Spanish language learning forums

Spanish language learning forums (http://forums.tomisimo.org/index.php)
-   Grammar (http://forums.tomisimo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Compound Tenses (http://forums.tomisimo.org/showthread.php?t=8629)

laepelba August 02, 2010 07:05 AM

Compound Tenses
 
Okay, I know this question is probably a bit too nit-picky, but it's how my brain works. Thank you for bearing with me! :)

My workbook has a chapter on "The Progressive Tenses". The next chapter is called "Compound Tenses: The Present Perfect and the Past Perfect". In the introduction to the chapter on the "Compound Tenses", it explains that these formas compuestas "consist of more than one verb element ... These tenses are conjugated with a basic form of a verb called a past participle..."

But wait! Aren't the progressive tenses formed with "more than one verb element"? Shouldn't the progressive tenses be included under the sub-heading of "compound tenses"/"formas compuestas"?

Thanks!

Perikles August 02, 2010 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by laepelba (Post 90289)
But wait! Aren't the progressive tenses formed with "more than one verb element"? Shouldn't the progressive tenses be included under the sub-heading of "compound tenses"/"formas compuestas"?

Thanks!

Yes, but you must remember that the book was almost certainly not written by a tidy-minded mathematician with logic as a top priority. I guess they would start off with a structure like a) simple tenses b) compound tenses. Then they write the info for both these. Then they flesh out the simple tenses chapter with another chapter about progressive tenses, thereby confusing the issue.

Perhaps there is a subtle linguistic distinction after all, but it does sound to me like a quibble over taxonomy. :)

laepelba August 02, 2010 07:42 AM

Okay - that's what I was hoping. Just semantics. But one would think that grammar categories ought to be treated in a very objective manner with a mathematical-like approach......

chileno August 02, 2010 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by laepelba (Post 90294)
Okay - that's what I was hoping. Just semantics. But one would think that grammar categories ought to be treated in a very objective manner with a mathematical-like approach......

Unfortunately or maybe fortunately not everybody has a mathematical type of thinking, and that has to be taken in account when a book is written. It is intended for everyone to read it. :)

Lorenzo August 02, 2010 02:00 PM

I get confused with the order of my textbook too. It needs to be written better.

Me confundo con el orden de mi libro de texto también. Lo necesita escrito mejor.

laepelba August 02, 2010 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chileno (Post 90311)
Unfortunately or maybe fortunately not everybody has a mathematical type of thinking, and that has to be taken in account when a book is written. It is intended for everyone to read it. :)

Yeah. The problem is that those of us with the analytical minds see things as "correct" or "incorrect".......... I feel that the explanation in this introductory paragraph of the textbook is "incorrect" and thus misleading. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorenzo (Post 90336)
I get confused with the order of my textbook too. It needs to be written better.

Me confundo con el orden de mi libro de texto también. Lo necesita escrito mejor.

Welcome, Lorenzo from Yonkers. I have been out of town since you've joined Tomisimo. Let me tell you that you can ask any questions you want here and there are lots of people who are SO MUCH more personable than your textbook to give you answers. Enjoy!!!

chileno August 02, 2010 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by laepelba (Post 90344)
Yeah. The problem is that those of us with the analytical minds see things as "correct" or "incorrect".......... I feel that the explanation in this introductory paragraph of the textbook is "incorrect" and thus misleading. :)

I am pretty sure they is a simple explanation for the way the material is presented in the book.

But for you, it shouldn't be that simple. :whistling:

Rusty August 02, 2010 05:09 PM

One thing I noted here, and thought I would bring to your attention, is that the book said the compound tenses are formed with the (past) participle. This can't be said for the (progressive), which uses a (present participle).
The compound tenses use a conjugated form of haber, while the (progressive) uses a conjugated form of estar.

In the paragraph above, I deliberately placed certain terms in parentheses. This is because a native speaker of Spanish isn't taught these terms. These are English terms that we try to fit on Spanish parts of speech. The Spanish equivalents for these terms are participio and gerundio, respectively.

The "compound" tenses are formed using haber + participio (Spanish terms used the formula). The 'progressive' isn't ever listed in a conjugation chart. This is because it is neither a "simple" nor a "compound" tense. It is simply known as the gerundio.

The gerundio has nothing to do with the English gerund. (Don't get me started.)

You'll find all kinds of sites (and books) teaching these things wrong.

laepelba August 02, 2010 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 90352)
One thing I noted here, and thought I would bring to your attention, is that the book said the compound tenses are formed with the (past) participle. This can't be said for the (progressive), which uses a (present participle). <---YES! That's why I included that part of the quote...
The compound tenses use a conjugated form of haber, while the (progressive) uses a conjugated form of estar.

In the paragraph above, I deliberately placed certain terms in parentheses. This is because a native speaker of Spanish isn't taught these terms. These are English terms that we try to fit on Spanish parts of speech. The Spanish equivalents for these terms are participio and gerundio, respectively.

The "compound" tenses are formed using haber + participio (Spanish terms used the formula). The 'progressive' isn't ever listed in a conjugation chart. This is because it is neither a "simple" nor a "compound" tense. It is simply known as the gerundio.

The gerundio has nothing to do with the English gerund. (Don't get me started.)

You'll find all kinds of sites (and books) teaching these things wrong.

Okay - that is exactly what I was looking for. So "compound" isn't only about having two verb elements. It is specifically about the use of *haber* as the first of those verb elements and the past participle. Thus, the term "compound" is a tad bit misleading.

It's interesting to me that the progressive isn't considered a "conjugation". It seems to me to be quite parallel to the perfect tenses: estar/haber conjugated in present or past or future tense + gerundio/participle

Hmmmm.....

Well, I definitely won't get you started on the gerundio vs. gerund. I DO understand that they're different ... and am starting to get a feel for when to use the gerundio vs. when to use the infinitive.

Thanks, Rusty!!

Lorenzo August 02, 2010 08:41 PM

Yes, I see. I want to use/enjoy this site and my Spanish books.

Si, veo. Quiero usar/disfrutar esto sito y mi libros de Español.

Quote:

Originally Posted by laepelba (Post 90344)
Yeah. The problem is that those of us with the analytical minds see things as "correct" or "incorrect".......... I feel that the explanation in this introductory paragraph of the textbook is "incorrect" and thus misleading. :)



Welcome, Lorenzo from Yonkers. I have been out of town since you've joined Tomisimo. Let me tell you that you can ask any questions you want here and there are lots of people who are SO MUCH more personable than your textbook to give you answers. Enjoy!!!



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:58 PM.

Forum powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.