Please make a lesson on these: lo suficiente, lo normal, lo habitualThis same issue was asked 5 years ago, and a new specific lesson would be helpful. (more than the current article on neutral lo)
Here is what I asked ChatGPT
______________________
tell me more about the use of "lo" in "lo suficiente" and "lo habitual", with grammar explanation and more examples of both
ChatGPT said:
The word "lo" in phrases like "lo suficiente" and "lo habitual" serves as a neutral article that turns adjectives, adverbs, or phrases into abstract nouns. This structure is often used to express qualities or degrees of something in a general, impersonal way.
Explanation of "lo" in these phrases:
Lo suficiente: Here, "lo" makes the adjective "suficiente" (sufficient) into a concept or a general idea. Instead of referring to something specific, "lo suficiente" means "enough" in a more abstract way, as in "the sufficient amount."
Example: No hemos hecho lo suficiente para resolver el problema.
(We haven't done enough to solve the problem.)
Lo habitual: Similarly, "lo" turns the adjective "habitual" (usual) into an abstract noun, referring to "what is usual" or "the usual thing."
Example: Llegó tarde, como lo habitual.
(He arrived late, as usual.)
Why isn't this "Pónganselo aquí en esta habitción para nosotros, por favor."?
After all, the reflexive pronoun for the third person plural imperative of poner is se.
Hola. Solo para que sepan...
Esta pregunta apareció en el Quiz. Mi cuenta tiene la versión latinoamerica activada, y normalmente no vemos preguntas sobre conjugaciones de vosotros porque no la usamos.
Es probable que ________ en el intento.It's possible that you'll die trying.(HINT: Using the "vosotros" form, conjugate "morir" in El Presente de Subjuntivo.)
This same issue was asked 5 years ago, and a new specific lesson would be helpful. (more than the current article on neutral lo)
Here is what I asked ChatGPT
______________________
tell me more about the use of "lo" in "lo suficiente" and "lo habitual", with grammar explanation and more examples of both
ChatGPT said:
The word "lo" in phrases like "lo suficiente" and "lo habitual" serves as a neutral article that turns adjectives, adverbs, or phrases into abstract nouns. This structure is often used to express qualities or degrees of something in a general, impersonal way.
Explanation of "lo" in these phrases:
Lo suficiente: Here, "lo" makes the adjective "suficiente" (sufficient) into a concept or a general idea. Instead of referring to something specific, "lo suficiente" means "enough" in a more abstract way, as in "the sufficient amount."
Example: No hemos hecho lo suficiente para resolver el problema.
(We haven't done enough to solve the problem.)
Lo habitual: Similarly, "lo" turns the adjective "habitual" (usual) into an abstract noun, referring to "what is usual" or "the usual thing."
Example: Llegó tarde, como lo habitual.
(He arrived late, as usual.)
What if I want to use querer in el preterito indefinido, but I don't want it to be interpreted as tried or refused? Por ejemplo:
Yesterday, I wanted apples, but today I don't.
The action is complete, it requires the preterito indefinido, but I don't want to interpret the sentence as: Yesterday, I tried apples, but today I don't.
'Tis a conundrum for me.
The lesson states that if the subject is the same in both clauses you would omit que and use the infinitive in the second clause. Why is the subjunctive and not the infinitive used in the following example?
Nosotros preferiríamos que fuésemos al restaurante del centro.
We'd prefer if we all went to the restaurant in the centre.mnemonic.
Thank you, Kim
First off, a minor suggestion wrt this lesson to break the ice: ;)
When you are talking about the position of 'se', you are in fact referring to the position of BOTH 'se' and a corresponding direct object pronoun. You might want to note this in the explanations somewhere.
Now, my real question:
With a participle, does the combo of se & direct object pronoun HAVE to be attached at the end, or this is just an option? "Se la estamos decorando" and "Estamos decorandosela" are both grammatically correct and semantically equivalent, right? Or are we allowed to say "Se la estamos decorando" only because we have two verbs next to each other?
PS
I agree with the other poster who pointed out that these agglutination rules totally warrant a separate lesson.
As far as food, I looked for restaurants... is translated as 'En cuanto a la alimentación' or 'Con respecto a la alimentación'
This is useful language but I can't find any lesson that references this structure. Is there one?
The nearest I can find is 'Preposition + lo que + clause' which would lead to:
En lo que respecta a la alimentación. Is that possible?
Gracias
"a pesar de que" is not wrong. I think your system should be fixed.
-r
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level