# Ellos van caminando agarrados de la mano.



## Stephan0

Hi,

could maybe somebody explain the way the word "agarrados" is used in the sentence "Ellos van caminando agarrados de la mano." In English or German I'd expect the present participle to be used for "holding hands" here, not the past participle. Does this grammatical construction have a name that I can lookup in grammar books?


----------



## Bondstreet

Welcome to the forums.

>> Past participles are commonly used as adjectives in Spanish...

Me encantan los huevos revueltos.
I love scrambled eggs.
 
Salimos por la puerta abierta.
We left through the open door.

www.spanishdict.com - past participle adjectives in spanish

www.google.co.uk - past participle adjectives spanish
.


----------



## Stephan0

Thank you Bondstreet! I was aware that past participles can be used as adjectives. But this example looks different to me, because "agarrados" agrees in gender and number with "ellos" and not "mano". I don't think this sentence could be translated literally into English or German without changing the past participle into a present participle. Or am I missing something?


----------



## Agró

Predicativo.


----------



## Stephan0

Thank you!


----------



## Bondstreet

_>> this example looks different to me, because "agarrados" agrees in gender and number with "ellos" and not "mano"_

Yes, it is is "they" (ellos) who are "joined" or "grasped together" (agarrados), not the hand(s). So "agarrados" agrees with "ellos", not "mano". "de la mano" merely indicates the manner in which they are joined together.

"They walked along, (joined by the hand)"
.


----------



## Stephan0

Interesting. I couldn't find any reference for "agarrar de" being used in that sense.


----------



## Bondstreet

_>> I couldn't find any reference for "agarrar de" being used in that sense.
_
You need to search for "agarrado de" or "agarrada de" or "agarrados de" or "agarradas de".


----------



## Stephan0

All the uses of "agarrad(a|o|as|os) de" I found where having a sense of "holding", "grabbing", "gripping", "clenching" etc. something, not "being joined by" something.

I suppose that this is a use of the past participle as a "complemento predicativo" that has no direct equivalent in English  and hence has be translated using the present participle.


----------



## ayuda?

CLEP Spanish Language Book + Online
13. (D) Unlike English, the verb continue (continuar) [ a verb of motion] cannot be followed by either the infinitive or present participle. In Spanish* only* the present participle is correct with this verb...
[That was an excerpt from a certain test example in the book. I believe it applies here.]

Ellos *van caminando* (*agarrados *de la mano).
I totally get your point, StephanO.

My attempt at an explanation:
*▶van caminando*—a verb of motion [ I believe this type of verb would always take the *present participle *with this structure in StephanO’s post (caminando, etc. and similar to continúan+ present participle)].
**[See quote cited above.]
*
▶agarrados de la mano*— This is simply a further description of the couple in combination *with the past participle *after the present participle with a verb of motion. It is *plural* in this case.
It is something like using *agarrados* to express *the past*:
●They are(were) walking and *they were holding hands. {idea]*
Whereas English it would be:
...even though (*agarrados*) is the past participle in Spanish, not the present participle in English.
*de la mano*—by the hand [holding each other *by the hand*]

This is just my attempt to explain the idea here.
This is very tricky and different than in English, where we would use the *present participle* here:
●They are walk*ing *(and)hold*ing *hand*s.*
It is just a structure I think you have to be aware of, memorize, and recognize once you come across it again. Just make it make sense to you now.

Hope this has been of some help to you since there really isn't a parallel in English or German.
Any comments concerning this information are welcome.

Maybe the native Spanish speakers could give you a few more example of this structure using a *verb of motion + present participle +past participle*.


----------



## Stephan0

ayuda?, thanks for your detailed answer. If I understand you correctly, you agree that this is a special construct that has no direct equivalent in English.

However, I have to admit, I'm not yet sure I really understand how this construct works and when to apply it.

I wonder, could one only use the present participle here, i.e. would "Ellos van caminando agarrando de la mano." also be correct?

Are the following two sentences both correct and do they have the same meaning?

Ellos van caminando sonriendo. 
Ellos van caminando sonreídos.​
How about these? (Here Google translate infers different meanings.)

Ellos van caminando señalando con sus dedos.
Ellos van caminando señalados con sus dedos.​


----------



## Agró

Es un uso del adjetivo/participio análogo a:
Viajaron/Estaban sentados (no _sentando_).

Los predicativos deben concordar con el nombre al que modifican. Los gerundios, en cambio, son invariables.


----------



## Stephan0

¡Gracias, Agró! 

Lo que aún no está claro para mí es cuando uno tiene que usar el predicativo y cuando el gerundio.

Si te entiendo correctamente, no se puede decir "Ellos van caminando agarrando de la mano". ¿Es lo mismo para las otras dos oraciones de ejemplo que di en mi respuesta anterior? Supongo que no. Pero, ¿cuál es exactamente la diferencia?


----------



## Magazine

Stephan0 said:


> Si te entiendo correctamente, no se puede decir "Ellos van caminando agarrando de la mano".



To complicate things even more: you can actually say that with a slight change. 

..van caminando agarrándose de la mano. 

It would be unusual, but possible.


----------



## Stephan0

@Magazine Interesting! Is that specific to agarrar or would you also have to use the reflexive gerund for coger?

Could maybe a native speaker comment on which literal translation that doesn't use the present participle comes closest to capture the literal meaning of "Ellos caminan agarrados de la mano." or suggest a better one:

They walk joined by the hand.
They walk gripped by the hand.
They walk gripped at the hand.


----------



## Bondstreet

.
@ #15:  They walk "joined by the hand".  But the usual expression would be "hand in hand".

Think of "joined" as an adjective describing the condition of "they" - they are in the state of "having been joined" or "being in the 'having-been-joined-up' (agarrado) condition"  A Spanish adjective must agree with what it describes (they) - hence "agarrado*s*" .

If you are still having a problem understanding this, I suggest you leave it for while. Very often, as you become more used to a foreign language, you begin to absorb things unconsciously, and what was once a difficulty becomes clear and normal.
,


----------



## Magazine

Tell you the truth, I find "joined by the hand" rather odd. I would have thought "they walked hand in hand" or "holding hands" would be the most common and correct wording. 

to me, not a native speaker, joined by ...seems like their hands are glued together.


----------



## Stephan0

Magazine said:


> Tell you the truth, I find "joined by the hand" rather odd. I would have thought "they walked hand in hand" or "holding hands" would be the most common and correct wording.



My last question wasn't about the best way to express the meaning in English. I'm looking for a literal word-for-word translation that doesn't use the English present participle, because I'd like to understand how a native speaker interprets the word agarrados here. Such a translation will necessarily be awkward and likely incorrect.


----------



## Johncbcn

Magazine said:


> Tell you the truth, I find "joined by the hand" rather odd. I would have thought "they walked hand in hand" or "holding hands" would be the most common and correct wording.
> 
> to me, not a native speaker, joined by ...seems like their hands are glued together.



From a native speaker's perspective, you assertions are are 100% correct.
You could even say, "they are walking together, hands held, ......" However, although this is a correct usage of the p.part. it would be unclear whether or not they are holding each other's hand, or if each individual has joined his own hands together. Personally, I would tend to use "hand in hand" which sounds more natural.


----------



## Johncbcn

Johncbcn said:


> From a native speaker's perspective, you assertions are are 100% correct.
> You could even say, "they are walking together, hands held, ......" However, although this is a correct usage of the p.part. it would be unclear whether or not they are holding each other's hand, or if each individual has joined his own hands together. Personally, I would tend to use "hand in hand" which sounds more natural.



* your assertions


----------



## Bondstreet

_>> #19: I would tend to use "hand in hand" which sounds more natural._

As an aside, I am reminded of a favourite French song which includes "la main dans la main" =  "the hand in the hand":

YouTube (with English subtitles): dQDTO0Jan3Y

lyricstranslate.com - all-the-boys-and-girls
.


----------



## Johncbcn

Ha,ha! I've seen a lot worse. I walk past a Chinese restaurant every day with "salsa de judía negra/ black Jewess sauce" on its menu. They're probably breaking all kinds of laws, but I can't fin the courage to tell them so.


----------



## Bondstreet

_>> I walk past a Chinese restaurant every day with "salsa de judía negra/ black Jewess sauce" on its menu... _


----------



## Azarosa

Stephan0; _"I suppose that this is a use of the past participle as a "complemento predicativo" that has no direct equivalent in English and hence has be translated using the present participle."_. Es exactamente así como lo dices. En español, "van caminando" puede interpretarse como una perífrasis; y "agarrados de la mano", efectivamente como una construcción predicativa subjetiva (referida a "ellos"). 
(I'm not sure I'm allowed to make comments or answer in Spanish here; excuse me if I shouldn't have).


----------



## Magazine

Claro, Azarosa, hemos contestado en inglés y español todos. 

un saludo


----------



## Magazine

Stephan0 said:


> My last question wasn't about the best way to express the meaning in English. I'm looking for a literal word-for-word translation that doesn't use the English present participle, because I'd like to understand how a native speaker interprets the word agarrados here. Such a translation will necessarily be awkward and likely incorrect.



Sorry, Stephano, I got carried away, I was just trying to make sure. 



Johncbcn said:


> From a native speaker's perspective, you assertions are are 100% correct.
> You could even say, "they are walking together, hands held, ......" However, although this is a correct usage of the p.part. it would be unclear whether or not they are holding each other's hand, or if each individual has joined his own hands together. Personally, I would tend to use "hand in hand" which sounds more natural.



Thanks John and Bondstreet.


----------



## nangueyra

Stephan0 said:


> Hi,
> 
> could maybe somebody explain the way the word "agarrados" is used in the sentence "Ellos van caminando agarrados de la mano." In English or German I'd expect the present participle to be used for "holding hands" here, not the past participle. Does this grammatical construction have a name that I can lookup in grammar books?



Tal vez lo más correcto sería "tomados de la mano" pero acá usamos "agarrados" también en ese sentido.


----------



## Magazine

nangueyra said:


> Tal vez lo más correcto sería "tomados de la mano" pero acá usamos "agarrados" también en ese sentido.



En España es _*cogidos de la mano*_..pero tengo entendido que eso no le suena bien a todo el mundo


----------



## Azarosa

Entiendo que la pregunta de Stephan0 se refería al valor sintáctico de "agarrados" en la oración que planteó, no a la preferencia lexical. Pero ya que estamos, en Argentina "agarrados" es una forma coloquial, si bien en este caso sería perfectamente válida en un texto más formal ("agarrados de la mano); también correctísimas son "tomados de la mano" o "cogidos de la mano".


----------

