How does one determine the subject with linking verb : Lo mejor de ese cine son las butacas lujosas.
This is the reverse of Gekkosan's question. He asked how does one know which is the subject in an English sentence using a linking verb. Here is a sentence similar in form to the one he referenced...
The best feature about that theater is its luxurious chairs.
He wanted to know if the verb (to be) should agree with feature (is) or with chairs (are). Apparently in Spanish the obvious thing to do is make the verb agree with chairs like in the sentence below...
Lo mejor de ese cine son las butacas lujosas.
Gekkosan accepted my answer regarding the English grammar, which was that, in English, it is the position of the nouns relative to the verb that determines which is the subject and, thus, the conjugation of the verb. That is, if he writes the sentence such that feature precedes the verb, then feature is the subject and the verb must be is, but, if he writes it so that chairs precedes the verb then chairs is the subject and the verb must be are.
However, my question, which is not necessarily posed to Gekkosan but rather to any who might know the answer, is: how does Spanish grammar determine that butacas is the subject?
Phrased another way, how do we know that lo mejor is not the subject?
Just in case using a neuter noun (lo mejor) is forcing butacas to become the subject, then let me rephrase the Spanish a bit...
La mejor característica de ese cine son las butacas lujosas.
Now, let me mix it up just a bit more. How do I, a non-native, use Spanish grammar rules to determine the subject of the following sentence...
La mejor característica de esa habitación es la butaca lujosa.
Which is the subject: característica or butaca? Why? How can I tell which one is the subject using Spanish grammar rules?
I have searched and searched and cannot find the answer.
Here is a guess at the rule based on my current knowledge of Spanish grammar:
Either can be the subject. Spanish doesn't care which one you consider the subject. However, if one is singular and one is plural, then make the verb agree with the plural one.
Here's another guess at the rule:
Make the verb agree with the closest one. If both are right next to the verb (just before and just after), then flip a quarter to choose which one to make the verb agree with.
What say ye?
13 Answers
And now, this is it:
c) Cuando el sujeto y el atributo son dos sustantivos que difieren en número, lo normal es establecer la concordancia con el elemento plural: «Mi infancia son recuerdos de un patio de Sevilla» (Machado Campos [Esp. 1907-17] 491); «Todo eso son falacias» (Ott Dientes [Ven. 1999]); «La primera causa de regresión de la especie son las alteraciones de su hábitat» (DNavarra [Esp.] 20.5.99).
Look at the examples, it is the same case as in the above. Well, you owe me a beer, a cold one please
I would like to drink it here, if you don't mind
um.... when I was a child, so i was tought grammar, the teacher showed us any sentence, for instance: Lo mejor del burdel son las mujeres. then, the teacher pointed at any trembling boy and said: you, worm, tell me everything about the sentence.
then the boy thougt himself: "who is the subject? um... if I change the singular part into plural the verb doesn't change, but if I change the singular part into singular, the verb does."
so: Las mejores cosas del burdel son las mujeres.
and: Lo mejor del burdel es la mujer.
interesting. then u get the subject.
well, it doesn't work unless you are a native speaker. But I can tell you something else: think logically. either burdel/brothel or mujeres/women can be the subject in this sentence. Because brothels and women can be good or bad, or whatever, but "the best feature of anything" is just a description of the subject. Obviously "brothel" is not the subject as it is part of the description.
Of course you can also say: the best feature of the brothel is really crappy. in this case "t-b-f-o-t-b-" is acting as subject, but here "the best feature of the brothel" is actually replacing "women". and if it weren't clear, the recipient would ask: "what is the best feature of the brothel?"
there is not such a rule like: the subject is the closest one to the verb. this makes no sense. what about those sentences where the subject ain't written nor spoken?
use logic. don't forget language was invented so it must be logical!!
Look:
Resultados 1 - 10 de aproximadamente 63.100 de "la principal caracteristica son.
This is like saying: lo importante son ....
You must remember, the subject is not always before the verb like in English, and this form is special. I really don't know how to explain this.
Look:
Resultados 1 - 10 de aproximadamente 576.000 de "lo importante son.
In any case the verb ser is copulative in Spanish, that is it does not have a direct object but an atributo, and we ...
O M G..I found it!!!! puffff, you owe me, web, I have been freaking looking for this for two hours!
2.1. Copulativo. Ser es el verbo copulativo por excelencia y su función es la de afirmar del sujeto lo que significa el atributo: Luisa es alta;
this is what I was saying so far.
You have to consider several facts:
2.1.1. Para establecer correctamente la concordancia del verbo ser en las oraciones copulativas, ha de tenerse en cuenta lo siguiente:
That is, to establish the subject/atributo +verb agreement you have to consider the following:
a) Como norma general, ser debe concertar con el sujeto en número y persona: «Este club es una maravilla» (Bayly Días [Perú 1996]); «Algunas cosas son el colmo de la dificultad»
As a general rules it agrees with the the subject.Look a the examples above.
b) No obstante, si el atributo es un pronombre personal, la concordancia, tanto de número como de persona, se establece necesariamente con este: «Dios somos nosotros» (Alviz Son [Esp. 1982]); «Mi diaria preocupación sois vosotros»
As you can see here we have the first disagreement with English, in Spanish the pronoun is predominant.
Dios somos nosotros: God are we (English: God is us/we)
All this is taken from the "bible" where I should have looked right from the start, I did actually , but I was looking for "atributo" which was not listed.
You can find all this under "ser", type it in here.
A quick glance at the level of the head on "El Doble's" beers suggest that maybe it should really be called "La Mitad".
Fascinating. Noone has yet mentioned either logic or the intentions of the speaker/writer.
When I compose a sentence, I know what the subject, the thing my statement (or question) is about, is. The fact that I may then try to add emphasis to the object or attribute by promoting it to the beginning of the sentence is irrelevant. Whoever wrote "Dios somos nosotros" knew that he was categorizing "us, ourselves" as the reality of "God" but decided that there was more weight to be had by inverting the syntax and writing (my extended version) "God, that's us". If it had occurred to him to include a comma after God there would be far less confusion.
Inversion is not unique to Spanish but occurs in all the few languages I command including English. With luck a good example will flit through my brain in a moment. I used frequently to use inversions for the sake of emphasis in the days when I wrote reports in Spanish (rejected by the secretary but reinstated by my Spanish boss) and I can assure you that it never changed my perception of my subject.
How about "Silently, through the forest, goes the tiger." Guess what's the subject - it sure ain't the forest.
Make the verb agree with the closest one. If both are right next to the verb (just before and just after), then flip a quarter to choose which one to make the verb agree with.
That's my method too.
Why would you include a comma, though, after the word 'forest' in your sentence? ...or before 'through', for that matter? - Janice
It probably depends on your age and point of view. In Shakespeare's time, commas (and most punctuation) served to indicate the length of the pause between phrases. (ranging from comma, through semi-colon and colon to full stop) in normal speech.Modern "usage" experts have complicated matters. Probably one would say, because "through the forest" is, essentially a parenthetical interpolation (even without the parentheses). It interrupts the basic statement "Silently goes the tiger" in a way that "The tiger goes silently through the forest." does not. If one simply reads (without pauses) the sentence "Silently through the forest goes the tiger.", the result sounds very odd.
Don't cheat and make the answer seem simplistic. Show the other 1/2 of that "rule":
No obstante, en algunos casos es posible establecer la concordancia también en singular, en especial cuando uno de los dos sustantivos tiene significado colectivo, o cuando, siendo un plural morfológico, se refiere a un concepto unitario: «Quienes desarrollaron la cultura de La Venta era gente de habla maya» (Ruz Mayas [Méx. 1981]); «El sueldo es tres mil dólares al mes» (Donoso Elefantes [Chile 1995]); «Las migas ruleras es un postre que se reserva para la cena» (Vergara Comer [Esp. 1981]).
Now we're almost back to the flipping a coin method.
Thanks for letting me know about that website! I didn't know about it.
I looked through a few very advanced books on syntax and grammar that I have. What was the reference that you were using to find that answer, Heidita?
Let me throw something into the issuet: One characteristic of a linking verb is that other parts of the sentence must agree with the subject.
Therefore if chairs were the true subject, the agreement would be: Las butacas son las mejores características del cine.
Which seems to make for the argument that La mejor característica or lo mejor is really the true subject:
La mejor característitica/lo mejor del cine ES las butacas.
Opinions?
No tengo ninguna idea. :(
Good question, I'm going to watch for the answer.
