Another confusing sentence: Ya lo tengo has sido tu.
Ya lo tengo has sido tu. When you split it up, it says I already/now have it (Ya lo tengo), and You have been(has sido tu). I have a feeling that ya lo tengo is, perhaps, an idiom. Does it mean something like, "I knew"? In that case, is the entire phrase something like, "I knew it had been/was you?"
6 Answers
Yes, it really should be punctuated as two sentences. "¡Ya lo tengo! ¡Has sido tú!" ("Now I get it! It had been you!.")
Exactly as you've said it...
I knew it!... it was you
By the way... you're missing the tilde in "tú"... it should be "Ya lo tengo, has sido tú"
I think I was unclear with my wording, but when I mean't regional differences, I was referring to the wording of the phrase, not the use of accent marks. Sorry for not getting that across the first time. As for regional differences, I believe there are. For example, vosotros in Spain, which isn't widely used in Latin America, and the use of voz in Argentina. I know, at the end of the day, it's all the same. You can definitely get your point across perfectly, unless the differences are two distinct, but I'm trying to form a uniform language that isn't all over the place; a language that's centralized. Think of someone who interchanges "y'all" and "you's guys" regularly. Even though everyone in the south doesn't say "y'all", and everyone up north doesn't say "you's guys", it makes you wonder where on earth the person is from. Also think about these two words, chips and fries, or biscuits and cookies? They are the same things, but with different names given by two different countries which speak the same English, more or less. I've seen examples of this in the Spanish language many times. I know it may seem irrelevant, but regional differences interest me =) It's another way of getting a piece of the culture, and I'm all for learning the culture because culture definitely has a huge impact on language. Plus, culture is fun to learn about =D *P.S.: Sorry for the super long post @.@
I suppose it depends on the situation. If it were text/IM talk, then I guess a dropped accent mark would be alright, if the idea was still clear. I'd understand "James hablo" without the accent mark. I've noticed a few short hand Spanish words/phrases like "q" for que, "q?" for ¿Qué?, and things like that. It's all quite interesting. It's like typing in English, "Hey wut r u doing 2day? But, in formal writing, I agree. There should be accent marks and tildes much like you dot your i's and cross your t's.
Now as for Spanish changing their Spelling and tildes through the RAE, I don't know if that's such a bad thing. Spanish is a living language, so changes are inevitable. It all really depends, I guess. Why are they changing the spelling? Is the word they are changing archaic, perhaps, in relation to the world now so that it does merit a spelling change? Is the word understood just fine with/without the accent mark? If it's creating confusion, then, they should just leave the word as is. But if it's something on the level of changing honour to honor or colour to color, then it's not going to kill anyone except die hard "u" fans, and of course, those who aren't fond of change.
P.S. VERY interesting post thread everyone. =D
I figured it had an accent mark, but I wasn't sure because the source where I got it didn't have it. So, I figured I'd just type it as it was. Oh, and regional difference? I'm focusing more on Latin American Spanish, so is it not used so much in Latin America? Is it just a Spain thing?
Your original source didn't have the punctuation it should have had, either. Accent marks aren't regional. Not using them where they're supposed to be used is like not capitalizing or punctuating. It's a sign of laziness and slopiness.
I figured it had an accent mark, but I wasn't sure because the source where I got it didn't have it. So, I figured I'd just type it as it was. Oh, and regional difference? I'm focusing more on Latin American Spanish, so is it not used so much in Latin America? Is it just a Spain thing?
