Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach
When talking to someone from Spain I said, Perdón, fui ocupado. The person then corrected me, saying I was supposed to instead say Perdón, yo estaba ocupado. Would anyone mind explaining this please?
Thanks!  |
Felipe's answer is great, and I'll just post my explanation as well, in case it helps.
First, the difference between the preterit and the imperfect
The preterit is for things that are done, gone and finished in the past.
Fui a la tienda. (I went to the store)
Estuve afuera. (I was outside [for a certain amount of time])
Estuve ocupado. (I was busy [for a certain amount of time])
Comí arroz. (I ate rice.)
Canté la canción. (I sang the song.)
Escribí una carta. (I wrote a letter.)
Estuve comiendo arroz. (I was eating rice [for a certain amount of time])
The imperfect is for things that are either not done/finished in the past, or we don't know or we don't care if they were actually completed in the past.
Iba a la tienda. (I was going to the store [we don't know or care if you ever got there- it's irrelevant])
Estaba afuera. (I was outside [indefinitely, or we don't know or care how long you were outside])
Estaba ocupado. (I was busy [indefinitely, or we don't know or care how long you were busy])
Comía arroz. (I was eating rice. [but it's irrelevant how long you were eating, or if you finished etc.])
Cantaba la canción. (I was singing the song.)
Escribía una carta. (I was writing a letter.)
Estaba comiendo arroz. (I was [in the act of] eating rice.)
The imperfect is usually used to set the stage for some other action that happened in the past (preterit) and was finished. IE:
Comía arroz (imperfect, setting the stage) cuando ella entró (the action that took place).
(I was eating rice when she came in.)
Second, the difference between ser & estar
I think there are other threads on this (try searching), but I'll touch the point briefly. Ser is normally for more permanent things, and estar for more mutable (changeable) things. So when you're going to say "I was busy", you have to choose ser or estar for that "was". I'd say being busy is not a permanent condition, so I'd go with estar. Now, using the explanation above, choose the preterit or imperfect for the past tense. Were you busy for a certain amount of time, and you're not busy any more, and the fact that you were only busy for a certain amount of time is the important fact that you want to communicate, then use the preterite: "estuve ocupado". See also
http://wikispanish.org/ws/Ser_and_estar
Estuve ocupado toda la mañana y no pude salir.
I was tied up all morning and couldn't get away.
(You're emphasizing the fact that you were busy)
Estaba ocupado toda la mañana y no pude salir.
I was busy all morning and wasn't able to get out.
(You're emphasizing the fact that you couldn't get away.)
Ser and the passive voice.
You didn't think your question would get such a long and involved answer did you?
When you use ser + the past participle of another verb, it's what is called the passive voice. For example:
The meat was ground. (La carne fue molida.)
The building was demolished. (El edificio fue destruído)
So, the verb "ocupar" means to occupy or to use. So....
Fue ocupado would mean "It was used" or "it was occupied"
You might say "Fuí ocupado" in a science fiction story where some aliens physically occupied your body, or maybe by stretching the imagination, you could also have been used for some evil purpose in a diabolical plan.....
Fui ocupado para traer abajo el reino del Rey X.
I was used to ruin King X's kingdom...
But note that none of these examples would be common by any stretch of the imagination.
Whew...
David signing off for awhile