1. The WordReference Forums have moved to new forum software. (Details)

I can't believe (that) there's no trash

Discussion in 'Spanish-English Grammar / Gramática Español-Inglés' started by Hector9, Apr 22, 2011.

  1. Hector9

    Hector9 Senior Member

    Si yo quiero traducir al inglés "No puedo creer que no haya basura en la calle": ¿Cual sería correcta?

    I can't believe that there's no trash on the street
    I can't believe there's no trash on the street

    Pregunto esto para saber si es necesario poner el "that" referido al "que" y en caso de que no sea así, que me puedan el motivo/razón por el cual no es necesario colocarlo en inglés.

    Muchas gracias!!!
     
  2. Sharifa345

    Sharifa345 Senior Member

    USA
    US English, DR Spanish
    Ambas son correctas. No sé por qué, pero no es necesario usar "that" en este tipo de frase en inglés. Tampoco es incorrecto no usarlo.

    I think he's going to run = I think that he's going to run
    I don't believe he said that = I don't believe that he said that.
     
  3. Hector9

    Hector9 Senior Member

    Lo preguntaba porque por lo general veo que no se suele poner "that" en lugar de "que" en inglés..

    Alguna opinión más?
     
  4. SevenDays Senior Member

    Spanish
    Hola
    Te doy una razón semántica, y otra sintáctica:
    Partiendo por la semántica:
    I can't believe that equivale a
    I can't believe there is no trash on the street
    "that" y "there is no trash on the street" significan lo mismo, por lo que no es necesario repetir "that".
    Sintácticamente, "that" no tiene función sintáctica (valga la redundancia) y, gramaticalmente, no hay que agregarla: I can't believe there's no trash on the street

    Saludos
     
  5. Hector9

    Hector9 Senior Member

    SevenDays no entiendo cuando dices que "I can't believe that" (No puedo creer eso) significa lo mismo que "I can't believe there's no trash on the street" (No puedo creer que no hay basura en la calle).

    En el último caso no estaría repitiendo "that", ya que hay uno sólo :confused:

    Es algo que veo muy a menudo, que suponen el "que" en inglés (sin poner el that).
     
  6. duvija

    duvija Senior Member

    Chicago
    Spanish - Uruguay
    En las oraciones relativas, en castellano el 'que' es casi obligatorio, pero en inglés se saltea. Lo difícil es enseñar a los nativos del idioma inglés el uso del 'that' en castellano, porque no tienen idea de que es parte de una cláusula relativa. (Ya sé que no expliqué bien esto, pero no me sale mejor a esta hora...):p
     
  7. SevenDays Senior Member

    Spanish
    Hola
    No me expliqué bien. Quise decir que "that" equivale a "there's no thrash on the street," en un sentido de aposición. Si estamos hablando de que no hay basura en la calle, perfectamente puedo decir solamente I can't believe that y todos entenderán a que se refiere "that". Por eso, al decir la oración completa no es necesario agregar "that" pues estaríamos diciendo el mismo concepto, la misma idea, dos veces ya que "that" y "there's no trash on the street" están en aposición. Claro, todo esto hablando semánticamente.

    Lo sintáctico quizás sea más importante. La función de "that" en la oración es de subordinator: "that" introduce la cláusula (o sintagma) subordinada que explica, define, el significado de "I can't believe". Pero dentro de la subordinada there's no trash on the street "that" no desempeña ningún papel sintáctico (no es ni sujeto, ni objeto, ni complemento), y por lo tanto se puede suprimir. Fijate que al eliminar "that" no cambiamos el sentido de la oración; otra razón más para dejarlo a un lado. Ahora bien, al incluir "that" damos a entender que la función de "that" en la oración ("subordinator") es argumento suficiente para mantenerlo ahí, en toda su gloria.

    ... y es tarde, espero que no te esté confundiendo más...
    Saludos
     
  8. duvija

    duvija Senior Member

    Chicago
    Spanish - Uruguay
    I don't believe that that. (Esta sería la frase en inglés completa, que nadie usa).
     
  9. Hector9

    Hector9 Senior Member

    Hay una parte que no entiendo:

    "I don't believe that" No sería: "No creo eso"? (que no haya basura en la calle)

    Siempre había pensado que significaba eso..
     
  10. SydLexia Senior Member

    London
    UK, English
    Pero "I don't believe (that) he did that" es "No creo que haya hecho eso".

    Estos "that" no son iquales.

    syd
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2011
  11. duvija

    duvija Senior Member

    Chicago
    Spanish - Uruguay
    Claro que no son iguales. Uno es el 'subordinante' y el otro el 'pronombre' para toda esa cláusula de la basura.
     
  12. k-in-sc

    k-in-sc Senior Member

    THAT
    That is used to connect a subordinate clause to a preceding verb. It serves the purpose of a conjunction in that instance. The word that may often be left out with no changes in meaning to the sentence. You need to determine whether the sentence is clearly understood when you leave out the word that in introducing a subordinate clause.
    Ronnie heard (that) his car was stolen.
    Michelle thought (that) her neighbors were gossiping about her.
    Helga feels (that) she said nothing rude to the salesman.

    As you can see, those sentences make perfect sense with or without the word that. If you think leaving out the word that makes a break in the smoothness of a sentence, use a comma where the word that would have been.

    I'm telling you (that) I don’t want to go there anymore.
    The biggest obstacle is (that) no one wants to spend money on repairs.

    If you think the sentence sounds as good and its meaning is clearly understood without using the word that, leave it out.

    There are three times when the word that should be used:

    1. If there is a time element mentioned between the verb and the clause:
    Joshua told us last week that he was going on vacation this month.

    2. If the verb of the clause is further into the clause, rather than close to the beginning:
    The newspaper stated that some factions of the right-wing resistance formed over the last few months were now beginning to grow disillusioned with their leader’s agenda. (The verb were beginning is far from the subject of the clause--factions.)

    3. If writing the word that a second time makes the sentence more clear as to who said or did what:
    The fireman said that the frequency of home fires was increasing and that the sale of smoke detectors had fallen off. (Did the fireman mean that sales had fallen off, or was the increase in fires causing the drop in sales? The second that clarifies the sentence.)
     

Share This Page