Uses of "se"

Uses of "se"
 

I was reading a newspaper article and I came across a couple sentences with the use of "se" that I could not rationalize. Can someone tell me why "se" is used, giving me a gramatical explanation and what the segment in the bold type translates into. Thank you, your help is very much appreciated.

A la renuncia el lunes Ramón Carrizález, vicepresidente y ministro de Defensa y de su esposa, Yuribí Ortega, ministra de Ambiente se le sumó ayer la dimisión del presidente de estatal Banco de Venezuela, Eugenio Vazquez Orellana que a su vez tiene el cargo de ministro de Estado para la Banca Pública.
En la sede del canal oficial se encontraron con los estudiantes opositores quienes que acudieron a protestar por el manejo que se da allí a la información.
No obstante, cree que esta vez las cosas no serán tan fáciles y podrían salírsele de las manos.

Before getting a grammar explanation. Could you please translate that to English?

- Sumarse: pronominal
- Darse: pronominal
- Salirse: pronominal

Look here :)

Salírsele de las manos: to get out of hand, out of control? :thinking:

:approx::infinity::infinity::infinity:

:confused: What's that? :thinking: ¿Te gusta el infinito? :D

"El niño no me come" is a very common sentence said by mothers when their children do not eat enough. The correct sentence is "el niño no come", but as a mother loves her son so much, "me" is added to emphasize. This sentence is the most clear example when one studies "dativo ético" (also called "superfluo" because it's not necessary), that's because the sentence came to my mind (and I didn't realise that I was talking about "se). :)

If I said "el niño no me come", literally I could translate into English as: "the child doesn't eat to me" :D

GRacias, no encontraba la tecla "----------" y me ponía aterrar :lol::lol:

True, that is very literal. The ethic dative is used when the person in the dative is somehow affected by the event, so here, the mother is troubled if the child doesn't eat. It is important to realise that the dative case is not just for indirect objects, but has accumulated all kinds of functions from other cases which have been lost (locative, instrumental, etc.). It is particularly difficult to spot in Spanish, because there is no difference between the form of me for the direct object (accusative case) and the indirect object (dative), whereas in sensible (joke:rolleyes:) languages, the difference is clear (e.g. German: mich, mir). (Personally, I think it outrageous to have an ethic dative with no unambiguous dative ending on the word, and I wish to protest.:D)

A more meaningful literal translation would be "the child doesn't eat for me" :)

Didn't you tell me that "wish" is used when there is no possibility of something? Then, you can go on "wishing" :D

Why "for me"? ¿No come para mí? :thinking: Do you mean "in my opinion"? :confused:

Hi,

El niño no me come=The child will not eat for me(esta vez o en el futuro)/The child doesn't eat for me(siempre)

It is like this sentence, I think:

Me es difícil=Para mí, es difícil=It is difficult for me

I hope this helps

I understand "for me" in the second sentence (it's difficult for me). But I can't understand it in the first one.

Sometimes we say to a child (when one is feeding him/her):

Esta cucharada para para papá; esta, para mamá.

Is it something similar? :thinking:

And about "for me" and "to me", may I use both of them or "for me" is better than "to me"?

Thanks. :)

I was trying to express the ethic dative with a more meaningful preposition than your "the child doesn't eat to me", The 'to' is unhelpful, because the idea is that the mother is somehow affected if the child doesn't eat.

When I was young, living at home, I noticed how my mother would always personalize everything by saying 'for me' with every request:

Will you take the rubbish out for me?
Will you take the dog for a walk for me?
Will you go and comb your hair for me? .....

This was her own method of expressing an ethic dative, that she was involved in whether I did these things or not. The for me I think is better than a to me :):crazy:

Ah! Now I understand it (the rubbish has been the key :D) :)

But I didn't want to say that, but in Spanish, literally, "no me come" means "he doesn't eat me" (or to me, I'm not sure if "to" is used here). A ver si te come el león / el niño no me come. :D

Por eso las traducciones de frases así son:thinking: ,...

Nos son difíciles porque.... They are difícult for us because...
El niño no nos come. The boy doesn´t eat for us
El niño no me cepilla los dientes, the boy doesn´t brush his teeth for me.
El perro no me anda, sino corre con un loco. The dog doesn´t walk for me,..

no - the me is the dative case of the pronoun which is yo in the nominative. When this dative case is an indirect object, then the translation to me is correct. This is the most common use of the dative case, hence it's name: ἡ δοτικὴ πτῶσις. BUT the dative covers other functions like the ethic dative, where the translation into English me or to me is meaningless. Hence my suggestion of for me. :rolleyes::rolleyes::)

So, I could say: "I'm always telling to me ..." (siempre me digo que...), instead of "telling me", since I is the subject. Or nothing to do... :confused:

This is yet another case of a simple indirect object expressed by the dative case, where to is correct. In this instance, though:D, I'm always telling to me is incorrect, you would say I'm always saying to myself

And yes, this has nothing to do with what I was saying.... *sigh* :D

Eso me parecía. :erm: :D

Thanks. :)

¿Y estaría mal, "no come por mí"?

¿o para ti solo hay "para mí"?


En todo caso "el niño no come todo lo que yo quisiera"...estaría bien para mí.

No, "por mí" aquí no me cuadra. :thinking: Sólo cuando le estás dando las cucharadas al niño y le dices "ésta por papá", etc. :)

Correcto.