# A Spanish language question... **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 31, 2004, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481 "2004-08-31T22:28:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2004, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/1 "2004-08-31T22:28:59Z")
I started my new job at the local Welfare office yesterday. The area has a large Hispanic population, so all of the informational posters in the lobby are either bilingual or have versions in Spanish. Two different posters deal with food stamps. One is about emergency food stamps. The English version’s “headline” is “Food Stamps Now!” The Spanish version reads “Cupones De Alimentos ¡Ahora!” The other poster reads, in English, “Using Food Stamps”. In Spanish, “Como usar(?..I’m going from memory) sus cupones para alimentos”. My question is why the difference in the “cupones…alimentos” phrases? Are they exact equivalents or is this a very subtle difference necessitated by the nature of the different phrases around them? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2004, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/2 "2004-08-31T22:32:20Z")
Dammit…¡Ahora! I keep forgetting that HTML entities don’t work here… ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2004, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/3 "2004-08-31T23:09:30Z")
There is a subtle distinction in meaning. However, it’s not clear from the two constructions that it is absolutely necessary in either case to use one over the other. “de” here simply means “for,” basically indicating a simple adjective modifying the noun. “para” has a somewhat stronger sense of indicating what something is used for, that is, what its purpose is. “Una taza para cafe” = a cup for coffee = a coffee cup. One could translate “food coupons” as either “cupones de alimentos” or “cupones para alimentos.” The latter possibly indicates more strongly “coupons to be used for food” than simply “coupons for food.” “Para” _might_ be favored in the second sentence because it is a more active construction. It sort of conveys more a sense of “How to use your coupons for the purpose of buying food.” However, I don’t think the use of “de” here would be incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2004, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/4 "2004-08-31T23:14:31Z")
Thank you! I’m seriously thinking of trying to learn Spanish. It would be a HUGE plus in this job (regular shifts as receptionist dealing with a goodly proportion of exclusive Españaphones being part of it). ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/5 "2004-09-01T02:44:36Z")
I saw a Bank of America billboard with a Hispanic family, and a caption that read, “Para usted y por usted.” What does that mean exactly? ---
**Author:** ![Washoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ecae2f/32.png) [@Washoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Washoe)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/6 "2004-09-01T02:59:06Z")
I’ve seen the same billboard. It involves subtle distinctions between the definitions of the words por and para. Por and para both mean ‘for’. But por also has the additional meaning of ‘for’ in the sense of ‘because of’. English also used to use the word ‘for’ in this manner: “oh beautiful, _for_ spacious skies, \*for \* amber waves of grain”. So the billboard essentially means ‘for you and because of you’. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/7 "2004-09-01T05:03:00Z")
> [@sturmhauke](#): > > I saw a Bank of America billboard with a Hispanic family, and a caption that read, “Para usted y por usted.” What does that mean exactly? The distinctions between “por” an “para” can be a major headache for an English speaker learning Spanish. To elaborate on **Washoe’s** post a little, among the several meanings of the two words, the following ones best apply here: para - “to indicate what something is used for or intended for” por - “to express _in behalf of, in favor of, for the sake of_” So the connotation is “Our bank is intended for your use, and will work on your behalf.” ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/8 "2004-09-01T06:04:51Z")
I remember asking my Spanish teacher in high school about the difference between por and para, but I never got a very clear answer. Thank you for clearing up a decade of confusion. ---
**Author:** ![Doobieous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Doobieous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doobieous)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/9 "2004-09-01T11:46:33Z")
A very close but slightly different vibe to what Colibri said. > [@jayjay](#): > > Two different posters deal with food stamps. One is about emergency food stamps. The English version’s “headline” is “Food Stamps Now!” The Spanish version reads “Cupones De Alimentos ¡Ahora!” Rather simply: Food stamps now! Because nouns cannot become adjectives in Spanish as they do in English (by placing them in front of another noun), “de” is used. > [@](#): > > The other poster reads, in English, “Using Food Stamps”. In Spanish, “Como usar(?..I’m going from memory) sus cupones para alimentos”. > > My question is why the difference in the “cupones…alimentos” phrases? Are they exact equivalents or is this a very subtle difference necessitated by the nature of the different phrases around them? In the second case the meaning I would apply is simply “How to use your coupons for food” meaning “how to use your coupons to get food”, rather than just “food stamps”. As Colibri is saying there’s a subtle distinction here, but i think what is meant is being implied “how to use your stamps in order to get food” as “para” often means “in order to…” They could have very easily have used “cupones de alimentos” as well. Although thinking about it, i think a meaning that would occur if they wrote “Como usar sus cupones de alimentos” would creat “how to use food stamps” which would imply telling directions rather than telling someone how to get the food _using_ the food stamps. Ugh i’ll stop i’m just going to confuse things ;). ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/10 "2004-09-01T12:43:15Z")
You didn’t confuse things, Doobieous. You clarified. And you’re right. Spanish does not share the quasi-agglutinative nature of English. In English, it’s almost like “Food Stamps” is one word, but in Spanish, they are strictly two separate words that simply follow the grammatical syntax of whatever sentence uses them. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/11 "2004-09-01T15:52:02Z")
> [@sturmhauke](#): > > I remember asking my Spanish teacher in high school about the difference between por and para, but I never got a very clear answer. Thank you for clearing up a decade of confusion. Actually, it’s a lot more complicated than that. My explanation was related to just that particular phrase. My grammar book gives no fewer than 11 different examples for when to use _por_, and 6 for _para_. However, most of them boil down to the fact that _por_ tends to be used for meanings related to “because” (motive), while _para_ means “in order to” (purpose). There are also some specialized uses of each. I don’t disagree with **Doobieous’s** further comments. I was trying to keep it as simple as possible. There are some additional possible nuances to the second phrase, as well as some ambiguity. I would also mention, with regard to my first post, that “de” and “para” cannot necessarily be substituted for one another in other cases. _Una taza para cafe_ = a cup used for coffee = a coffee cup _Una taza de cafe_ = a cup of coffee ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/12 "2004-09-01T19:01:11Z")
In an episode of _Emergency!,_ the episode begins with the firemen responding to an alarm–a house explosion. The address they arrive at, however, is undamaged. There is an aged caretaker who only speaks Spanish, so Marco Lopez talks to him. (The following has no Spanish diacriticals because the computer I’m using has no access to them) Marco: _Que hubo explosion dentro de la casa?_ Caretaker: _No…Son policias?_ Marco: \*No, somos bomberos \*[firemen]. _Que hubo explosion?_ Caretaker: _Donde se cambiaron._ (lapsing into English) And you…rent? Marco: No, the people who moved out, where…(returning to Spanish)_Pero adonde se fueron los gentes que se cambiaron?_ Caretaker: _Orange Grove, norte de Norton._ Marco: _Muchas gracias._ The conversation reveals that the people who lived there had moved out (and obviously gave the fire department the wrong address). But my question is the expression _Que hubo._ Does that mean “where was there” or “was there” or what? ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/13 "2004-09-01T19:58:58Z")
To be honest, I’ve only ever heard “que hubo” used in a single, certain context: The President of Mexico said it to me on Christmas morning of 2001 as he shook my hand outside his ranch. Okay, enough name dropping. 🙂 In the context mentioned above, it’s rushed together – “que-bo” kind of. It’s like, “what’s going on” or “how’s it going.” Literally translated, it’d mean “what was.” So what you transcribe from the show makes no sense to me, and I’ve never seen or read it anywhere. Granted my experience is Mexican Spanish as well as the low-class Spanish that’s prevenlent on Telemundo et al in the USA. ---
**Author:** ![Washoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ecae2f/32.png) [@Washoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Washoe)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/14 "2004-09-01T21:54:10Z")
This is an advanced grammatical construction in Spanish, and one that is usually not encountered until the fourth semester of college Spanish. This is going to get a bit complicated, so bear with me. The word _haber_ (to have) has two uses. It is used primarily as an auxiliary verb to form perfect (action completed) tenses, and is used in conjunction with the past participle of the action verb: _he comido_, _has comido_, _ha comido_—I have eaten, you have eaten, he/she/it has eaten, etc. This is covered in the second semester of college Spanish. It also has a second meaning, which is to indicate the concept of there is/there are. When used in this sense, it occurs only in the third-person singular. It is conjugated exactly as the third-person singular of the auxiliary form of _haber_, except that its present indicative form is _hay_ instead of _ha_. This is where the word _hay_ is actually derived from. Most beginning Spanish students are familiar with the word _hay_ when used to indicate the concept of there is/there are, but they don’t realize that it is actually a conjugation of the verb _haber_. _Que hubo_, therefore, translates to “what was there/what were there”, and the sentence seems to mean “there was an explosion in the house”? But it seems to me to be a very strange grammatical construction. ‘_Que hubo_’ by itself literally means ‘what was there’ or ‘what were there’, but is actually a colloquialism meaning ‘how are things’? The above was paraphrased from chapter 30 of _A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish_, by Butt and Benjamin. If you really, really, really want to understand Spanish grammar, get a copy of this reference. It is the most thorough exposition of the subject I have ever encountered. If you read this entire book, memorized it, and understood it, you would essentially know everything there is to know about Spanish grammar. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/15 "2004-09-01T22:51:17Z")
I got the same sense of meaning for _Que hubo_ as **Balthisar** and **Washsoe** , but it seemed such an odd/unusual expression in this context that I thought I’d wait until someone else volunteered to explain it. The Spanish in that conversation has some other oddities, such as the use of _cambiarse_ to express moving to another house, which would normally be _trasladarse_, _traspasar_, or _mudarse_. Unless it’s a colloquial use in Mexican Spanish, it seems to me to be wrong here. And _se fueron los gente que se cambiaron_ is also wrong. _La gente_ (the people) is not only feminine, it is also normally takes a singular verb. It should be _se fue la gente que se cambió (se trasladó)_. Marco Lopez and the caretaker both seem to speak a decidedly odd dialect of Spanish. Or maybe it’s just bad scriptwriting. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/16 "2004-09-02T12:27:25Z")
In Mexican Spanish, I’ve only heard used _cambiarse_, _mudarse_, and yes, simply _moverse_ used to indicate moving house. But as above, I can’t speak with only real authority; I can only share my experience. On a movie or tv show, you’d at least think the guy speaking Spanish would speak up and say it ain’t correct, well, unless he’s lost his language. On the other hand, given all the gonna, wanna, and bad pluralz we get in English now, maybe no one knows the difference anymore. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/17 "2004-09-02T19:08:22Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > I got the same sense of meaning for _Que hubo_ as **Balthisar** and **Washsoe** , but it seemed such an odd/unusual expression in this context that I thought I’d wait until someone else volunteered to explain it. > > The Spanish in that conversation has some other oddities, such as the use of _cambiarse_ to express moving to another house, which would normally be _trasladarse_, _traspasar_, or _mudarse_. Unless it’s a colloquial use in Mexican Spanish, it seems to me to be wrong here. > > And _se fueron los gente que se cambiaron_ is also wrong. _La gente_ (the people) is not only feminine, it is also normally takes a singular verb. It should be _se fue la gente que se cambió (se trasladó)_. > > Marco Lopez and the caretaker both seem to speak a decidedly odd dialect of Spanish. Or maybe it’s just bad scriptwriting. FWIW, I said _los gentes,_ not _los gente_–plural article and noun and thus properly conjugating _ir_ in the third-person plural. Your point about other verbs to express this, however, is well taken; my college textbook mentions only _mudarse._ ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/18 "2004-09-02T19:10:27Z")
Excuse me–_irse._ :o ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/19 "2004-09-02T19:38:42Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > FWIW, I said _los gentes,_ not _los gente_–plural article and noun and thus properly conjugating _ir_ in the third-person plural. Your point about other verbs to express this, however, is well taken; my college textbook mentions only _mudarse._ The lack of the “s” was just a typo in my reply. My point was not just that _gente_ takes a singular verb, it was that it’s not normally used in the plural at all - it would almost always be just _la gente_, not _las gentes_ (and as I said, it’s feminine, so it would not take _los_ in any case). My dictionary give a few examples of the use of _gentes_ in some expressions, but if you are just talking about people, it’s singular. Unlike English, Spanish treats “people” as being a singular noun; “people is,” rather than “people are.” ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481/20 "2004-09-02T20:00:19Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > The lack of the “s” was just a typo in my reply. My point was not just that _gente_ takes a singular verb, it was that it’s not normally used in the plural at all - it would almost always be just _la gente_, not _las gentes_ (and as I said, it’s feminine, so it would not take _los_ in any case). My dictionary give a few examples of the use of _gentes_ in some expressions, but if you are just talking about people, it’s singular. Unlike English, Spanish treats “people” as being a singular noun; “people is,” rather than “people are.” So can you give me the proper construction of the conversation between Marco and the caretaker? 🙂 [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-spanish-language-question/262481.md?page=2)