When Obama’s campaign slogan is translated into Spanish, why is it translated as “Yes, it can be done” rather than “Yes, we can”? And while I’m at it, why do businesses advertise “Se habla español” (Spanish is spoken) rather than “Hablamos español” (We speak Spanish)? Is it a colloquialism, or maybe an idiom?
It’s idiomatic – Spanish speakers have several different constructions which will communicate “Spanish spoken here”. “Se habla español” became the stock expression for no particularly logical reason … as human language is wont to do.
Is it the case in general, then, that a third person plural slogan tends to come out as a passive third person? And is it just slogans, or is it applied in ordinary speech?
During WC 2006 the Ecuadoreans would chant “si se puede” during their games (they did reach the second round). I’m guessing it also just sounds better than the alternative, at least in terms of chants.
FWIW, there are many bumper stickers around here that say “Obamanos!” I think it’s pretty cool (Vamanos means, “let’s go”).
A Spanish-speaking Doper can give you better perspective than I can, but I will take a crack at it.
Don’t think of constructions using “se” strictly as passives. Very often (perhaps even “more often” from a frequency-of-use standpoint) you’re seeing instead use of what’s called the “impersonal se”:
See above. The “impersonal se” seems to be widely used in speech.
I was taught in Spanish class that “vamanos” wasn’t a real word. “Let’s go” is “vamos”. Whether “vamanos” is really used by Spanish speakers or is only used by gringos and Speedy Gonzales, I am unsure.
FWIW,
Rob
Sone quick & dirty Googling revealed that some Spannish speakers believe vámonos to be perfectly correct Spanish – part of the conjugation for irse (to leave), though, not ir (to go). Some others don’t seem to use vámonos at all. Maybe the usage for this word varies by country/dialect.
The slogan is in the impersonal. It’s a form that’s quite common in Spanish in places where English has to resort to the passive form. Recipe books for example can use either the imperative (common in cookbooks) or the impersonal (science recipes, which in English go in the passive form).
Vámonos and vamos are both perfectly correct Spanish. Vámanos isn’t.
Vámonos would indicate “let’s leave;” vamos would be “let’s go,” both in the moving sense and in the sense of getting a move on.
I do not agree that the examples cited by bordelond are passive voice but rather impersonal. But Spanish tends to use the “se” passive/impersonal rather abusively.
“Se habla inglés”, “English is spoken”, (Where? In England?) is bad enough but “se murió” (he died) make no sense. “Murió” is correct. He died. It is not reflexive, it is not passive, it is not impersonal. He died.
You need a better Spanish teacher. Which does not surprise me because I have met quite a few Spanish teachers in America who could barely speak a few words of Spanish.
Not only is “vámonos” perfectly good Spanish for “let’s go” but I have always used “let’s vámonos” even in English.
Vamos is “we go”.
Nos vamos is “we are leaving”.
Vámosnos (shortened to vámonos) is “let’s leave” in most of the Spanish-speaking world just by usage because originally, in old Spanish, it was the same as “nos vamos” and in Asturias they retain that construction to this day.
Again, for “Se Habla Espanol” the closest literal translation into English uses the passive voice, but the feeling in Spanish is much less passive/formal/beauracratic. I think ‘Hablamos Espanol’ would seem weird to native speakers, like saying “Let’s speak Spanish together” on a sign.
But for Poder/Poderse, I think it’s a little less clear-cut. In fact, I have seen “Juntos Podemos” signs (I think for Deval Patrick for Massachusetts Governor but not sure); probably nearly as many as “Se puede” signs for various campaigns.
Sailor, where did the examples “Se habla inglés” and “se murió” come from? I didn’t see them in my link.
They’re normal constructions in Spanish, borderlond.
“Se habla (insertlanguagehere)” is the normal construction for “(language) spoken.” To answer sailor, the place where it’s spoken is the one where you see the sign.
“Se murió” means “he died.” The “se” is reflexive and emphatic: you’d say that someone “se murió,” you’d say a plant “murió.” If it was a pet and you cared about it, you’d use “se murió,” if you couldn’t wait to get rid of the fleafarm in question you’d say “murió.”
As a spanish speaker i was surprised by that.
IMHO “Yes we can” should have been translated as “si, nosotros podemos” or better yet “si, podemos” or “podemos hacerlo”.
I feel the “se puede” translation lacks the inclusive nature of the original “we can”.}
“Se puede” is impersonal, “podemos” is inclusive.
17th century Spanish soldier, sailor and adventurer Alonso de Contreras discovered his wife in bed with another man and in his autobiography he, very casually, writes
And on to other things.
jejeje, free translation “… i found them together one fine morning, and they died, may God have them in heaven, if they repented during their deaths”
even funnier if you know about the alternative Argentinian dialect meaning of “Cogí”, that Nava and I talked about in other thread…
I would suggest that “se murió” is neither a reflexive nor impersonal use of the verb “morir,” but the application of the verb “morirse.” There are many, many verbs like this in Spanish.
In way of contrast, there is also the verb “hablarse,” but it’s not being used in the examples above.
Thanks, I spelled it wrong. Of course, it makes sens that it says Obamanos instead of Obamonos when combining the words.
I’ve been around Spanish speaking people my whole life; I wish I had made more of an effort to pick it up when I was younger. 
The verb “morirse”. That’s a good one. Where did you learn your Spanish? And your grammar, for that matter?
Those are reflexives. What’s reflexive is (generally) the verb itself, not the usage. The verb isn’t reflexive without the reflexive pronoun so the pronoun is considered part of the verb.
Sometimes the reflexive and transitive versions of a verb have very different meanings and then each gets its own dictionary entry. Others, like morir(se) aren’t different enough to merit two entries. For example, here the RAE uses a reflexive form in the entry for “morir,” there is no entry for “morirse.” The example with the reflexive is in item 7, it’s an emphatic reflexive (as if “dying for a picture” wasn’t exageration enough, we go and add the “se”).
I agree with Frodo that in the case posited by the OP (a political slogan) I would have gone for the personal form: “Podemos.” Given that Obama’s message involves inclussion, I’d further have gone for “entre todos podemos” or somesuch (“all of us, together, can” - yeah, it back-translates like shite).