
> 
> 
> 
> I would rather say that *‘No futuro, gostaria de casar-me*.*’* sounds more singular then the more prosaic *‘No futuro, gostaria de me casar.’*
> Also don’t think that any of these ‘_convey the impression that you don't love your bride as much as…’_. It’s a stylistic choice indeed, but the meaning stays unchanged.
> Or maybe this is another PTP/PTB variant?
> 
> Then again, it’s also a matter of opinion!
> It’s interesting to discuss it! ^_^
Click to expand...


----------



## Vanda

> Dom Casmurro, please allow me to gently disagree with you (for the fist time I think! ) when you say:
> 
> 
> 
> Dom Casmurro said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Gostaria de casar-me" is formal and, even worse, unromantic, as it conveys the impression that you don't love your bride as much as you would if you had said "gostaria de me casar".
> 
> 
> 
> I would rather say that *‘No futuro, gostaria de casar-me*.*’* sounds more singular then the more prosaic *‘No futuro, gostaria de me casar.’*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> White ray now it's my time to disagree with you.  If a Brazilian guy said that to a normal/regular Brazilian girl she would throw him and his proposal against the wall or would tell him to marry the grammar book instead!
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## white_ray

hahaha Why is that? 
It’s surprising anyway as I see absolutely no offensive or pretentious or 'bookish style' intentions in it, just a regular sentence, slightly more stylised? 
Thanks for the comment. 
It would be interesting to get other opinions from other PTP speakers.
wr


----------



## Ricardoreis

Pretty sure this is just a simple Brazil/Portugal difference. All the grammar books say this, at least, which explains why both sides find different versions better. The trouble is, too often grammar guides present stylistic choices as 'rules', which confuse us poor foreigners  I think, regarding this issue, there are a mixture of 'rules' and stylistic choices (for example, negatives attracting the pronoun, but it's a stylistic choice where to place the pronoun in compound tenses).

What I think would be really useful sometime would be a style guide that some grammarian could put together, one for Portugal, one for Brazil (assuming other lusofone countries follow predominantly one pattern or other), that instead of listing the rules, creates a list of the strongest to the weakest 'attractors' of the pronoun. For example, are prepositions like 'de' a stronger or weaker attractor than an infinitive verb? I've always seen a negative as a stronger attractor than an infinitive verb.

Thus I'd guess that in both Portugal and Brazil

*Não/Nunca me casarei
Não/Nunca vou me casar*

are correct and agreed on, whilst

_Vou me casar (Brazil?)
Vou-me casar (Portugal?)
Vou casar-me (Portugal?)
Eu me casarei (Brazil?)
(Eu) casar-me-ei (Portugal?)_

Are going to be disputed


----------



## Dom Casmurro

Ricardoreis said:


> What I think would be really useful sometime would be a style guide that some grammarian could put together, one for Portugal, one for Brazil (assuming other lusofone countries follow predominantly one pattern or other), that instead of listing the rules, creates a list of the strongest to the weakest 'attractors' of the pronoun. For example, are prepositions like 'de' a stronger or weaker attractor than an infinitive verb? I've always seen a negative as a stronger attractor than an infinitive verb.


This is a very good idea indeed, and I mean it. I just hope a publisher reads your post and goes ahead with it - without forgetting to pay the royalties due to you...


----------



## olivinha

I will be honest, whenever I write in Portuguese here in this forum, I go over my pronouns to make sure I do not start sentences with the wrong one (which I probably do anyway ).
Having said that, it is sooooo natural for Brazilians to generally place all _their _pronouns before the verb that the oficial, correct version may sound pedantic and unnatural sometimes.

Sure, _quero me casar_ sounds more intimate and relaxed than the official, grammatically-correct _quero casar-me_, at least to my ears.

So, Nat and Ricardo, are you guys having problems with Portuguese pronouns?! Well, welcome to the club!


----------



## white_ray

I generally stick to the rule that I was taught_; i.e. the pronoun follows the main verb._ It’s also a matter of everyday usage and maybe an optimistic attempt of mine to simplify inflated exhaustive rules, though I’m conscious that orally it’s not as commonly used and when it is, it might sound rather elegant, although other nations may disagree.  

I highlighted these examples (imperative tenses, relative clauses, phrases with adverbs) as they seem to be strong pronoun attractors, but the list is probably very long.
I suppose that’s the (enigmatic) thing with languages; we can deepen our knowledge to a certain extent, but at some point we need some instinct input? 

Vou me casar (Brazil?)
Vou-me casar (Portugal?) ok PTP
Vou casar-me (Portugal?) ok PTP 
Eu me casarei (Brazil?)
(Eu) casar-me-ei (Portugal?) ok PTP

Olivinha I definitely agree with you! Thanks for that observation! 


olivinha said:


> Having said that, it is sooooo natural for Brazilians to generally place all _their _pronouns before the verb that the oficial, correct version may sound pedantic and unnatural sometimes.


However I think we can certainly assert that ‘Quero me casar’ is officially correct in PTB; I’m not sure if the use of the hyphen is required though.
By the way Olivinha, would you say “Vou-me casar” or “Vou casar-me”? And if you sometimes use the second structure, do you find it overly formal?

Ricardo, it’s _‘luso*ph*one’_ countries’ in English right? I seldom used this word in English, but in French I say it all the time.


----------



## olivinha

white_ray said:


> I
> Olivinha I definitely agree with you! Thanks for that observation!
> However I think we can certainly assert that ‘Quero me casar’ is officially correct in PTB; I’m not sure if the use of the hyphen is required though.
> By the way Olivinha, would you say “Vou-me casar” or “Vou casar-me”? And if you sometimes use the second structure, do you find it overly formal?


Hi, White. 
First of all, let me just say that I am very suspicious to say anything about this subject as my Portuguese is bit "touched" by Spanish.
Now regarding your question: 
By the way Olivinha, would you say “Vou-me casar” or “Vou casar-me”? And if you sometimes use the second structure, do you find it overly formal?
I'm sure I'd say: "Vou me casar." 
I guess I'd use the second choice on written language. It's not so much I find it formal but rather unnatural for coloquial, everyday language.

Again, pronoun position is not my forte.
Once I had to translate _I will send you the documents_ and did not know where to put the pronoun. Yeah, kind of pathetic, huh? 
Look, I made that doubt public here at this thread.

Regards,
O


----------



## nat88

My goodness, what a lot of information!
It's really difficult trying to grasp all this Portuguese grammar stuff, especially when I'm used to Spanish! But I think I get the general idea with this one

Thanks to everyone for so much help!


----------



## Denis555

I've tried here to sum up the rules of spoken Brazilian Portuguese for pronoun placement.


*The object pronoun goes ALWAYS before the main verb. *

1)When there's only one verb: 
Eu me lembro. (=I remember)
Ele me disse a verdade. (He told me the truth).
Te amo. (=I love you). *

2)When there are 2 verbs: 
a)(With an auxiliary verb): 
Eu tinha te contado antes. (=I had told you before).** 

b)(In a verb phrase [=locução verbal]):
Eu posso te ligar amanhã? (=Can I call you tomorrow?)
Gostaria de te ajudar. (=I'd like to help you).


There are few exceptions to this rule of thumb e. g.:

1)When the infinitive is together with *-lo(s), -la(s)* e. g.:
A gente vai vê*-la* amanhã (=We'll see her tomorrow). 

2)When "*ele(s), ela(s)*" are used as direct object pronouns. In this case, they come always after the verb, but no hyphen is used:
Eu vi Marcus no shopping  Eu vi ele no shopping(= I saw him at the mall). ***

3)In some expressions with "se":
Foda-se! (=Fuck you!). ( With "se" it's not uncommon after the verb specially with imperatives)
Por favor, sinta-se à vontade! (Please, feel at ease!)


Obs.
*The grammar says it should be avoided: _to start a sentence with a object pronoun._ That's the most ridiculous rule in the Portuguese grammar!

** Frowned upon by traditional grammar, backed up by Brazilian modern writers:
_Tinha se esquecido de conferir o bilhete. (V. Coaraci)_
_A conversa na mesa tinha lhe dado suficiente prestígio para isso? (Jorge Amado)_
_Era como se tivesse ido muito longe, ou se escondido atrás de uma parede muito grossa. (Raquel de Queirós)_
_A situação agora havia se invertido. (José J. Veiga)_

***Still frowned upon in writing.


----------



## white_ray

Denis555 said:


> 2)When "*ele(s), ela(s)*" are used as direct object pronouns. In this case, they come always after the verb, but no hyphen is used:
> Eu vi Marcus no shopping  Eu vi ele no shopping(= I saw him at the mall). ***


 

Eu vi ele no shopping(= I saw him at the mall).

*Mayday!!*  Is this really officially correct in PTB? As far as I know in both PTB and PTP one should say:
‘Eu vi-o no shopping/centro comercial!’
Does this mean that ‘Eu o vi no shopping’ isn’t used in PTB?

Nat88,
In a nutshell and hopefully we’ll all agree: 

*Both are correct:*

*No futuro, gostaria de casar-me *
*(Slighly more formal and more often used in written language)*

*No futuro, gostaria de me casar *
*(Definitely generally used in spoken language and a more relaxed register)*


----------



## nat88

hehe!
cheers everyone


----------



## olivinha

Denis555 said:


> Te amo. (=I love you). *
> Obs.
> *The grammar says it should be avoided: _to start a sentence with a object pronoun._ That's the most ridiculous rule in the Portuguese grammar!


 
I know!! And so hard, if not impossible, to follow it, especially in spoken language.
I think I've never heard somebody saying _Amo-te_ to anyone. And what a turn-off it would be too. 
Of course, I´m only referring to Pt Br.


----------



## white_ray

Of course ‘Eu amo-te’ is used in PTP.
On the other hand I haven’t heard ‘(Eu) te amo' in Portugal… unless it’s said by a Brazilian.
I agree that ‘Eu amo-te’ might sound more poetic to some people, both Portuguese and Brazilian? 
wr


----------



## olivinha

white_ray said:


> Of course ‘Eu amo-te’ is used in PTP.
> On the other hand I haven’t heard ‘(Eu) te amo' in Portugal… unless it’s said by a Brazilian.
> I agree that ‘Eu amo-te’ might sound more poetic to some people, both Portuguese and Brazilian?
> wr


 
You got it, White, _amo-te_ could definitely be more poetic... in a poem for exemple.


----------



## Vanda

> Eu vi ele no shopping(= I saw him at the mall).
> 
> *Mayday!!*  Is this really officially correct in PTB? As far as I know in both PTB and PTP one should say:
> ‘Eu vi-o no shopping/centro comercial!’
> Does this mean that ‘Eu o vi no shopping’ isn’t used in PTB?



Raiozinho, de jeito nenhum! Officially correct no, just the way people say it *colloquially*! The official way is the one like our both grammar say!
Eu o vi no shopping’ isn’t used in PTB? Yes, it is; if the context demands that!


----------



## Denis555

white_ray said:


> Eu vi ele no shopping(= I saw him at the mall).
> 
> *Mayday!!*  Is this really officially correct in PTB? As far as I know in both PTB and PTP one should say:
> ‘Eu vi-o no shopping/centro comercial!’
> Does this mean that ‘Eu o vi no shopping’ isn’t used in PTB?


 
As Vanda said and I pointed out in the end of my post, it's frowned upon, disaproved of by grammar and in writing but it's a fact of life and it's been with us for a long time.. Look at what Aurélio says:
_Na fase arcaica da língua, empregou-se como objeto direto, uso que persiste no Brasil, entre pessoas incultas e na fala de pessoas cultas descuidadas: _
_Vi ele. __No português moderno, ainda pode ser usado com essa função, desde que antecedido da prep. a, constituindo, com ela, o objeto direto preposicionado (como sucede, aliás, com nós e vós): _
_“Nem ele entende a nós, nem nós a ele” (Luís de Camőes, Os Lusíadas, V, 28)._ 

It's interesting that in another Romance language Italian, the contrary has happened: the object pronouns "lui"(him) and "lei"(her) became subject pronouns, replacing "egli"(he) and "ella"(she). And now it is correct to say lui=he and lei=she.


----------



## white_ray

Phew! Thanks for these precisions. 
To be honest, even in Portugal I hear this kind of uncomfortable constructions ‘Eu disse a ele que…’ instead of ‘Eu disse-lhe que…’ and ouch! 
Oh well, I do admit I tend to have puritan tendencies towards languages now and again… You’ll forgive me for that hopefully! 
Anyway, it’s good to be aware of the nuances!
wr
Ainda assim seria bom evitar dizer ‘pessoas incultas’… Afinal nos também especulamos bastante!


----------

