llamarse
how would you say in spanish " it is called scouse " can you use llamarse'
20 Answers
I bow to the female way of thinking.
absolutely ! "Things other than people" (This meal is called scouse, se llama scouse')
thanks every one for your help
Hey guys, not boring at all & if anyone is they can tune out. I think it's great when two knowledgeable people have a discussion on a concept that we learners have some trouble with.
I'm not getting into the fray but I'm wondering if peter rowlands wanted to know if things other than people "se llama" and the answer is sí. Notice how well I sidestepped the "call itself" issue.
You can say it
what I wanted to know is can I say the meal is called scouse,
La comida se llama scouse,
(scouse is a local meal in liverpool similar to irish stew maybe)
It sounds like we are in nearly perfect agreement. This whole discussion started because someone gave a "literal" translation of "se llama scouse," the purpose of which was to help someone with poor command of Spanish to understand how the Spanish phrase is put together. You replied that "itself" has nothing to do with such a construction, and I disagreed. However, more importantly, you and I agree that such a literal translation would never work in a real translation.
Anyway, if I am making you bored I'll stop. Just let me know.
Actually, I find this discussion fascinating and stimulating, but I bet that puts me in a very small minority on this forum, and that everyone else is getting bored. So I'll bow out now, but I look forward to seeing your posts again soon.
Then it is called, means ins spanish: Se le llama.... / Se le dice...., which is not aplicable to a person as: Se le llama Eddy/ Se le dice Eddy.
As an exception can be:
If someone is a Liverpool habitant, is called scouser.
I'm a translator (of Japanese), and belong to the school that holds that translation is not merely the replacement of words with other words, but the replacement of concepts with identical concepts expressed in other words.
Excellent! Then, don't replace 'me' with 'myslef', and replace the concept:
If I meet someone for the first time and I want to introduce myslef, I'd say:
Hola, me llamo lazarus. Encantado (de conocerte)
Now, you're not going to tell me that you normally use this sentence, right':
Hello, I call myself James. Nice to meet you.
Do you honestly say that? I doubt it. Why? Because it is a different concept; it is not used the same way, it is just a word-by-word translation that happens to make sense, but people don't normally use the same way we use "me llamo", a sentence that sounds as natural as "I am James" or "My name is James". The only reason why people happily say it is the same is because it justifies that 'me' which, otherwise, would be a riddle to any English speaker.
If you really go telling people "Hello, I call myself James" then I suppose we're both right, and there is nothing else to talk about, of course.
Anyway, if I am making you bored I'll stop. Just let me know.
I'm a translator (of Japanese), and belong to the school that holds that translation is not merely the replacement of words with other words, but the replacement of concepts with identical concepts expressed in other words.
Me llamo lazarus, pero nunca me llamo a mí mismo así.
My name is Lazarus, but I never go by that name.
My (given) name is Lazarus, but I never call myself that.
My (given) name is Lazarus, but I never use that name.
etc.
I agree with you that the concept of "Me llamo xxx" is the same as the concept of "My name is ...," but the beauty of learning a foreign language is that we learn new ways to think of things. So, while in English we use a noun (my name is), in Spanish we use a verb (me llamo).
"...but is commonly known as doradita.". Well... that's also distinct from "la llaman doradita", isn't it? I never said "commonly" - you added it to solve the ambiguity caused by insisting in translating "se llama" as "it is called".
Adding words is an essential part of good translation, since a nuance included in a word in the source language may be absent in the word used in the target language. So there is nothing tricky about adding "commonly"; it just makes the meaning clear or makes the sentence sound more natural.
But we are splitting hairs by this point, and Peter (the original poster) has probably nodded off by now. 
Last thing: the diccionario de la Real Academia Española has this verb listed as a pronominal, and gives it a particular definition just for this particular structure:
llamarse
13. prnl. Tener tal o cual nombre o apellido.
Real Academia Española © Todos los derechos reservados
As you can see, if you want to call yourself "King of the world", that is what would be reflexive, but it is not when it is your name. This distinction cannot be made in English just by using "call oneself", of course.
Me llamo lazarus (el nombre en mi pasaporte), pero me llamo Magic Johnson (así me denomino a mí mismo).
I stand correct: "me llamo" here is accurately translated as "My name is", even though you call also say sometimes "I call myself" (but not all the time).
But I maintain that the concept in Spanish is indeed "I call myself lazarus1907," which is grammatically distinct from "Mi nombre es lazarus1907."
Yes, but "I call myself lazarus" and "Me llamo lazarus" are also grammatically distinct, as I can use the former even if I never call myself lazarus. The last one is not reflexive, while "I call myself lazarus" is.
"...but is commonly known as doradita.". Well... that's also distinct from "la llaman doradita", isn't it? I never said "commonly" - you added it to solve the ambiguity caused by insisting in translating "se llama" as "it is called".
So, how do you translate this again?
Me llamo lazarus, pero nunca me llamo a mí mismo así.
I call myself lazarus, but I never call myself like that''''?
I insist: it is not my personal opinion, but what all my grammars say, and what I learnt in my Teaching Course of Spanish as a Foreign Language.
P.D. I know pirita is pyrite. I though I made up a name, and I used a real one accidentally.
Slight correction, someone from Liverpool is a scouser
Scouse is something or someone from Liverpool in England.
"Me llamo lazarus1907" IS NOT "I call myself lazarus1907, but "my name is lazarus1907".
Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one. But I maintain that the concept in Spanish is indeed "I call myself lazarus1907," which is grammatically distinct from "Mi nombre es lazarus1907."
As for "Esta roca se llama pirita, pero la llaman doradita," I might translate it as "This rock is called pirita (pyrite), but is commonly known as doradita."
That is, llamarse is reflexive (yo me llamo, tú te llamas, él se llama, etc.), and therefore does involve the concept of self.
The grammatical distinction between a proper reflexive (with itslef) and a pronominal is sometimes too thin to be bothered talking about it, but I think here is worth mentioning:
"Me llamo lazarus1907" IS NOT "I call myself lazarus1907, but "my name is lazarus1907". You could, of course, argue that I call myself indeed that, but I wouldd use that sentence even if I have decided never to call myself that name:
Me llamo lazarus, pero me llamo a mí mismo John, porque odio lazarus.
How to translate this? I call myself lazarus, but I call myself John'''? Does it make sense? Another one:
Esta roca se llama pirita, pero la llaman doradita.
This rock calls itslef pirita, but they call it doradita''? It doesn't work., so some people decide to shift to a passive interpretation, of course. This rock is called pirita, but it is called doradita? Mmmm, better, but even better The name of this rock is pirita, but they call it doradita. It doesn't matter whether people call it like that or not: it is the name it has been given - whether people use it or not.
A proper reflexive would have accepted a redundant "myslef / itself", but with this verb sounds funny, o wrong. The best grammars I know call this verbs "pronominales" to differenciate them from the true reflexives, the passive reflexives, etc.
