Can I Omit reflexive pronoun in special situations?
Is it necessary reflexive pronoun (or indirect object pronoun) to show possession of bodypart or clothing when subject or subject pronoun is mentioned in sentence? For example which below sentences is correct? 1- Ella rompió los anteojos. Or 2- Ella se rompió los anteojos. 3- Ella juntó las manos para orar. Or 4-Ella se juntó las manos para orar. 5-Ella cortó el dedo. Or 6-Ella se cortó el dedo. 7-Sam arregla el pelo. Or 8-Sam se arregla el pelo. 9-Lolita lava las manos antes de comer. Or 10-Lolita se lava las manos antes de comer.
According to below refrences 1,3,6,7 and 10 is correct. Now i am confused whether reflexive pronoun is arbitrary or not?
sentences references: http://www.spanish411.net/Spanish-Possessive-Adjectives-Pronouns.asp http://spanish.about.com/od/adjectives/a/possessive_adjectives.htm http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/courses/pronoun1.htm http://www.cliffsnotes.com/foreign-languages/spanish/spanish-ii/pronouns/reflexive-pronouns
8 Answers
Ella rompió los anteojos. She broke the glasses (maybe purposely, maybe accident). This doesn´t indicate who owns the glasses.
Ella se rompió los anteojos. She broke her own glasses. This is the reflexive use of se such as; Ella se lava las manos. To say it without reflexive se leaves us wondering who´s hands she is washing.
Ella le rompió los anteojos. She broke the glasses of someone else.
A ella se le rompieron los anteojos. Her glasses broke unexpectedly. Because this action is sudden, it is referred to by some Spanish learners as the "no fault se". Sometimes spoken in English as: Her glasses broke on her.
Tras de las nubes se apareció el sol. The sun suddenly appeared behind the clouds, This sudden / unexpected action is not "no fault" obviously, so the "no fault" concept used by some foreign Spanish teachers can sometimes be confusing. This can also be said as: Tras de las nubes de repente apareció el sol.
It depends on the situation and the verb you are using.
With Romper usually the reflexive is used unless it is used as a verb transitive.
For example ... se me rompió la guitarra .. My Guitar broke.
se le ha roto el televisor : His/Her TV has stopped working, has gone out of order.
In your example, it is correct to say " Ella se rompió los anteojos/lentes .. if you remove the reflexive pronoun "se" it will render the verb as transitive and will change the meaning andw will then mean that she broke some one else's glasses.
In the other exmples you have stated above the reflexive is working differently with a different logic which I will expalain later ..Don't want to overburden you with too much info at once. First tell me if you understood this much or does it need further elaboration ..
Thanks alot for your answer. What I understood from your explenation is: intransitive verbs---> with se and teransitive verbs ---> without se, and because in my example the verb "rimpo" has used in transetive concept, so it must be without se.
But i have another idea: I know 5 types of "se" : 1- reflexive pronoun se 2- reciprocal reflexive pronoun 3- indirect object pronoun like: "se la" and "se lo" 4- impersonal se 5- no-fault se
I think se in your both examples are "no-fault se" .
No-fault Se difinition: Sometimes in order to avoid blame or to really emphasize the accidental nature of something, we'll say things like "My book got lost." or in example: "Se me perdieron los libro." literally translates to something like "The books lost themselves on me," giving the idea that, "Yes, I lost my books, but it wasn't really my fault. They just got lost.
So i think your examples are not for reflexive pronoun. In addition, If you focus to my all examples "se" has placed exactly before verb.
And about translation my sentence: "Ella rompió los anteojos.", you told it means: "she broke some one else's glasses." but in refrence "http://www.spanish411.net/Spanish-Possessive-Adjectives-Pronouns.asp" is completely different. The refrence translation for the same sentence: "She broke her glasses."
If I am in mistaken, please guide me.
Thanks.
With these examples, it would be amazing for me to know translation of belw sentences in spanish:
Did Mario break her hand? No, she herself broke her hand.
And:
Did Mario break your hand? No, I myself broke my hand.
Another question: "a ella" in the sentence: "A ella se le rompieron los anteojos." is for emphasising or clearfying "se" or "le"?
I don't have any teacher. I learn spanish from internet sites. I agian have another idea. Reflexive pronoun is "me" not "se". I have some reason:
1- the reflexive concept is kept even without "se" in my example. So if i want translate "me perdieron los libro." i say: "I myself lost my books.
2- I think if "se" is reflexive, it must be exactly before verb. But in the examples is before me.
Anyway, it is not important that "me" is reflexive or IDOP. My first question was: can i omit reflexive or IDOP for clothes and budy parts? You told we use "se" with interansitive verbs and omit in transitive. But in below example is not so.
Ella se cortó el dedo = she cut her finger. (cortó is transitive not interansitive.)
There is a rule in spanish grammar that we must not use possessive pronoun with clothing and bodypart if their possessor and subject be the same. In this situation IDOP or reflexive pronoun uses before verb that it has 2 role first is Reflexive or IDOP and second as possesive adjective for bodypart or clothing. For this reason I confused why we dont have IDOP or reflexive pronoun in :
Ella rompió los anteojos = she broke her glasses.
Thanks alot from JulianChivi, Your answer and your examples are very very good and usefull. Can I conclude that this spanish teaching site translate this sentence mistakely? :
Ella rompió los anteojos = she broke her glasses.
Refrence site: http://www.spanish411.net/Spanish-Possessive-Adjectives-Pronouns.asp
Ha ha ha, what is a "no-fault se" ,, the se in my examples are reflexive pronouns. I am not sure what you mean by a no-fault se ...
Well after reading your definition of the so called "no-fault se" and the examples which follow I get what you are saying .. but my friend that concept of "no-fault say" is also an aspect of reflexives and "se" is still used in it's reflexive capacity.. for example ... if I say .. se me rompió el jarron .. what I am saying (which is exactly what you also said) that the vase broke (on it's own) on me .. where "se" is a reflexive pronoun indicating that the vase broke "on its own" (I didn't break it) and me is an IDOP which can't be translated exactly into English as we simply don't speak like that in English ... but still we can loosely translate it as "the vase broke itself "on me"" .. (as If I am saying, the vase died on me) ..
So you may call it "no fault se" or whatever but the fact of the matter is that "reflexive pronouns" can be used in a lot of different ways and this is one of the various dimensions of reflexives (no fault se I am sure is not a grammatical term and may be used by your teacher to impart the idea).. Hehe ..
Reflexive works differently with different verbs and in different situations .. For example .. Afeitarme mens I shave my self but caerse doesn't mean to make yourself fall (as if falling is something very pleasureable haha) .. Caerme would mean that I fell where the reflexive "me" is just used for emphases (and se in this respect may be used in the same sense as you pointed out "no fault se" ) and then in some other situations it is merely idiomatic etc. etc .. So don't confuse yourself with these superficial terms like " no fault se" instead try to walk on the path of self-enlightenment (with respect to the Spanish Grammar) so you understand the very fundamentals .. hehe
please read the last section of this page: http://www.spanish411.net/Spanish-Reflexive-Verbs.asp You can find examples and explanation about "no-fault se".
If you also have any interpretation about other sentences please help me.
