Difficulties with que/qué

[Premium]

Hi there,

i´ve been learning spanish for a few months now but i struggle with some phrases.

No hay segundas oportunidades que valgan cuando has tenido ya cien.

As far as i know it means; There is no second opportunity since you already had 100.

I don´t know what "que valgan" means.

Se supone que tienes que ser el jefe.

What does this phrase mean?

Thank you in advance.

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by Premium

Hi there,

i´ve been learning spanish for a few months now but i struggle with some phrases.

No hay segundas oportunidades que valgan cuando has tenido ya cien.

As far as i know it means; There is no second opportunity since you already had 100.

I don´t know what "que valgan" means.

Se supone que tienes que ser el jefe.

What does this phrase mean?

Thank you in advance.

Hello -

1) The verb valer means to be valid, something like German gelten. The valgan is 3rd plural pres subjunctive so que valgan means which might/would be valid.

2) Se supone acts as a passive voice, which Spanish avoids. It is supposed that you have to be the boss.

Note that que is a conjunction or pronoun, but qué is always an interrogative pronoun, or interrogative adjective, or adverb.

By the way, in English a phrase does not have a finite verb. The above is a sentence of two clauses.

Does that help?

[Premium]

First of all thank you for replying

que valgan makes no sense to me in this phrase. And why is it 3rd plural and not 2nd singular since it continues with - has tenido.

So, Se supone que tienes que ser el jefe means - Assuming that you have to be the boss.?

[wrholt]

Originally Posted by Premium

Hi there,

i´ve been learning spanish for a few months now but i struggle with some phrases.

No hay segundas oportunidades que valgan cuando has tenido ya cien.

As far as i know it means; There is no second opportunity since you already had 100.

I don´t know what "que valgan" means.

Se supone que tienes que ser el jefe.

What does this phrase mean?

Thank you in advance.

Actually, "valer" has several possible meanings, and "to be valid" is *not* one of them, at least according to any dictionary entry I've seen. The usual meanings of "valer" include:
1. to cost (to have a price [in money])
2. to be good at
3. to be good for
4. to deserve, to be worth (something)
5. (as valerse) to make use of, to take advantage of

Your first sentence means roughly:

There are no second changes that are worth anything when you've already had 100 of them.

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by Premium

No hay segundas oportunidades que valgan cuando has tenido ya cien..

Originally Posted by Premium

que valgan makes no sense to me in this phrase. And why is it 3rd plural and not 2nd singular since it continues with - has tenido.

Because it agrees with its subject, "segundas oportunidades ". These are the things which are not valid.

Originally Posted by wrholt

Actually, "valer" has several possible meanings, and "to be valid" is *not* one of them, at least according to any dictionary entry I've seen. .

I was really making a comparison with the German gelten, because this is very near valer in this instance, and I assumed the poster would understand it. As for valer, of the many meanings, the Oxford Spanish Dictionary gives:

F
1 (ser válido) «billete/pasaporte/carné» to be valid; ese pase no vale, está caducado that pass isn't valid o is no good, it's out of date; las entradas valen para toda la semana the tickets are valid for the whole week, the tickets can be used throughout the week; esta partida no vale, me ha visto las cartas this game doesn't count, he's seen my cards; lo que le dije a él también vale para ti what I told him goes for you too; no hay excusa que valga I don't want to hear o I won't accept any excuses; he tomado la decisión y no hay discusión que valga I've made my decision and I don't want any arguments; valga la comparación if you know o see what I mean; se comporta como un `nuevo millonario', valga la expresión he behaves like some sort of `nouveau millionaire', for want o lack of a better expression; redundancia

[Premium]

Thank you really much, you made it very thorough. Got it now

[wrholt]

@Perikles, you're right, "valer" and "to be valid" are translation equivalents in some contexts. In other contexts often they are not good translation equivalents. To my ear, in the original poster's sentence, "valer" implies a broader sense of "to have value/worth" rather than a narrower sense of "to be valid".

[Perikles]

The examples I gave from the dictionary show that very often the subjunctive of valer is best translated in a periphrastic way avoiding the actual word valid, but as you say, sometimes this, or to have meaning/worth is the underlining meaning.