a causa de y porque
What's different between "a causa de" n "porque"'
11 Answers
Using James' examples:
El partido se suspendió a causa de la lluvia = El partido se suspendió porque llovía
"A causa de" is followed by the name of the cause; "porque" is followed by verb explaining the cause.
lazarus1907 said:
Marco said:
Does English have imperfect tense? I think that English only has simple past tense and past progressive tense. Am I right? That is why it is hard for English speakers to understand the difference between the imperfect tense and past progressive tense. So it is also difficult to know when the imperfect tense needs to be used and past progressive tense as well.
The specific answer to your questions is useful if you're into linguistics, and probably not if you just want to learn how to speak, but there we go:There is very little difference between the Spanish past progressive tense and the imperfect tense... with certain verbs, and in these cases, they both translate pretty much as past progressive tense in English.But not all verbs are the same. You can't, for example, say "I am being 25 years old" even if you are 25 at the very moment, because in this case the progressive tense is not justified in English. Here you have to use the present tense ("I am 25"). In ten years time, you'll tell the story as "I was 25", and not "I was being 25" too. Unless there is an unexpected exception (and there might be one or two) that I can't think of right now, if you can't use the present progressive in English, there is no way you can do it in Spanish, so "Estoy teniendo 25 años" is as incorrect as in English. Wait ten years again, and then you'll have to tell the story with imperfect (never in preterit), and you won't be able to use the progressive. The reason for this is that, at that time, the action (being 25) is not finished yet; hence the imperfect.Now take a verb where the progressive is fine in English, but not in (standard) Spanish: "I'm wearing a blue shirt" (you can't say "Estoy llevando..."). In ten years time, you'll tell this story as "I was wearing...", and in Spanish you'll use the imperfect again, but not the progressive. At that time, the action (wearing a shirt) is not finished; hence the imperfect.Finally, take a verb where the progressive can be used in both languages, such as "it is raining" ("está lloviendo"). Here, for the first time, you are allowed to use the past progressive, but it doesn't make much of a difference, because this can also be expressed with the imperfect, since the action wasn't finished at the moment you are describing.As you can see, imperfect is used if we don't want to focus on the action as a finished one, but as it was still happening. This is normally expressed with the past progressive in English, but you can only use the same tense in Spanish if you could have used the present progressive to describe that very moment exactly when it happened in the past. If you would have never used the present progressive then, you won't be able to use it now to talk about that moment in the past, but you still can use the imperfect.I shouldn't have written all this; my mind is not working well today.
Hi lazarus and Samdie,
After I read the explanations from both of you, my understanding is that it's better to use imperfect tense instead of progressive tense for me, a beginner of learning Spanish. The progressive tense is used for some specific situations, especially when I would like to express something happened in the past.
As lazarus explained, imperfect tense can be used in many situation, but the progressive tense has the limit to be used in Spanish.
I just want to make sure if my understanding is correct or not.
Thanks to both of you,
Marco
lazarus1907 said:
Using James' examples:El partido se suspendió a causa de la lluvia = El partido se suspendió porque llovía"A causa de" is followed by the name of the cause; "porque" is followed by verb explaining the cause.
Sacrifico tiempo libre todos para estudiar "a causa de" difícil de esa asignatura.
is that right'
Marco said:
Does English have imperfect tense? I think that English only has simple past tense and past progressive tense. Am I right?
That is why it is hard for English speakers to understand the difference between the imperfect tense and past progressive tense.
So it is also difficult to know when the imperfect tense needs to be used and past progressive tense as well.
In my opinion "imperfect" and "past progressive" (in English) refer to the same thing. "Imperfect" is the usual term when one is studying Latin (and by extension) Romance languages; "past progressive" when one assumes that students know nothing of "traditional" grammatical terms. If you consider the etymology of "imperfect", it means an action "not yet completed" (since "perfect", in this sense, means "completed" [unlike the more common modern meaning of "without fault"]).. Past "progressive", on the other hand (at least for modern speakers of English), suggests that the action is still in "progress". So both terms come down to the same thing but "past progressive" is probably more understandable for speakers of modern English.
Thank you,
Marco
Marco said:
Does English have imperfect tense? I think that English only has simple past tense and past progressive tense. Am I right? That is why it is hard for English speakers to understand the difference between the imperfect tense and past progressive tense. So it is also difficult to know when the imperfect tense needs to be used and past progressive tense as well.
The specific answer to your questions is useful if you're into linguistics, and probably not if you just want to learn how to speak, but there we go:
There is very little difference between the Spanish past progressive tense and the imperfect tense... with certain verbs, and in these cases, they both translate pretty much as past progressive tense in English.
But not all verbs are the same. You can't, for example, say "I am being 25 years old" even if you are 25 at the very moment, because in this case the progressive tense is not justified in English. Here you have to use the present tense ("I am 25"). In ten years time, you'll tell the story as "I was 25", and not "I was being 25" too. Unless there is an unexpected exception (and there might be one or two) that I can't think of right now, if you can't use the present progressive in English, there is no way you can do it in Spanish, so "Estoy teniendo 25 años" is as incorrect as in English. Wait ten years again, and then you'll have to tell the story with imperfect (never in preterit), and you won't be able to use the progressive. The reason for this is that, at that time, the action (being 25) is not finished yet; hence the imperfect.
Now take a verb where the progressive is fine in English, but not in (standard) Spanish: "I'm wearing a blue shirt" (you can't say "Estoy llevando..."). In ten years time, you'll tell this story as "I was wearing...", and in Spanish you'll use the imperfect again, but not the progressive. At that time, the action (wearing a shirt) is not finished; hence the imperfect.
Finally, take a verb where the progressive can be used in both languages, such as "it is raining" ("está lloviendo"). Here, for the first time, you are allowed to use the past progressive, but it doesn't make much of a difference, because this can also be expressed with the imperfect, since the action wasn't finished at the moment you are describing.
As you can see, imperfect is used if we don't want to focus on the action as a finished one, but as it was still happening. This is normally expressed with the past progressive in English, but you can only use the same tense in Spanish if you could have used the present progressive to describe that very moment exactly when it happened in the past. If you would have never used the present progressive then, you won't be able to use it now to talk about that moment in the past, but you still can use the imperfect.
I shouldn't have written all this; my mind is not working well today.
samdie said:
Marco said:
I got this question again. I got confused with the difference between "llovía" and "estaba lloviendo".Are they both translated to "it was raining" or "llovía" was translated to "it rained" and "estaba lloviendo" was translated to "it was raining"?
It's not so much a difference of meaning as of emphasis (or, if you prefer of denotation versus connotation). Using the progressive tense emphasizes that the action was in progress (as the name of the tense suggests). As an approximate analogy, consider the difference between "I was walking down the street and ran into George." versus "As I was walking down the street, I ran into George." They both mean pretty much the same thing but the addition of "as" emphasizes the fact that I was in the process of walking down the street while the first simply states that the two thing happened at (more or less) the same time.
Thank you, Samdie for your explanation.
Does English have imperfect tense? I think that English only has simple past tense and past progressive tense. Am I right?
That is why it is hard for English speakers to understand the difference between the imperfect tense and past progressive tense.
So it is also difficult to know when the imperfect tense needs to be used and past progressive tense as well.
Thank you,
Marco
Marco said:
I got this question again. I got confused with the difference between "llovía" and "estaba lloviendo".
Are they both translated to "it was raining" or "llovía" was translated to "it rained" and "estaba lloviendo" was translated to "it was raining"?
It's not so much a difference of meaning as of emphasis (or, if you prefer of denotation versus connotation). Using the progressive tense emphasizes that the action was in progress (as the name of the tense suggests). As an approximate analogy, consider the difference between "I was walking down the street and ran into George." versus "As I was walking down the street, I ran into George." They both mean pretty much the same thing but the addition of "as" emphasizes the fact that I was in the process of walking down the street while the first simply states that the two thing happened at (more or less) the same time.
lazarus1907 said:
Using James' examples:El partido se suspendió a causa de la lluvia = El partido se suspendió porque llovía"A causa de" is followed by the name of the cause; "porque" is followed by verb explaining the cause.
Hi lazarus,
I got this question again. I got confused with the difference between "llovía" and "estaba lloviendo".
Are they both translated to "it was raining" or "llovía" was translated to "it rained" and "estaba lloviendo" was translated to "it was raining"?
Thank you,
Marco
patch said:
Can we also say...? El partido se suspendió por la lluvia El partido se suspendió porque estaba lloviendo (similar to Lazarus's example)
Yes, you can. "Por" is far more common in spoken Spanish, at "estaba lloviendo" focuses on a particular moment of the raining, so it is not really that different from "llovía" here.
Can we also say...?
El partido se suspendió por la lluvia
El partido se suspendió porque estaba lloviendo (similar to Lazarus's example)
Cheers.
Porque just means because, as in "I like it because it's sweet" (Me gusta porque es dulce). A causa de means "because of" and is used when you want to ascribe the cause of something to an agent.
El partido se suspendió a causa de la lluvia = The game was called on account of rain
