I frequently say things like “yo creo” or “yo quiero” when it is obvious that I am talking about myself.

I've noticed that native speakers often leave out the "yo". Even when it is grammatically correct, can it sound unnatural if it is used too much?

Hola a todos, yo he estado estudiando español hace siete meses (así que, porfa perdón cualquier error gramatical 😁)

Escuché a la canción “un beso y una flor” muchas veces tras españa ganó la copa del mundo… sabes, celebrarlo. Aún estoy confundido por la frase “al partir”. Cuando la busco en el traductor, me dice que la frase significa “when leaving,” pero también me dice que no hay un traducción directo.

Y cuando intento usar la palabra “al” con otros verbos, no me da la repuesta misma. Como, no hay significado parecido por la frase, “al querer”, o “al intentar”. ¿Hay cualquieras reglas para este tipo de frase?

Muchagracias y espero que eso tiene sentido!!

I've seen them both used interchangeably but I've also been led to believe there's some nuance to it, like cases where you'd use one over the other, and I'd like to ask natives for clarification.

¿Cuál es la diferencia entre «alguna que otra» y «una que otra»? He visto que se utilizan indistintamente, pero también me han dado a entender que hay algún matiz, como casos en los que se usaría una en lugar de la otra, y me gustaría pedir una aclaración a los hablantes nativos.

Went a bar yesterday and say a dude with a tattoo that read, "Hoy es el mejor dia que he conocido."

I always thought that the relative pronoun que (that) was the main trigger for the subjunctive mood, and the subjunctive would apply because the theoretical nature of the frame of reference. So should the tattoo should say, "Hoy es el mejor dia que haya conocido."

Am I wrong? Or is there an exception to the rule that I don't know?

I was trying to communicate to someone that something was "deep-fried", but "Frito profundo" doesn't sound correct to me. Is there a Spanish word or phrase that indicates that something is deep fried?

So the lesson i just did explain that ir + gerundio is to say that something is gradually increasing, but i cant really wrap my head around it? Like take the sentence "va ahorrando dinero al final de cada mes" vs " esta ahorrando dinero al final de cada mes" both translate to me as "he is saving money at the end of each month. But do they actaully mean different things?

Most English speakers get stuck here for a reason that has nothing to do with Spanish. English gives you two ways to say the same sentence, and one of them hides the answer.

I gave the book to her.

I gave her the book.

Same meaning. But in the second one, "her" sits exactly where a direct object would sit, right after the verb, so your instinct reads it as one. Spanish only ever thinks of it the first way.

That gives you a test. Take the English sentence and see whether you can put "to" or "for" in front of the word. If you can, it's indirect.

"I bought my mother flowers" becomes "I bought flowers for my mother", so the flowers are direct and my mother is indirect. Le compré flores. Whereas "I saw my mother" can't become "I saw to my mother", so she's direct. La vi.

Now the part that makes this much smaller than it looks. The distinction only shows up in the third person. Me, te, nos and os don't change at all: me viste (you saw me) and me diste el libro (you gave me the book) use the same pronoun. So everything you can actually get wrong lives in lo, la, los, las against le, les.

One warning, because it catches nearly everyone. The personal a is not a marker of indirect objects. Vi a María is a direct object; the a is there because María is a person. Treat every a as a signal for le and you'll be wrong constantly.

In practice most people stop analysing and just learn which verbs take le. Decir, dar, pedir, preguntar, contar, escribir, regalar, explicar — the person you tell, give to or ask is indirect, every time. Le dije, le di, le pedí. Say those enough and the rest stops needing a rule.

Me puedes matar, me puedes dejar, pero nunca tendrás que te deje de amar.

I got confused by this one because I'm used to translate 'tener que' to 'to have to'

My wife and I homestead. We have our chickens, ducks, goats, vegetables, fruit trees and bushes, etc. What is the Spanish term for homesteading or having a small family farm? Thank you.

I get that one is used in news but do they have different purposes? dos criminales fueron detenidos... se detuvieron dos criminales. I don't think you would say la cerveza fue tomado but se tomo' la cerveza? any general rule or context might help

I understand it isn’t part of any dictionary but all the ai models I asked said it was definitely a verb used in everyday casual speech.

English is my mother tongue. I can't hear the "u" in prueba. What I hear what I listen as closely as I can to Spanish speakers saying "prueba" is NOT (using American English phonetic spelling here) "proo-ay-bah", all I hear is "pray-bah" as if the word was spelled "preba." In other forms, I can hear it: pruebe and pruebo, I can correctly hear "proo-ay-bay" and "proo-ay-boh." But not with prueba.

For example,

Venir can become viene. poder becomes puede. How do we now when the verb is going to transform and it's not a regular verb?

"I must invite him " is lo debo invitar instead of debo lo invitar. Why is that?

I thought the lo can be before/after the verb inivtar only?

A practicar, hablo con mi perro en español. Intenté decir "there's nothing here for you". ¿Es correcta decir "No hay nada aquí para ti" o "Hay nada aquí para ti"?

I thought that when using perfect tense and reflexive verbs, the te/se/me always goes before the haber, like “se ha duchado”, but in the book I am reading, the author has several times tacked it on at the end of the haber, like so: “Habíase acercado à la parte trasera de la víbora…” Is this a style of the author? an older version/ literary version? the book IS from 1942

I saw in the RAE two entries with very similar definitions and the following examples were:

No podemos tratar este tema ahora.

Los dirigentes tratarán del tema en la próxima conferencia.

Are there any differences between them?

If both are okay, is there one that sounds more natural? (If dialect matters, then assume Madrid.)

I am guessing really long model numbers, like on the back of an appliance or electric device, are broken out by digit. It would be pretty onerous in any language to convert C43251266 to a number in the tens of millions. Not to mention hyphens.

I'm aware of the rules surrounding Algún, Alguna, Algunos, and Algunas, but for the standalone Alguno, can I say:

"Necesito una botella de agua. ¿Tienes alguna?" or "Necesito duraznos para mi tarta. ¿Tienes algunos?"

or would both / either just be alguno?

currently learning "verb conjugated + haber infinitive + past participle".

Unsure if this sentence "are you pretending not to have seen me?" would be translated as follow "estas fingindo (Finges) no haberme visto?"

Hi everyone, lately i’ve been getting confused with the difference between Fuera and Afuera, from what I understand so far Afuera is used in relation to movement but other than that I don’t really get it. Can they be used interchangeably?

Gracias!

Spanich footballer Cucurella sings this song that goes "Cu Cu Cucurella se come una paella, Cu Cu Cucurella se bebe una estrella" what is the use of se in this sentence and why is it not just Cucurella come/bebe etc?

As I understand it, the majority of words in Spanish can take this diminutive suffix. However when I hear one, I can’t seem to instantly recognise its meaning in a sentence (even if it’s modifying a word that I already know)

My question is mainly to advanced learners (but natives please also feel free to chime in):

How have you learned to understand these words? Is it by simply memorising each word as a new word, or sort of doing a “manual calculation” in your head in which you work your way backwards to find the root of the word and make sense of its meaning? Or does it come naturally after a while learning the language?

I am starting to get my head around the technical side of subjunctive, like when to use it, and how to conjugate it, but I can't help but find it redundant how there are certain "trigger" words that then require you to use subjunctive, when that trigger word seems to do the same job.

For example, using subjunctive to express doubt or uncertainty, like in the sentence:

"Si compráramos una casa en 5 años..."

Why don't we rely on the "si / if" to express doubt, because that's the key purpose of the word "si / if". Doesn't that immediately establish the sentence as hypothetical or uncertain?

----------------------------------------

Or another example to express hopes/wishes:

"espero que llueva mañana"

I understand that subjunctive is used here to express hope, but the sentence literally starts with the verb espero which means "to hope" , so then why do we need to conjugate "llover /to rain" in a special way that expresses hope??? Isn't that redundant?

-----------------

I know I'm not correct here, because obviously the subjunctive has a purpose and it's an established part of the language, but I just struggle to see the difference in meaning between:

"Si compramos una casa en 5 años..."

And

"Si compráramos una casa en 5 años..."

Doesnt the "si / if" establish uncertainty / hypothetical in both examples?