8 Vote

I just want to share this exchange of messages I had with our resident guru Lazarus, regarding using the 2nd person indicative to have the effect of an imperative. I already got his OK with this. I just thought that it would benefit us non-natives in expressing the imperative in another way. Anyway here it is:

Me: Hi Lazarus.. I have a question about imperative using the 2nd person indicative. For example:

En cuanto llegues a Madrid, me mandas una carta.

I think I have read this form somewhere, but I would like to know if this is correct or if it is indeed used.

Thanks.

Lazarus: It is not strictly speaking an imperative, although the effect is similar. You see, when someone in a movie looks at another person and says "You are dead!", he is not really implying that he is talking to a dead person, but stating what he considers a fact before it becomes true, because he is going to make sure it happens and there is no way it will be avoided. Some smart grammarian may call it "threatening present", "omen present" or something like that, but it is just a stylistic mechanism that uses the basic function of the present tense to make statements about what we regard as facts.

That "me mandas una carta" is not that different: rather than making guesses or approximations about a possible future, we state it beforehand as something undeniable. The other person is not making the call as we speak (like the other guy wasn't dead when he was told he is dead), so we interpret it as an inescapable future event that must be carried out at all cost. It does not necessarily sound like a threat, but it is very assertive in any case.

This usage is rather colloquial, but it is very commonly used, at least in Spain.

  • Posted Jan 2, 2011
  • | 529 views
  • | link
  • | flag

1 Answer

0 Vote

Hah. I was expecting a thread about a regalo given with threatening intentions (like the cut-off ear given as a gift in some Sherlock Holmes I saw long ago).

  • Sorry to disappoint you, web ;) - Deanski Jan 2, 2011 flag
  • I though it was a spelling mistake and was meant to be "threatening presence" - ian-hill Jan 2, 2011 flag
Answer this Question
Comentarios