4 ms·
> I was puzzled by the one about the present continuous tense, which does exist in Spanish According to Spanish grammar, what would be considered the Spanish a
by flobosg 6y ago
> I was puzzled by the one about the present continuous tense, which does exist in Spanish
According to Spanish grammar, what would be considered the Spanish analog of the English present continuous is formally classified not as a tense, but a periphrasis.
- leephillips 6y agoYes, it seems some grammarians reserve “tense” for conjugations. The same grammarians will say that English has no future tense.
- flobosg 6y agoIt depends on how you define a tense. Strictly speaking, English has no morphological future tense, but some tense-aspect combinations are commonly referred to as a “future tense”. In Spanish, unlike «haber», «estar» is not considered an auxiliary verb in conjugation and therefore the present continuous-ish construction is not treated as a proper tense or tense-aspect pair.
- leephillips 6y agoThere is something I’m not getting. If “I am talking” is the present continuous tense, why is «Estoy hablando» not the same tense? They seem to be exactly analogous: a verb for to be, conjugated, followed by the present participle.
- flobosg 6y agoI’m not a linguist, but here’s how I see it: They are analogous expressions, but as I mentioned, «estar» is not considered an auxiliary verb in Spanish conjugation. You only have «haber», while English has “to be”, “to have” and “to do”. So, technically, in English the expression is “conjugated form of auxiliary to be + gerund” while in Spanish it is defined as a paraphrasis composed of “conjugated form of to be + gerund”. Tomayto, tomahto.
- foldr 6y agoTo be clear, this is just a difference in the traditional grammatical terminology for each language. Linguistically speaking neither English nor Spanish has any such thing as a "present continuous tense". Of course, the exact linguistic notion of "tense" is not particularly relevant to most people learning a language. I'm not objecting to its broader use in the context of language learning.
- foldr 6y agoThe reason for saying that English has no future tense goes beyond just morphology. 'Will' is a modal operator that has no inherent future sense. For example, you can say "John will be here already". You can't do that with a true future tense. See e.g. http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005471.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005471.h... for more on this. If you try translating the examples at the bottom into a language with a true future tense, then 90% of them will come out as gibberish, or as meaning something quite different.
- Al-Khwarizmi 6y agoRegardless of how linguists classify it, the truth is that there is a direct correspondence in that respect. Every time you can use the present continuous ("I am eating") in English, you can use the Spanish equivalent ("estoy comiendo") in Spanish as well, and vice versa. It's one of the easiest thing to learn for Spanish speakers, contrary to e.g. the present simple which has quite different usage in English than in Spanish. So saying that Spanish has no present continuous might be true in some pedantic or stilted sense of the word or in a technical context, but it's not very useful otherwise. For all practical purposes, for speakers and learners, Spanish has present continuous.