¿Se come chufas?

Question

Here is the sentence from La Sombra del Viento:

[Said the unemployed beggar:] --Según todos los indicios, los americanos nos van a invadir el día menos pensado y a Franco le pondrán un puesto de chufas en Melilla. Y yo recuperaré el puesto, la reputación y la honra perdida.

English version: All intelligence points toward the Americans invading us any day now and setting Franco up with a peanut stand down in Melilla. Then my position . . .

The dictionary says that chufa is a tiger nut (means nothing to me), which Wikipedia says is a kind of (edible) sedge.

Is chufa actually used to mean peanut, or is it just translated as "peanut stand" so that the idiom would make sense'

Answer 1

Natasha said:

OK, I must be really dense, but it looks to me like all your sentences have a grammatical subject. Is the distinction based on whether the subject (object before we turned the sentence around) is a person (persons)?

The impersonal sentences have no subject, and you cannot add one either:

Se saluda al invitado.
Se saluda a los invitados.

"Al invitado / los invitados" is the direct object, which of course, doesn't agree with the verb. The verb is in third person singular, but you cannot use the personal pronoun for the third person singular (or any other):

ÿl/ella se saluda (Wrong!)

Answer 2

OK, I must be really dense, but it looks to me like all your sentences have a grammatical subject. Is the distinction based on whether the subject (object before we turned the sentence around) is a person (persons)?

lazarus1907 said:

James Santiago said:

Lazarus, you missed your calling as a politician! That's double-speak worthy of 1984. hehe

Please, call me anything but politician. It is very insulting.Let me explain what I meantassive reflexive constructions have a grammatical subject:La gente visita la Estatua de la Libertad - Se visita la Estatua de la Libertad.La gente cocina tortas - Se cocinan tortas.That's why the verb agrees with it. Impersonal sentences, on the other hand, have no subject, and they are always in 3rd person:La gente recibe al embajador - Se recibe al embajadorLa gente recibe a los embajadores - Se recibe a los embajadoresThe RAE recommends to keep one structure for objects and the other for people (for a good reason, believe me), but native speakers just speak, and not everyone reads the RAE manuals before opening their mouth, so many people use the impersonal construction in either situation:Se cocina tortas.Se recibe a los embajadores.The first sentence is never used in Spain (to me it sounds impossible), but it is common in Mexico, for example. In any case, impersonal sentences are always singular and have no subject-verb agreement (as there is no subject, hehe), and as soon as you see the verb in plural, it must be passive reflexive.

>

Answer 3

James Santiago said:

Lazarus, you missed your calling as a politician! That's double-speak worthy of 1984. hehe

Please, call me anything but politician. It is very insulting.

Let me explain what I meant:

Passive reflexive constructions have a grammatical subject:

La gente visita la Estatua de la Libertad - Se visita la Estatua de la Libertad.
La gente cocina tortas - Se cocinan tortas.

That's why the verb agrees with it. Impersonal sentences, on the other hand, have no subject, and they are always in 3rd person:

La gente recibe al embajador - Se recibe al embajador
La gente recibe a los embajadores - Se recibe a los embajadores

The RAE recommends to keep one structure for objects and the other for people (for a good reason, believe me), but native speakers just speak, and not everyone reads the RAE manuals before opening their mouth, so many people use the impersonal construction in either situation:

Se cocina tortas.
Se recibe a los embajadores.

The first sentence is never used in Spain (to me it sounds impossible), but it is common in Mexico, for example. In any case, impersonal sentences are always singular and have no subject-verb agreement (as there is no subject, hehe), and as soon as you see the verb in plural, it must be passive reflexive.

Answer 4

So in other words if I want to say, "Voters are registered here," the following would be ambiguous:

Se inscriben votantes aquí

So instead we say:

Se inscribe a votantes aquí.

Did I get it?

lazarus1907 said:

Natasha said:

Look at the article Lazarus linked to before:http://www.mepsyd.es/redele/revista3/lidia_lozano.shtmlI may have misunderstood it, but look at the example about Se vende libros / Se venden libros.

I know every word of that article as though I had written it myself. What they are saying is that swapping impersonal and passive reflexive structures (in singular only) it has become quite widespread, but the RAE advices to use passive reflexive constructions with objects only, to avoid misunderstandings. Historically, the passive reflexive construction was the only one used, but sentences were ambiguous when referred to people, so the impersonal ones were introduced.

>

Answer 5

This is great! Let me try. There is a clear distinction between politicians and scoundrels, although sometimes it is difficult to tell . . .

James Santiago said:

N:If you have time could you give one example of each type mentioned below? (The grammar is getting over my head, help!)You are not alone.L:There are clear distinction between them, even though sometimes it is difficult to tell.Lazarus, you missed your calling as a politician! That's double-speak worthy of 1984. hehe

>

Answer 6

Natasha said:

Look at the article Lazarus linked to before:

http://www.mepsyd.es/redele/revista3/lidia_lozano.shtml

I may have misunderstood it, but look at the example about Se vende libros / Se venden libros.

I know every word of that article as though I had written it myself. What they are saying is that swapping impersonal and passive reflexive structures (in singular only) it has become quite widespread, but the RAE advices to use passive reflexive constructions with objects only, to avoid misunderstandings. Historically, the passive reflexive construction was the only one used, but sentences were ambiguous when referred to people, so the impersonal ones were introduced.

Answer 7

N:
If you have time could you give one example of each type mentioned below? (The grammar is getting over my head, help!)

You are not alone.

L:
There are clear distinction between them, even though sometimes it is difficult to tell.

Lazarus, you missed your calling as a politician! That's double-speak worthy of 1984. hehe

Answer 8

OK, so I should have written "Se comen chufas," as James said.

If you have time could you give one example of each type mentioned below? (The grammar is getting over my head, help!)

lazarus1907 said:

James Santiago said:

I was attempting to write "se impersonal," not "se pasivo,"I'm not aware of any distinction between them. As far as I know, this use of se requires the verb to agree with the noun in number. Se comen los tacos en California....

There are clear distinction between them, even though sometimes it is difficult to tell. For example, your example is clearly passive reflexive, since impersonal constructions are ALWAYS in singular (there is no grammatical subject).Passive reflexive constructions are used only with transitive verbs, and Ideally, only with objects. Impersonal constructions are, ideally, with transitive verbs with people as direct objects, and intransitive verbs, but all of them in third person singular only.

>

Answer 9

Look at the article Lazarus linked to before:

http://www.mepsyd.es/redele/revista3/lidia_lozano.shtml

I may have misunderstood it, but look at the example about Se vende libros / Se venden libros.

James Santiago said:

I was attempting to write "se impersonal," not "se pasivo,"I'm not aware of any distinction between them. As far as I know, this use of se requires the verb to agree with the noun in number.Se comen los tacos en California.Tacos are eaten...One eats tacos...People eat tacos...They eat tacos......

>

Answer 10

James Santiago said:

I was attempting to write "se impersonal," not "se pasivo," I'm not aware of any distinction between them. As far as I know, this use of se requires the verb to agree with the noun in number. Se comen los tacos en California....

There are clear distinction between them, even though sometimes it is difficult to tell. For example, your example is clearly passive reflexive, since impersonal constructions are ALWAYS in singular (there is no grammatical subject).

Passive reflexive constructions are used only with transitive verbs, and Ideally, only with objects. Impersonal constructions are, ideally, with transitive verbs with people as direct objects, and intransitive verbs, but all of them in third person singular only.

Answer 11

I was attempting to write "se impersonal," not "se pasivo,"

I'm not aware of any distinction between them. As far as I know, this use of se requires the verb to agree with the noun in number.

Se comen los tacos en California.
Tacos are eaten...
One eats tacos...
People eat tacos...
They eat tacos...
...

Answer 12

I was attempting to write "se impersonal," not "se pasivo," but it could be just plain wrong. Please let me know . . .

James Santiago said:

Buy the weigh, Your title should be "Se comen chufas," no?

Also, I think your "any day now" would be "cualquier día de estos."

>

Answer 13

I have an unfair unadvantage, in that I read the rest of the conversation. Make a long story short, the protagonist (Daniel) has been thrown out on his ear, by the side of the beggar (in whose face he previously slammed the door). So there´s a lot of irony in the picture . . . here's more of their conversation:

Me ofreció su mano y la estreché.
--Fermín Romero de Torres, cesante. Mucho gusto de conocerle.
--Daniel Sempere, tonto de remate. El gusto es mío.
--No se venda barato, que en noches así todo se ve peor de lo que es. Ahí donde me ve, yo soy un optimista nato. No me cabe la menor duda de que el régimen tiene los días contados. Según todos los indicios . . .

James Santiago said:

I think for the first part, you could also say, "All indications are . . ."

Remember that register plays an important role in translation. "All indications are" has a fairly high register (meaning that it sounds fancy), and I THINK that "Según todos los indicios" isn't quite as high in register. The speaker is an unemployed beggar, and while he could still be highly educated and just unlucky, my feeling is that he is speaking in a somewhat lower register than what your translation indicates.

For what it's worth.

>

Answer 14

Buy the weigh,
Your title should be "Se comen chufas," no?

Also, I think your "any day now" would be "cualquier día de estos."

Answer 15

I think for the first part, you could also say, "All indications are . . ."

Remember that register plays an important role in translation. "All indications are" has a fairly high register (meaning that it sounds fancy), and I THINK that "Según todos los indicios" isn't quite as high in register. The speaker is an unemployed beggar, and while he could still be highly educated and just unlucky, my feeling is that he is speaking in a somewhat lower register than what your translation indicates.

For what it's worth.