It does. But nobody uses it.

eficaces :)

I agree with your reply except I do use the present progressive for things that I’m not actively doing right now. I can tell a work colleague, “Estoy viendo un serie buenísima” (I’m watching a really good series) even if I’m at work and not watching TV at the moment, because I’ve started the series and not finished it, so it’s still in progress. “Estoy dibujando un retrato” can mean I have a pencil in my hand right now, but it can also mean I started the portrait yesterday but it’s still a work in progress.

I’m not sure, but it may be different in different places, like the pretérito perfecto compuesto “he hecho” has a different meaning in Spain and in Mexico.

1. I would use “estoy tratando de” or “estoy intentando”.

Yes, there are some cases in which English uses present continuous and Spanish doesn’t. A very common one is ehen talking about the future, for example: “I’m going to the movies this evening”; in Spanish you can’t say “estoy yendo” if you’re talking about the future. It just doesnmt work.

In your example, you are in the middle of learning Spanish, even if you’re not doing it this second, so it’s better to use “estoy tratando”. This implies you’re treating it like a process.

“Trato” would be for more general things, things you do regularly but you don’t think about them like a process, more like habits. “Siempre trato de ser amable con los meseros.” (I always try to be nice to waiters.)

1. The difference in meaning between “tratar” and “intentar” is fuzzy and probably differs by region. To me, they’re mostly interchangeable. “Intentar” may be a little more like “attempt”, like you’re going to try to do something once and see if you succeed (“voy a intentar trepar ese árbol” - I’m going to try to climb that tree). “Tratar” is a bit more general and, for me, it works better for learning languages. But you can use either and it sounds ok.

2. No, don’t add “de” without anything after. “Voy a tratar” is perfect and complete; “voy a tratar de.” is incomplete. Some people do it, but Spanish grammar doesn’t really allow that.

Awesome. Really beautiful concept and execution.

Are other ligatures handled with contextual alternates?

I agree, three tenses can probably communicate most ideas accurately enough. It’s a good shortcut to start speaking more confidently without having to learn a ton of nuances and exceptions first.

I completely agree with the sentiment, but you don’t only need three tenses. You can kind of get by with three (I mean, probably even with just the infinitive if you just want to be understood), but there are four/five simple tenses with their corresponding compound tenses in the indicative mood, plus two simple tenses and two compound ones in the subjunctive mood, plus the imperative. And native speakers use all of them.

I’m not saying this to discourage OP; my point is that it’s completely understandable that they don’t know how to use all of them yet because it’s not that simple. It will become easy with practice.

But yes, don’t worry, it’s probably not necessary to apologize and it’s completely fine if you use whatever tense comes to you in the moment. You’ve been given some good suggestions to apologize if you’d like to though.

I would use “tal vez vea…” I think it’s completely down to personal taste and what one is used to. All three can work.

And yes, both words (quizá(s) and tal vez) need the subjunctive in this case.

Here is a reply  to this same question that I think is very complete and with which I agree:

I've done some research on this in the past cause I've always found it quite fascinating that there were 2 different forms, and here's the list of differences I've come up with (native speakers, feel free to disagree). Basically, it seems the two are very close to equivalent when you actually used the imperfect subjunctive, but the -ra forms have a couple additional functions:

1) When the imperfect subjunctive is used as a deferential form of making a request, only the -ra forms can be used

E.g.: "Quisiera un café", "¿Pudiera comprar un café?"

2) Sometimes the -ra form stands in for the pluscuamperfecto indicativo, which the -se form cannot do

E.g.: "Destruí el plato dorado que tanto cuidara mi madre."

3) Sometimes the -ra form is used to replace the past conditional form (as I understand it, this is not grammatically correct however)

E.g.: "Si hubiera hecho calor, hubiéramos ido a la playa", instead of the grammatically correct "Si hubiera hecho calor, habríamos ido a la playa"

4) As someone mentioned, it is good style to alternate the two in a sentence with many consecutive imperfect subjunctive verbs

E.g.: "Te pediría que limpiaras la casa, comprases flores y visataras tu abuela" (Not a great sentence, but you get the gist)

5) Anecdotally, most people seem to perceive a difference in formality between the two, but which one is more formal differs strongly by region. This is not scientific at all but I have seen quite a few forum posts by Latin American speakers who find the "-se" forms to be a bit haughty and prefer "-ra", whereas Spanish speakers seem to think it is the reverse. Again, this is not scientific so careful with applying this as a hard and fast rule.

Wow. They look beautiful and interesting

I like it! It’s dark and has some cool ideas and compositions. I saw a couple other drawings on your profile and they’re really cool. Keep drawing! You have an interesting mind and it shows in your drawings.

I already replied, but I want to add a Mexican point of view. Mexicans from the center and maybe the south (not so much the north) tend to be very indirect in their requests. But, as others have said, saying something like “¿me das… por favor?” (could you give me… please?) or “¿me pasas…?” (could you pass me…?) or “¿me pones…?” (could you add/put some…?) are polite enough even for Mexicans, because they are questions.

If you say “por favor”, or, as someone suggested, “porfa” (more neutral) or “porfi(s)” (more “cute”) and say it in a nice tone, I don’t think it will come off as rude even if it’s not a question.

Spanish direct only in some places. I’ve found Spain is very direct, and Argentina too maybe, but the center and south of Mexico, for example, is extremely indirect.

But your options sound perfectly acceptable to me. Just phrase them as questions (except “necesito”): ¿me traes…? ¿Me das…?

If you want to be even more polite you can say ¿me traerías…? ¿Me darías…? But I don’t think it’s necessary, especially in a restaurant where I would expect more efficient requests.

“¿A qué hora se cierra la tienda?”, to me, sounds a bit like you’re asking an employee when he’ll (physically?) close the store, or you’re a new employee and you’re asking when the store should be closed.

It’s a correct sentence and it sounds natural, but in this particular case (a store, mall, museum, etc. closing), it’s usually “la tienda/plaza/museo cierra”, without “se”. I’m not sure if it’s an intransitive meaning of “cerrar” or there’s an implied object (“la tienda cierra [sus puertas] a las 6”), but in any case, that’s the only use I’ve seen.

If you’re asking an employee, you could also ask “¿A qué hora cierran/cerráis?”

*In Spain

Commenting as a Mexican, no one in Mexico would ever say /iθeβergs/, and many people would struggle to even understand that pronunciation. Here, you’d use “y” because you’d pronounce it /aisβergs/.

Only in Spain though. Everywhere else, it’s /aisβerg/, so it would take y.

That’s interesting! I hadn’t thought about that discrepancy in imperative vs. subjunctive in the verb “ir”.

Just a small correction: “Vamos” is natural and I agree it’s become the coloquial (and probably also literary) form of the 1st person plural imperative, but it’s not the only option. The RAE recognizes both “vamos” and “vayamos” as imperatives , and I’m sure most native speakers will agree that “vayamos” is also a correct way to use the verb in the imperative, although it is MUCH less common and, in most circumstances, doesn’t sound natural at all. I would argue that, at least in Mexico, “no vayamos” doesn’t sound so natural either. It would be more natural to say “no hay que ir”.

La clase de ayer = yesterday’s class

Others have given good explanations for the imperfect. I just want to add that “se iba a casar” is also perfectly fine and is what I would have said.

It’s not wrong to say “¿me puedes traer un tenedor?” or “¿puedes traerme un tenedor?” Me always goes either before the conjugated verb or attached at the end of the infinitive, never in between. It’s a natural way to say it.

However, “can” is not necessary in Spanish to make the request polite. In fact, I would argue that perhaps “¿Me traes…?” is slightly more polite, because “¿me puedes traer?” could sound a bit like you were expecting it and they didn’t do it, and now you’re asking them if they can. Some other polite (less direct) ways to say it would be:

• ¿Me podrías traer…?
• ¿Me traerías…?

Making it a question is already polite, as opposed to just using the imperative “tráeme un tenedor”.

Also, keep in mind that some Spanish speaking countries are way more direct than others in these situations. In Mexico we tend to be extremely indirect in requests (“perdón, ¿te podría pedir si por favor me podrías traer…?”), while in Spain I found people were much more direct and it wasn’t perceived as impolite at all.

Edit: typos

1. Si no les caes bien -> If they don’t like you Si no le caes bien -> I he/she/etc (singular) doesn’t like you.

Caer(me/te/le…) bien ≈ gustar(me/te/le…). The structure is the same and the meaning is similar, but “me caes bien” means I like your personality or I find you nice, and “me gustas” means I like you, usually in the sense of being attracted to someone.

(Note: This text is not very carefully written, it mixes singular and plural and has some mistakes)

1. Aquellos que les gustan -> those they like

Here, strictly, that would be the meaning. But, since it’s not a very carefully written text, it could possibly mean the opposite: “those who like them”. Normally, to say that, you’d have to say something like: “se preocupan por aquellos a quienes/a los que les gustan”.

1. Les dan igual aquellos que no les gustan -> They don’t care about those they don’t like.

Me da igual = it’s the same to me = I don’t care about it (or him or her…)

I can imagine how complicated this must seem, and having slightly ambiguous sentences like 2 and 3 doesn’t help. But you’ll get more and more used to it and then you won’t even have to think about it.

That’s what they said, isn’t it?

But that’s not the meaning used here. Impactar, when it means “impresionar, desconcertar a causa de un acontecimiento o noticia” is transitive, so it takes a DO and it should be “los/las impactaron”. I think that could be the issue here: they may be trying to use a gender neutral pronoun. Or maybe it’s just leísmo.

Not at all. Maybe in some places, but it’s definitely still used A LOT and IS expected in many circumstances.