# Why "Sí, se puede" rather than "Sí, podemos"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 1, 2008, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183 "2008-12-01T14:15:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/1 "2008-12-01T14:15:25Z")
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? ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/2 "2008-12-01T14:20:51Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/3 "2008-12-01T14:33:19Z")
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? ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/4 "2008-12-01T14:43:01Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Santo\_Rugger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/5 "2008-12-01T14:50:43Z")
FWIW, there are many bumper stickers around here that say “Obamanos!” I think it’s pretty cool (Vamanos means, “let’s go”). ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/6 "2008-12-01T14:51:21Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Is it the case in general, then, that a third person plural slogan tends to come out as a passive third person? 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”](http://spanish.about.com/od/pronouns/a/introduction_se.htm): > [@](#): > > **As the equivalent of the English passive voice** : By using se, particularly when discussing inanimate objects, it is possible to indicate some sort of action without indicating who performed the action. Grammatically, such sentences are structured in the same way that sentences using reflexive verbs are. Thus in a literal sense, a sentence such as se venden coches means “cars sell themselves.” In actuality, however, such as sentence would be the English equivalent of “cars are sold” or, more loosely translated, “cars for sale.” > **Examples:** Se abren las puertas. (The doors are opened.) Se vendió la computadora. (The computer was sold.) Se perdieron los llaves. (The keys were lost.) Se prohibe fumar. (Smoking is prohibited.) > > … > > **The impersonal se** : In some sentences, se is used in an impersonal sense with singular verbs to indicate that people in general, or no person in particular, performs the action. When se is used in this way, the sentence follows the same pattern as those in which the main verb is used reflexively, except that there is no subject to the sentence that is explicitly stated. As the examples below show, there are variety of ways such sentences can be translated to English. > > **Examples:** Se maneja rápidamente en Lima. (People drive fast in Lima.) Se puede encontrar cocos en el mercado. (You can find coconuts in the market.) Muchas veces se tiene que estudiar para aprender. (Often you have to study to learn.) No se debe comer con prisa. (One ought not to eat quickly.) > [@](#): > > And is it just slogans, or is it applied in ordinary speech? See above. The “impersonal se” seems to be widely used in speech. ---
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/7 "2008-12-01T14:54:48Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > FWIW, there are many bumper stickers around here that say “Obamanos!” I think it’s pretty cool (Vamanos means, “let’s go”). 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 ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/8 "2008-12-01T15:05:08Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > 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. 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. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/9 "2008-12-01T15:17:29Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/10 "2008-12-01T15:44:02Z")
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. > [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > 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 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. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/11 "2008-12-01T15:53:59Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/12 "2008-12-01T15:59:29Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I do not agree that the examples cited by **bordelond** are passive voice but rather impersonal. … > > “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. **Sailor** , where did the examples “Se habla inglés” and “se murió” come from? I didn’t see them in my link. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/13 "2008-12-01T16:03:26Z")
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.” ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/14 "2008-12-01T16:09:14Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/15 "2008-12-01T16:20:24Z")
17th century Spanish soldier, sailor and adventurer [Alonso de Contreras](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Contreras) discovered his wife in bed with another man and in his autobiography he, very casually, writes > [@](#): > > yo, que no dormía, procuré andar al descuido con cuidado, hasta que su fortuna los trajo a que los cogí juntos una mañana y se murieron. Téngalos Dios en el cielo si en aquel trance se arrepintieron. And on to other things. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/16 "2008-12-01T16:24:21Z")
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… ---
**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:** [December 1, 2008, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/17 "2008-12-01T16:25:43Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Santo\_Rugger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/18 "2008-12-01T16:30:34Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Vámonos and vamos are both perfectly correct Spanish. Vámanos isn’t. Thanks, I spelled it wrong. Of course, it makes sens that it says **Obama** nos 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. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/19 "2008-12-01T17:07:42Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > 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. The verb “morirse”. That’s a good one. Where did you learn your Spanish? And your grammar, for that matter? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2008, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183/20 "2008-12-01T17:21:36Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > 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. 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](http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=morir) 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). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-si-se-puede-rather-than-si-podemos/475183.md?page=2)