Forum Reading -short articles

[Chip]

What I understand how it is used here is that "atras" is used by itself to mean a generalized location and "detras de" to be more specific because the use of "de" requires a noun. For example:

- Donde esta Maria?
- Ella esta atras en el patio.

- Y los zapatos mios?
- Detras de la puerta.

 

[Marianopolita]

Two more articles- Haiti and illegal immigration----

El primer ministro de Hait? critica la 'falta de control' del Gobierno sobre las ONG

This is a good article about the current situation in Haiti, the government's take on the NGOs in the country and the way how affairs are being handled. I think the Prime Minister's point of view in the last paragraph is key but the irony is the next President is not here yet and what has the government done meaning Ren? Pr?val and his administration to help the country? Haiti will soon hit the one year mark since the devastating earthquake on January 12 of this year and they are still struggling with clean up efforts and over million people remain homeless. That's the current administration's job to address and resolve.

Interstitial - Noticia

(there's just a minor proofreading error towards the end 'los suceso' s/b 'los sucesos')


Rescatan a 57 inmigrantes de una patera interceptada cerca de la costa de Almer?a

Here is an article that once again reports about West Africans trying to make it to Europe via the Mediterranean Sea. I once read that high season is from April to October when the highest frequency of these attempts are made however, it's still happening all year round and is a reflection of the desperation people feel to risk their life for betterment. Dominicans in "yolas" to Puerto Rico are the equivalent of these "patera" crossings to Spain although I think these are much more frequent and the amount people in one patera sometimes is astonishing.

It's really incredible that sometimes all even make it to the coast of Spain (or another European country) and then are usually detained and eventually sent back. However, tragically many don't make it and are never to be seen or heard from again by their families. In this case, the patera made it near to the coast of Almer?a in the South of Spain.

Definition of "patera":

patera s. f. Embarcaci?n elemental de quilla plana y poco calado, que se usa para pescar en aguas poco profundas.

patera- sf- (Esp) boat, small boat (often used for illegal immigration)


Interstitial - Noticia

- the article states "subsaharianos" which means Africans not including the Maghreb region. Based on location and past patera crossings these Africans are usually from West African countries.


-MP.

 

[Norma Rosa]

detr?s de, detr?s, atr?s

Also there are interesting nuances that are commonly heard but not considered correct in educated speech by many speakers everywhere such as detr?s m?o, detr?s tuyo etc. or delante m?o, delante tuyo. This is a classic case of education and/ or it also depends how the people around you speak. I remember the first time I heard these types of phrases and I was surprised that people did not even recognize that what they were saying was incorrect. Of course, one can understand what they mean or want to say.

The use of an adverb + a possessive adjective is heard in Argentina and Catalu?a, that I know of. The DR does not make this error. An adverb can not be modified by a possessive adjective, therefore, it is incorrect to say “detr?s m?o, delante m?o, encima m?o, debajo m?o, cerca m?o.

Correct: Delante de m?, de ti, de ella, de nosotros, etc.

It is correct to say, al lado m?o, (tuyo, suyo) because lado is a noun.

As well, I believe the whole 'te llamo pa' tra' (te llamo para atr?s) originated in Miami with the English influence on Spanish. "I will call you back"- te llamo pa' tra. So literal so wrong and really does not make any sense especially if said to a Spanish speaker that does not speak English.

"Te llamo para atr?s" /"Regr?samelo para atr?s" -I am constantly correcting my Mexican students on this "para atr?s." And, will you believe it? I heard it in the DR (in a country side of El Cibao) from a person that has never been in the US.

What I understand how it is used here is that "atras" is used by itself to mean a generalized location and "detras de" to be more specific because the use of "de" requires a noun. For example:

- Donde esta Maria?
- Ella esta atras en el patio.

- Y los zapatos mios?
- Detras de la puerta.

For the most part, that’s how it is.

Notice other examples with atr?s:
Tres d?a atr?s (three days ago)
Ella mir? (hacia) atr?s. (She looked backwards.)
Ella vive en la calle S?nchez #45, parte atr?s (or “en el fondo”)

Please note: verb atrasar comes from atr?s.
Est? atrasado. (It is delayed, behind.)

Notice other uses of detr?s (without the preposition de)

Hablan de ella por detr?s. (They talk behind her back.)

El hombre sali? por detr?s. (The man left through the back -the rear.)

 

[Chip]

You guys are great. My Spanish se esta afinando poco a poco thanks to you guys. Now all I need is surgery for my accent, jeje.

 

[Marianopolita]

Those errors are heard in the DR too----

Norma,

Thanks for expanding as mentioned in my post #80. I thought it would be good for those reading to see examples of all three and they could be a reference point at any time.

Actually, it's not that cut and dry to say the usage is heard in Argentina and Catalu?a. I have heard it from Dominicans too and even some who participate on DR1. I have seen those forms written in their posts. In my experience, it's an across the board sociolinguistic error in Spanish not specific to one country but rather widespread and really associated with education and language and maybe to a certain extent the rural vs. urban phenomenon influence in Spanish speech patterns.

Te llamo para atr?s is just a phrase derived from English translated literally into Spanish and makes no sense. A friend of mine (Peruvian) constantly critiques this phrase whenever we talk about language which seems to be quite often as he always brings up the topic. He can't get over how Spanish speakers can say this knowing very well that it makes no sense or maybe they don't know but how can that be?

I think the usage spreads through different forms of communication. For example, the newspaper, the radio, the internet (this is key now in this age of technology we are in) and via other people. If someone hears a person say this phrase that's all it takes. Unfortunately, some people don't think about what they are saying and its meaning or lack thereof.


-MP.

 

[Chip]

With regard to "te llamo para atras" I had someone tell me this many years back in Orlando and was told to use instead "te devuelvo la llamada".

As far as "te llamo para atras" how many other phrases make no sense whatsoever when translated directly? At some point I think this is how idiomatic expressions are formed anyway; someone comes up with a catchy phraes to describe something.

 

[RacerX]

I will call you back or I will return the call. Hmmm, don't know what is better? When I was in Mexico, they don't say "Hola" when answering the phone. They say "Bueno."

 

[jrhartley]

Hablan de ella por detr?s. (They talk behind her back.)

El hombre sali? por detr?s. (The man left through the back -the rear.)

this is why I dont understand spanish
the first example doesnt mention a back(as in a persons back) , so should be they talk about her through the back

 

[Chip]

this is why I dont understand spanish
the first example doesnt mention a back(as in a persons back) , so should be they talk about her through the back

"Por" doesn't mean through and if you say in English "so and so is behind so and so person" no need of a "back" is needed to understand that one person is behind the other.

Also, some sayings just require pure memorization, like multiplication tables.

 

[Chirimoya]

With regard to "te llamo para atras" I had someone tell me this many years back in Orlando and was told to use instead "te devuelvo la llamada".

As far as "te llamo para atras" how many other phrases make no sense whatsoever when translated directly? At some point I think this is how idiomatic expressions are formed anyway; someone comes up with a catchy phraes to describe something.

Te llamo para atras is also very common in Gibraltar, and is cited as one of several phrases that developed independently both there and in Spanish speaking communities in the US, which suggests it has a certain semantic logic, however inaccurate.

Also, voy para atras a mi casa - I'm going back home - literally - I'm walking backwards to my house. I've also heard he puesto peso for 'I've put on weight" and he perdido peso for 'I've lost weight' instead of aumentado or rebajado.

Would d?jame saber for 'let me know' instead of av?same be another example or is that OK in Spanish?

We also have plenty of amusing literal translations in the opposite direction like 'she stayed pregnant'.

 

[Marianopolita]

Good examples----

----Would d?jame saber for 'let me know' instead of av?same be another example or is that OK in Spanish?

----

Great examples Chirimoya! If you can think of some more in line with the discussion please add them.


Idiomatic expressions in language are definitely not formed this way because they come from 'within' the language itself although they don't always make sense if you do a literal translation. Idiomatic expressions are not formed from what is called a bad 'traslaci?n' from one language to another. (See the dictionary for the definition of this linguistic term).

D?jame saber for 'let me know' is very widely used but I remember I used to have a professor who told us out right in class "you do not dejar anything". That's how frustrated she was when people used it in class a few times. In my opinion, she is right at least from a Spanish language/ usage perspective.

I think these forms are avoided for the most part by Spanish speakers who recognize the meaning/ usage and relationship to English from which they derived. I avoid them because I know they don't make sense. I would never say te llamo para atr?s and many other similar structures no matter how much people say them because they make no sense.


-MP.

 

[jrhartley]

when you say you dont use phrases that make no sense, there are going to be a lot of things that we use everyday that when we analize them, actually make no sense........so how can one tell which make less sense than others

 

[RacerX]

Explain "que tiene que ver"? That differs from what it means english. A literal translation leaves you dumbfounded.

 

[RacerX]

"Por" doesn't mean through and if you say in English "so and so is behind so and so person" no need of a "back" is needed to understand that one person is behind the other.

Also, some sayings just require pure memorization, like multiplication tables.

I don't know Chip, Por is one of those ubiquitous articles. It almost means everything. Para also. Here is a conundrum, atras, detras, bajo, abajo, debajo, devuelo, vuelvo, revuelvo. And each of those are used in ways that an English speaker will never understand the immediate translation only the general concept.

I will call you back? Wouldnt it be something I will call you in return which in english is quite a lumpy sentence. Yo te llamare en vuelve? or siguientemente? por consiguiente? o de nuevo? o otra vez? o mas tarde? o despues?

 

[Chirimoya]

Explain "que tiene que ver"? That differs from what it means english. A literal translation leaves you dumbfounded.

A close but not literal translation for qu? tiene que ver is 'what's (that) got to do (with something)'.

 

[Chirimoya]

Great examples Chirimoya! If you can think of some more in line with the discussion please add them.


Idiomatic expressions in language are definitely not formed this way because they come from 'within' the language itself although they don't always make sense if you do a literal translation. Idiomatic expressions are not formed from what is called a bad 'traslaci?n' from one language to another. (See the dictionary for the definition of this linguistic term).

D?jame saber for 'let me know' is very widely used but I remember I used to have a professor who told us out right in class "you do not dejar anything". That's how frustrated she was when people used it in class a few times. In my opinion, she is right at least from a Spanish language/ usage perspective.

I think these forms are avoided for the most part by Spanish speakers who recognize the meaning/ usage and relationship to English from which they derived. I avoid them because I know they don't make sense. I would never say te llamo para atr?s and many other similar structures no matter how much people say them because they make no sense.


-MP.

Thanks MP - I'm in Gibraltar at the moment and was having a conversation on the subject with my sister who has a degree in Spanish and works as a Spanish teacher - she refreshed my memory with several of these examples.

 

[Norma Rosa]

dejar + saber

Dejar + saber does exist in Spanish in its proper context. (The Spanish language uses dejar + other verbs, but it takes issue with dejar + saber.)

Incorrect usage: Any expression with dejar saber is incorrect when
1) it is used in the imperative (command) form: D?jame saber si vienes. (Let me know if you are coming.) This is a literal translation of the English imperative let me know.
(Spanish uses hacer saber: Hazme saber si vienes. Or simply, Dime, av?same si vienes.)

2) it wants to convey the meaning of receiving knowledge, information from someone: Ella siempre me deja saber si viene a visitarnos. (She always lets me know if she is coming to visit us.)
(It should be: Ella me hace saber . . . Or me dice, me avisa, me informa.)

Correct usage:The English let also means to allow, to permit, and it is with this meaning that Spanish can correctly make literal translations, since dejar also means to allow: Ella me deja cuidar la casa. (She allows me to watch the house.)
Imagine a discussion between husband and wife when she tells him to go to bed but he wants to stay up and listen to the news:

Wife: Apaga la televisi?n y acu?state. (Turn off the TV and go to bed.)
Husband: D?jame saber si mi equipo gan?. (Allow me to know -to find out- if my team won, which also conveys the meaning, don’t stop me from finding out. (Although I would prefer to say, d?jame informarme.)

Dejar can be used as a helping verb with some infinitives: Ella se deja querer, She allows herself to be loved.
In the DR, se deja + certain verbs are used sarcastically: Se deja comer, indicates that the food is good; it allows itself to be eaten.

 

[RacerX]

A close but not literal translation for qu? tiene que ver is 'what's (that) got to do (with something)'.

hacer would be better, because otherwise it means "what does one have to see?"

I figured dejar and salir were 100% synonymous with each other as in to leave or exit. I would consider permitir or irse a better verb to use than dejar in the case of "Let's ....."

 

[Norma Rosa]

hacer would be better, because otherwise it means "what does one have to see?"

You can not use hacer. It is tener que ver as already stated by Chrimoya. Don't make a literal translation of it, it doesn't work like that.
Exemple: No tengo nada que ver con eso. I have nothing to do with that.

I figured dejar and salir were 100% synonymous with each other as in to leave or exit. I would consider permitir or irse a better verb to use than dejar in the case of "Let's ....."

Could you give examples? Sentences? I am not following you here. Sorry.

 

[Marianopolita]

"tener que ver"/ new article for those who are interested----

Tener que ver is the expression in question. There's no option from a linguistic perspective to change 'ver' and substitute another verb such as hacer as suggested in the thread. IMO, that's when the expression would make no sense to try use an English equivalent in Spanish.


Here is an article that I found interesting to read. I wrote two mini blog entries on the topic in the past year. IMO, the practice is disturbing and also disappointing that the police have little involvement in arresting the group of people involved in these crimes especially when they come from neighbouring countries. I know that albinos are killed for "brujer?a" in Tanzania, Burundi, and Benin. However, there are few more countries where this practice occurs.


'Asesinan a un ni?o albino en Burundi para pr?cticas de brujer?a'

Asesinan a un nio albino en Burundi para prcticas de brujera - ABC.es

Un grupo de hombres armados asesin? ayer jueves a un ni?o albino de doce a?os de edad en el distrito de Kiganda, en el centro de Burundi, aparentemente para utilizar partes de su cuerpo en actos de brujer?a. Los cazadores de albinos matan a sus v?ctimas para utilizar su sangre y partes de su cuerpo en la elaboraci?n de pociones.

Los curanderos aseguran a sus clientes que les ayudan a tener suerte en el amor, la vida y los negocios. "El ni?o albino, de doce a?os de edad, fue asesinado por cuatro hombres armados con pistolas y cuchillos. Cortaron su mano izquierda y huyeron con ella", declar? este viernes a Reuters un responsable del gobierno local de Kiganda (a 80 kil?metros de la capital, Bujumbura), Joseph Ntahuga.

Ntahuga precis? que la v?ctima ten?a otros dos hermanos albinos. En Burundi hay alrededor de 500 albinos para una poblaci?n de ocho millones de habitantes. Con el de ayer ya son catorce los asesinados desde 2008.

Las autoridades creen que los autores de estos cr?menes son vecinos de la zona que trabajan con curanderos en la vecina Tanzania, un pa?s en el que habitan alrededor de 170.000 albinos y en el que desde 2007 han sido asesinados y mutilados al menos 53.

El presidente la asociaci?n nacional de albinos, Kazungu Kassim, denunci? este viernes que estos cr?menes contin?an cometi?ndose en Burundi debido a que las autoridades no castigan a sus perpetradores con suficiente dureza. "La soluci?n es condenar a la horca a los responsables del asesinato de albinos, como se hace en Tanzania", declar?. Un hombre fue condenado a la horca en Tanzania por asesinar a una ni?a albina de cinco a?os de edad, a la que cort? sus dos piernas con un machete y bebi? su sangre.

-MP.