use of the past participle

Question

Can the past participle function as an adjective? i.e., agree in number & gender? e.g. 'She was delivered from death'= 'Ella fue librada de la muerte'? I know it's primarily functioning as a verb, but I just want to be sure.

Thanks!

Answer 1

Past participles (which are verbal not adjetival) end in -do, -cho, or -to and many teachers try to teach them as adjectives. What they really should be called are passive participles that have four forms-librado, librada, librados, libradas and they are now adjectives.
i.e.:La ventana estaba abierta.= ventana abierta (adj)
Las ventanas fueron abiertas por el maestro.= ventanas abiertas (adj)
So with passive participles there is agreement with number and gender.

Answer 2

Here is the rule I use. I hope it helps you remember.

1. With ser and estar, these participles agree in number and gender.
2. When used as an adjective modifying a noun, they again agree in number and gender.
3. With haber, only the masculine singular is used.

Examples:
1. Están cerradas, fueron cerradas
2. Las ventanas cerradas
3. Ella ha cerrado las ventanas.

Answer 3

My point was to show my displeasure with the misnomer-past participles used as adjectives when in reality they are passive participles and have four forms while a past participle has only one form and always ends in -do, -to, -cho. It is like lazarus explained in the forum "Lo, le, nos, me, se , les..." that the with-verb pronoun "le" is not a "redundant pronoun" but should be called a "preparatory pronoun". It is almost impossible to change grammar insights because the textbooks continue to hammer out concepts like permanent vs not permanent (ser vs estar), etc
Let's write a new modern textbook!

Answer 4

No one will buy it. All the people on the review committees think the old textbooks are right.

(just being cynical)

látigo said:

My point was to show my displeasure with the misnomer-past participles used as adjectives when in reality they are passive participles and have four forms while a past participle has only one form and always ends in -do, -to, -cho. It is like lazarus explained in the forum "Lo, le, nos, me, se , les..." that the with-verb pronoun "le" is not a "redundant pronoun" but should be called a "preparatory pronoun". It is almost impossible to change grammar insights because the textbooks continue to hammer out concepts like permanent vs not permanent (ser vs estar), etc Let's write a new modern textbook!

>

Answer 5

Is there a way to tell for which verbs it´s OK to use the corresponding passive participles? Or is it OK for any verb?

látigo said:

My point was to show my displeasure with the misnomer-past participles used as adjectives when in reality they are passive participles and have four forms while a past participle has only one form and always ends in -do, -to, -cho. It is like lazarus explained in the forum "Lo, le, nos, me, se , les..." that the with-verb pronoun "le" is not a "redundant pronoun" but should be called a "preparatory pronoun". It is almost impossible to change grammar insights because the textbooks continue to hammer out concepts like permanent vs not permanent (ser vs estar), etc Let's write a new modern textbook!

>

Answer 6

As far as I know.

Natasha said:

Is there a way to tell for which verbs it´s OK to use the corresponding passive participles? Or is it OK for any verb?

látigo said:

My point was to show my displeasure with the misnomer-past participles used as adjectives when in reality they are passive participles and have four forms while a past participle has only one form and always ends in -do, -to, -cho. It is like lazarus explained in the forum "Lo, le, nos, me, se , les..." that the with-verb pronoun "le" is not a "redundant pronoun" but should be called a "preparatory pronoun". It is almost impossible to change grammar insights because the textbooks continue to hammer out concepts like permanent vs not permanent (ser vs estar), etcLet's write a new modern textbook!

>