I'm lost regarding the uses of SE
There are so many "se" uses in spanish that I ge confused as to what I'm looking at. Se passive, se reflexive, se to make verbs transitive or intransitive (not sure). Well maybe they are all linked and these grammatical termss are just to help us non'natives to get our heads around the language.
Well, my question is this.
Se rompió
Se me rompió
Is this reflexive? passive? I know you add "me" so that you remove a part of the blame from breaking something, but I'm sure there is more to it than that.
I really wany to be able to differenciate between the different Se uses but I'm feeling a bit lost.
Se le coge el tiro
The above for example. reflexive? passive? and that "le" is refering to the tiro?
ah, I really need a good dose of explanation.
thanks!!!!!
(oh and yes, i've completed the lessons on SD)
4 Answers
So if I say "se cayó" it is It-he-she fell, and is this the same construction as "se rompió"?
That's the only group of verbs with "se" I didn't mention: the intransitive ones. If you say "It fell", where is the second participant anyway? There isn't one! You can't hide something that doesn't exist! These verbs change the focus of the action in ways that can't always be predicted easily. These I suggest to learn separately.
"Ella se acordó." She remembered.
"Ella acordó." She agreed.
How does 'se' tell you not to look for agents or objects in this case?
First of all, it is not reflexive. I believe I've explained this before, but here it goes: both verbs come from the Latin root "cor" (heart), etymologically related to "heart" in English, "card" (heart) in Greek, "Kardis" in Hititte, and so on and so forth. To bring people's hearts together was the ancient way of expressing agreement; hence accord, concord, and many other English words. On the other hand, even know people say "by heart" when they remember things well, because bringing things to your heart used to be a way describe how you remember things. Well... "acordar" ended up as meaning to agree, bring people together through agreements, i.e. to agree, and acordarse, to bring and keep things to your own heart, i.e. to remember.
That is the etymology of the word, which of course, you can't figure out unless you've researched it, so it is useless when it comes to speaking. Basically, what many good books and grammarians recommend is that you learn those verbs separately, even though they look close (because they are related). It is like trying to relate "accord" and "accordion" in English by asking why when you add "dion" to the verb/noun accord, it becomes a musical instrument. They are etymologically related, but their meanings nowadays are as different as day and night.
Bottom line: acordar and acordarse are completely different verbs. If it makes you feel better, what does a ball (a spherical object) has to do with a ball (a dance)? Don't come up with strange ideas about why a basketball became a dance through a reflexive pronoun. They look identical, but they are totally different. Period.
Is this reflexive? passive? I know you add "me" so that you remove a part of the blame from breaking something, but I'm sure there is more to it than that.
No, there isn't. It is very simple: there are no more participants involved in the act of breaking -just whatever it broke. That's all that "se" does: tell you not to look for agents responsible for the action and not to look for things or people to act upon. Just the single item in the sentence. Forget about reflexive, passive or whatever -they all do the same thing.
The "me" puts you on the background, being affected by whatever happens.
Se le coge el tiro
The above for example. reflexive? passive? and that "le" is refering to the tiro?
Forget about that -many books and sites are written by people who don't really understand the difference, and most are simply unaware of middle "se" constructions. This time, "el tiro" is the only participant, and it is linked to the verb "coger". Since "el tiro" or the thing that it refers to cannot take things itself, obviously we'll have to assume that someone else does it, but there are no more participants, so that "se" is purposefully hiding that information, it is making the sentence "subjectless", i.e. impersonal in meaning (passive sentences are also impersonal in meanings).
Now, the expression in question can mean several things, but it is likely to be a colloquial expression meaning "to get the hang of it":
Cogerle el tiro (a algo)
Literally, to grasp the "tiro" (a particular measure used for clothes) of something, to get a "measure" of it, to know its intricacies. Unless it means something else (since I don't have a context), your sentence is something like "One gets the hang of it".
This site has a pretty good overview of its uses 
Lazarus explains it very well, but can anybody explain to me how his explanation fits in with reflexive verbs?
Por ejemplo: acordarse
"Ella se acordó." She remembered.
"Ella acordó." She agreed.
How does 'se' tell you not to look for agents or objects in this case?
Thanks, Lazarus
