That’s because it can be confused with “¿Hablamos Español?”
But i disagree with the poster who said that, while “Se habla Español” is IMHO better, “Hablamos Español” is correct also and does not risk confusing native speakers, at least native speakers around here :).
Nava, I cited the UFW and Chavez as the source for that because that’s what I remember being reported during the primaries here.
Post “hablamos español” in some parts of Spain and you risk people exclaiming “if we feel like it!” Post “hablemos español” and the same folks would say “ah, dunnow man, I really ought’a practice my English.” And I don’t just mean the nationalist parts and people, it’s a matter of sense of humor.
An impersonal like “se habla español” means that someone in the premises does; I’ve seen stores where the “we speak english” (sic) sign meant “this is a family business and the eldest daughter has two years of school English”. “Hablamos español” would mean everybody does: with the amount of blonde waiters and short curvy waitresses we’ve been getting from Parts Abroad, it isn’t always true.
(out of time)
jayjay, I think that may have more to do with the chavistas’ liking for turning anything into an excuse for noise than with any specific intent on Obama’s team’s part.
Obama is all “for change” and I’ve heard people joking about whether he was also promising (insert here XYZ party promise from a campaign where XYZ was all “for change”) - I haven’t spoken with anybody who truly thinks that Obama takes his inspiration from PSOE or PNV, though, to name two parties that have used that slogan in Spain. The chavistas OTOH could convince themselves that anybody mentioning Bolívar is breaching their copyrights and stealing their national identity.
Are we perhaps talking about two different Chavezes? “Si, se puede” was used by Cesar Chavez, a migrant worker activist and major figure in the United Farm Workers’ labor issues in southern California in the 70s.
It almost sounds like you’re talking about Hugo Chavez, the current president of Venezuela.
As Frodo said,
“hablemos español” would be “Let’s speak spanish together” (more or less).
“hablamos español” would be “we speak spanish”
Yes, I did get that. But I was trying to reconcile what appeared to be two conflicting posts.
The mention of “hablemos” is probably confusing–it’s a command form, as in giving an order. (It’s also used the same way in the subjunctive, which makes even less sense in context.) I cannot figure out why it was mentioned.
“Hablamos español” bothers me in place of “se habla español.” I feel like saying, “You’re speaking Spanish? Good for you.”
But “se puede” seems to have more punch. Slogans generally should be short; when I edit someone’s writing, I always look for ways to convey the essential content with fewer words. I was looking at some newspapers my parents had saved when JFK was assassinated; one had the headline KENNED SLAIN!–which told you all you needed to know in one syllable (besides the name). Certainly it had more impact than SOMEONE KILLS KENNEDY!. Although style mavens generally discourage the passive voice, the impersonal passive is usually an exception to this. Most languages seem to have a usage or pattern that fulfills a similar role; German has “es wird/wurde” = “there is”, “there’s”/“there were”, as in “es wird getanzt”=“there’s dancing”
May be, but “Se puede” does not conveys the same meaning (IMHO) that “We Can”, perhaps the better translation would have been “Podemos!” ?
You have to remember that really short phrases such as slogans are one of the most difficult things to translate, and the customs are very different, much beyond the grammar of the situation.
For example, it’s extremely common in French to write slogans in the first person: “J’aide l’environnement, je prends le transport en commun.” But you simply can’t translate that into English using the first person: “I help the environment, I take public transit” (unless there was explicitly a character in the advertisement who was saying that, and even then it would be a bit clunky.) You need to say something like, “Help the environment, take public transit,” changing it from the first person indicative to the imperative. That’s just how we make slogans, as opposed to how it’s done in French.
Similarly, while the impersonal doesn’t make a good slogan in English, it does in Spanish; and there’s also the fact that “¡Sí, se puede!” is a pre-existing phrase with all sorts of resonance – albeit some that might be controversial.
That reminds me of a scene from a movie. Coupla college kids on spring break walk into a Mexican hotel. Guy wants to show off his Spanish. “Hablo ingles?” he says to the clerk. “Yes,” she replies, “you speak English”. 
Oh my goodness, that would really clear a lot of things up, wouldn’t it?
I was trying to understand what, from Nava’s perspective, is so insane about Obama borrowing from Cesar Chavez. If she thought we were talking about that Hugo guy I could definitely understand the confusion.
Cesar Chavez is a national hero to many here, and from what little I know of his work I admire him greatly myself. His movement is a great part of Latino national and cultural identity in the United States. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least, knowing his background as a community organizer, if Obama found inspiration in his work to such an extent that he borrowed the United Farmworkers battle cry.
A few years ago I took my (rather obese) brother with me to Mexico. Being that “como” is “how,” “mucho” is “much,” I instructed him that when inquiring as to price at the vendors’ stands, the appropriate question to ask was “como mucho.” (“Yes, do do.”)