defective verbs
It says in the rules that certain verbs are 'defective' in that they don't contain all the grammatical parts, and the example often given is 'abolir'. 'Yo abolo' does not, they say, exist.
But in what sense does it not exist? In the same way that 'yo ladro' doesn't exist, because only dogs bark, and they can't talk about barking?
If I was playing with my little girl and pretending to be a dog, couldn't I say 'yo ladro'. I think I could.
So if I was playing a boardgame where you pretend to be a historical figure and I was General Franco, could I not say 'yo abolo la libertad de la prensa'?
Words are invented every day. I saw a sign at work telling me to 'badge in'. That's new. It didn't previously exist. So how does 'yo abolo' not exist'
9 Answers
Thanks Fulano.
These verbs can be looked up in the RAE DPD and/or the RAE dictionary - and the conjugation page there will most probably give it away. So abolir isn't defective after all, soler is, etc.
Buena suerte.
Here is a link with more information: http://lenguajealdia.blogspot.com/2006/11/abolir-yo-abolo-o-yo-abuelo.html
Defective verbs also exist in English. One example I can think of is "to rain"; you can't say "I rain" or "they rain".
You can't say "I rain" because it literally does not make any sense. But "yo abolo" makes sense - it means something similar to "yo prohibo".
My dad used to say, "I rained on his parade," or, "If you don't straighten up, I'm going to rain on your parade."
When my daughter's hair is wet and dripping water on me, she might say, "I'm raining on you."
Just because you say that "I rain" or "I bark" are impossible occurrences, that doesn't mean that the form doesn't exist. These verbs are not defective.
"Must" is a defective verb in English. It has no infinitive, future or past. The forms do not exist [to must (wrong) I will must (wrong) I musted (wrong)].
I'm pretty sure that "soler" is a defective verb in Spanish, because it has no future or conditional forms. I have no grammatical authority on that. I would like for some knowledgeable person to enlighten us further.
I think "ocurrir," "llover," and "nevar" are also defective Spanish verbs, but I'm not sure about that. It may be that the first and second person forms exist, but are just rare, as they are in English. Again, I am hoping for more enlightenment on this.
You can't say "I rain" because it literally does not make any sense. But "yo abolo" makes sense - it means something similar to "yo prohibo".
I think it's difficult, if you're not used to speaking a language in which verbs have complex conjugations, to understand that some conjugations don't sound right. That is, I believe, the reason you can't say "yo abolo" - even to my non-native ears it sounds horrible ("abolir" is defective in Portuguese too, in the same way as in Spanish)
So I think in the case of "abolir", "yo abolo" sounds so strange that native speakers have historically avoided it, to the point that the word "abolo" ceased to be used in written or spoken form. That is my hypothesis anyway.
There are other verbs, however, which simply cannot have some conjugations. "Acontecer", for instance, is not something that people do, so you can only conjugate it in the third person (singular or plural), and only when the subject of the sentence is not a physical entity.
Here is a link with more information: http://lenguajealdia.blogspot.com/2006/11/abolir-yo-abolo-o-yo-abuelo.html
Defective verbs also exist in English. One example I can think of is "to rain"; you can't say "I rain" or "they rain".
You can't say "I rain" because it literally does not make any sense. But "yo abolo" makes sense - it means something similar to "yo prohibo".
In general, one should be very careful about assuming/expecting parallel constructions in different languages (it's better to think of them as "happy coincidences"). You can (to take your example) say "Está lloviendo" which has the same syntactic structure as the English. However, in Japanese (for example), you would have to say (translating back into English) "The rain is falling." There simply is not way to express the "It's ..." construction in Japanese.
Where there exist (syntactically) similar constructions in Spanish and English (and if they help you to learn/remember the phrase), be thankful but do not expect that the similarities will be present.
Here is a link with more information: http://lenguajealdia.blogspot.com/2006/11/abolir-yo-abolo-o-yo-abuelo.html
Defective verbs also exist in English. One example I can think of is "to rain"; you can't say "I rain" or "they rain".
You can't say "I rain" because it literally does not make any sense. But "yo abolo" makes sense - it means something similar to "yo prohibo".
Here is a link with more information: http://lenguajealdia.blogspot.com/2006/11/abolir-yo-abolo-o-yo-abuelo.html
Defective verbs also exist in English. One example I can think of is "to rain"; you can't say "I rain" or "they rain".
I think language many times has no sense.
In this case to say "yo abolo, tu aboles, él abole.." sounds horrible, so that it has been supressed. It is a question of cacophony.
If that is the case, then neither verb is defective. They are conjugated in all the tenses/moods/voices; it is just that certain forms are avoided.
As far as I know 'abolir? has to be used only with the participle: 'esa ley ha sido abolida, será abolida, fue abolida'? or in the pronominal form 'se abolieron todas las leyes'.
Seems like I read that before, but I cannot remember where. Could you provide a reference for this'
I think language many times has no sense.
In this case to say "yo abolo, tu aboles, él abole.." sounds horrible, so that it has been supressed. It is a question of cacophony.
As far as I know "abolir" has to be used only with the participle: "esa ley ha sido abolida, será abolida, fue abolida..." or in the pronominal form "se abolieron todas las leyes".
Following your example "yo ladro" seems absurd but it could be accepted in certain contexts.
