Our last two lessons focused on how to use conjunctions (conjunctive phrases to be exact) to identify when we have to use the subjunctive. The first lesson in the series focused on conjunctions of time, and the second one on conjunctions of provision. Now we'll focus on conjunctions of condition.
These types of conjunctions will always be followed by the subjunctive provided one condition: that you are talking about hypothetical, or unknown circumstances at the moment. The conjunctions that are used to express condition in Spanish are a pesar de que, como, aunque, según, and donde. Let's start with the examples.
A pesar de que means "despite that," "even though" or "in spite of." Study the following example. Our friend Crista is talking about a hypothetical situation (that a place might be five or ten km away):
A pesar de que pueda estar un lugar a cinco o diez kilómetros,
Even though a place might be five or ten kilometers away,
lo medimos dependiendo del tiempo que tarde uno en llegar allí.
we measure it depending upon the time it takes someone to get there.
Captions 53-54, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana - Crista Pérez
Play Caption
That doesn't mean that you can't use indicative after a pesar de que. If, like our friend Beatriz, you are talking about a fact (the fact that there are variations), you use a verb in indicative (tenemos) and not subjunctive (tengamos) after a pesar de que:
La cultura es una a pesar de que tenemos variaciones.
Culture is one in spite of the fact that we have variations.
Caption 39, Beatriz Noguera - Exposición de Arte
Play Caption
So, the difference between la cultura es una a pesar de que tenemos variaciones (culture is one in spite of the fact that we have variations) and la cultura es una a pesar de que tengamos variaciones (Culture is one in spite of the fact that we might have variations) is very subtle.
Let's continue. Aunque means "although" or "even if":
Estamos aquí a treinta y nueve grados.
We're here at thirty-nine degrees.
A la sombra. -Aunque estemos a la sombra.
In the shade. -Although we're in the shade.
Captions 98-99, Burgos - Caminando
Play Caption
A more exact translation of aunque estemos a la sombra is, in fact, "although we may be in the shade," but since the person speaking is actually in the shade at the moment using "we're" makes more sense in English. In Spanish using the subjunctive allows to make a very subtle distinction between estemos (we may be) and the indicative estamos (we are): the indicative aunque estamos can only be used when the person speaking is presently and actually in the shade, while using the subjunctive aunque estemos makes the whole assertion a little more vague and general (we could just be talking about being in the shade as an hypothesis). They're slightly different expressions but neither is incorrect.
Como (as, in any way, whatever), según (as, in any way, depending) and donde (where, wherever) are less commonly used conjunctions. It's important to note that como and donde must be written without tilde (the orthographical accent).
Como and según mean the same thing, are used in the same way and are thus interchangeable. Como is perhaps more common and it's used in two phrases that you want to learn: como quieras (as you want) and como sea (however it might be, translations vary):
Sabe bien, sabe mal, como sea pero es tan real
It tastes good, it tastes bad, however it might be, but it's so real
Caption 11, Enrique Iglesias - Escapar
Play Caption
Como quieras ¿eh?
Whatever you want, right?
Caption 52, Animales en familia - Un día en Bioparc: Microchip para Nacahué
Play Caption
Want to see examples of the use of como without subjunctive? It's very simple: whenever you are not talking about hypothetical situations you must use the indicative:
Tómame como soy
Take me as I am
Caption 9, Shakira - Gitana
Play Caption
Yo te trato como quiero porque para eso sos mi hija.
I treat you how I want because for that [reason], you are my daughter.
Caption 2, Muñeca Brava - 2 Venganza
Play Caption
Would you like to know how the previous example would translate if you use the subjunctive instead? For the first example there's a big difference:
Tómame como sea
Take me in any way
Not so much for the second one:
Yo te trato como quiera porque para eso sos mi hija.
I treat you how I want because for that [reason], you are my daughter.
Let's see examples for según meaning "as," "depending on," or "in any way," which is less common:
Puedes elegir hacerlo según quieras
You can choose to do it in any way you want
Finally, an example of donde meaning "wherever." Plus another example of cuando(whenever), a conjunction of time:
Esa me la vas a pagar.
You are going to pay me for that.
Cuando quieras y en donde quieras, princesa.
Whenever you want and wherever you want, princess.
Captions 35-36, Muñeca Brava - 36 La pesquisa
Play Caption
The Spanish verbs tener (to have), haber (especially the impersonal verb form hay), ser and estar (both "to be") can sometimes be interchanged or used in similar ways to express the same idea. Recently, one of our subscribers asked us to tackle the subject. Since these verbs are indeed among the list of the most useful, versatile, and difficult verbs in the Spanish lexicon, we thought... What are we waiting for?!
In Spanish we use hay, the impersonal form of the verb haber (to have) to express a necessity. The formula is always hay que:
Es decir, hay que compartir.
I mean, it's necessary to share.
Caption 20, 75 minutos - Gangas para ricos
Play Caption
However, it's also possible to use the verbs tener (to have) or ser (to be) to express the same idea. Here's what the phrases would look like:
With tener: Es decir, se tiene que compartir.
With ser (you can't use estar): Es decir, es necesario compartir.
Is there a difference between them? Not really. OK, maybe a very subtle one, practically inexistent: it could be argued that the level of urgency in which the necessity is expressed is different for each sentence. Hay que is more pressing, se tiene is a little less, and es necesario is even lesser. It's really a negligible and debatable difference, so feel free to use them indistinctly.
Another case. We can use hay to express the concept of "there are/there is."
Creo que hay muchas personas haciendo "circuit bending"
I believe that there are many people doing circuit bending
Caption 70, Lo que no sabías - Arte electrónico
Play Caption
Can we use the other verbs to express the same idea? Well, this is a tricky matter. Of course, the following sentences are all possible in Spanish:
With tener:
Creo que tenemos muchas personas haciendo "circuit bending" / I believe we have a lot of people doing circuit bending.
With estar:
Creo que están muchas personas haciendo "circuit bending" / I believe a lot of people are doing circuit bending.
In fact, the usual order would be: Creo que muchas personas están haciendo "circuit bending."
With ser:
Creo que son muchas personas haciendo "circuit bending" / I believe they are many, the people doing circuit bending.
Take note that saying Creo que muchas personas son haciendo circuit bending is totally incorrect.
You can see that the first sentence using tener (to have) is very similar to the example using hay even though they are not exactly the same. The second example using estar is, however, the closer to the original one that uses hay. The only difference is they employ different verbs, haber (to have) and estar (to be). The third one is the really tricky one, because the subtle difference between the use of ser and estar (both "to be") gets lost in English. Maybe, in this particular context, you could use son muchas personas instead of hay muchas personas.
Just remember that in Spanish the use of the verb ser (to be) implies a more fundamental situation, while the use of estar implies a more temporal one, one that might change, one that depends on external factors like time and space. Ser is more about the essence of things and situations. Its meaning is broad and less determined by context. Therefore, using ser results in a shift of the sentence's focus from the action of doing circuit bending to the nature or state of being many, which is something we tried to mimic in our translation. In fact, that's the reason why the sentence only works using exactly that word order; so the verb son (ser/to be) modifies muchas personas. But you can't use ser to modify the verb haciendo, that is, to talk about an action that may be happening now, but may or may not happen tomorrow. For that you must use the verb están (estar/to be): están haciendo. Let's put it with apples:
Hay manzanas en la mesa / There are apples on the table.
Tenemos manzanas en la mesa / We have apples on the table.
Las manzanas están en la mesa / The apples are on the table.
Las manzanas son en la mesa /
This last example can't be used instead of any of the previous ones. In fact, it can't really be used at all, unless you are taking part in some kind of philosophical discussion. Saying this in Spanish would mean something like "The apples exists on the table."
Let's now see an example where you can use ser but not estar:
Pero siempre vamos a encontrar que hay una gran similitud.
But we are always going to find that there is a great similarity.
Caption 40, Beatriz Noguera - Exposición de Arte
Play Caption
The following sentences are not exactly the same; however, in some contexts they may be used to express the same idea, with subtle differences. Please note that in the following examples we have added possible contexts in parentheses.
With tener:
Pero siempre vamos a encontrar que tenemos una gran similitud (entre chabacanos y duraznos) / But we are always going to find that we have a great similarity (between apricots and peaches).
The sentence may mean something different in a different context, though. For example:
Tenemos una gran similitud (entre nosotros) / We have a great similarity (between each other).
With ser:
Pero siempre vamos a encontrar que es una gran similitud (la que existe entre chabacanos y duraznos) / But we are always going to find that there is a great similarity (that exists between apricots and peaches).
Notice how the verb ser here modifies similitud (the similarity is fundamentally great), and we need to use existe (to exist)—we could also use hay (there are)—in a complicated circunloquio (circumlocution) so we can convey the idea of the first example. You can't ever say something like es una gran similitud entre chabacanos y duraznos.
With estar:
It's not possible to use the verb estar (to be) to express this idea. You can't ever say something like está una gran similitud entre chabacanos y duraznos. This is wrong because you use estar to express non intrinsic situations, and when we talk about the similarity of apricots and peaches we are necessarily comparing their fundamental way of being, their intrinsic nature, what makes them what they are and not, let's say, bananas and apples.
Ok. Keeping all this in mind, let's put you to the test: Are the following sentences possible in Spanish? If they are, do they mean the same thing?
Los gemelos son igualitos.
Los gemelos están igualitos.
The answer is yes, both sentences are possible in Spanish. What's the difference between them, then?
Well, the first sentence is either talking about the fundamental similarity that exists between twins, any twins in general (Twins are identical), or it's talking about a particular couple of twins, which we refer to as "the twins," and the idea would translate as "The twins are identical." Using ser here stresses the idea that they are identical because they are identical in something that is intrinsic to them, not because they are wearing the same outfit or have the same haircut, for example. On the contrary, the second sentence, using estar, can't be used to talk about any twins in general. It can only be used to refer to a certain couple of twins. The translation is then, "The twins are identical."
By the way, fun fact: the diminutive igualito (from igual = same) paradoxically functions as a kind of augmentative: igualito means "very same," "identical."
Aplicarle la palabra "solidario" a las finanzas tiene que ver con que todo el mundo pueda acceder a ese... elemento de intermediación que es el dinero para poder hacer lo que de verdad importa ¿no?
Applying the word "solidarity" to finance has to do with everybody being able to access that... element of intermediation, which is money, to be able to do what's really important, no?
Captions 51-54, De consumidor a persona - Short Film - Part 6
Play Caption
There are some complicated thoughts being expressed in this short film about the social consequences of consumerism. The number of verbs in the above quote alone could make your head spin. But here we want to home in on just two of those verbs, joined together in a common phrase: tener que ver.
In Spanish, tiene que ver con means, basically, "has to do with" or "got to do with" in English. But, of course, ver means "to see" and not "to do" (that's hacer). That's just the way it is.
En este cuadro, represento a Bachué, que tiene que ver con la cultura muisca de las montañas en Colombia.
In this painting, I represent Bachué, who has to do with the Muiscan culture from the mountains in Colombia.
Captions 16-17, Beatriz Noguera - Exposición de Arte
Play Caption
¿Y eso qué tiene que ver?
What's that got to do with it? [Or, more simply:] So what?
No tiene nada que ver.
It's got nothing to do with it.
One of the points that comes across loud and clear in the film De consumidor a person is that a lot of social issues have to do with $money$ (el dinero). Eso es la verdad. ("That's the truth.")
French
German
Italian
Chinese
English
English 
Français
Deutsch
Español
Italiano
Português
