había sido/estado + participio

indoctus

Senior Member
Canada English
Hola:

El usar de la voz passiva en español provoca problemas para los anglohablantes.

Por favor avísame que estas frases sean correctas.

"El problema había sido reconocido hace mucho tiempo."
("The problem had been recognized for quite some time.")

Explicación: Se usa "ser" porque "ser" denomina a un evento permanente, el acto ocurrió y no habrá ningún cambio. En ninguna manera no es posible que se usa "estar" en esta construcciòn.

"He estado tratado mal por mi jefe por muchos años"
("I have been treated badly by my boss for many years")

Explicación: Se usa "estar" porque "estar" denomina a un evento donde los detalles pueden cambiar en el futuro.

¿Todo esto va bien?

Gracias de antemano
 
  • Wandering JJ

    Senior Member
    British English
    Hi indoctus.

    I'm pretty sure you always use the verb ser for passive constructions, whatever the likely change in the future. Theoretically, he sido mal tratado would be the passive form, but the passive is much less used in Spanish than in English and you are more likely to hear me ha maltratado.

    Un saludo.
     

    indoctus

    Senior Member
    Canada English
    Hi indoctus.

    I'm pretty sure you always use the verb ser for passive constructions, whatever the likely change in the future. Theoretically, he sido mal tratado would be the passive form, but the passive is much less used in Spanish than in English and you are more likely to hear me ha maltratado.

    Un saludo.

    Thanks Wandering JJ. That actually makes is much easier.
     

    inib

    Senior Member
    British English
    Hola:

    El usar de la voz passiva en español provoca problemas para los anglohablantes. Interesting question.



    "El problema había sido reconocido hace mucho tiempo."
    ("The problem had been recognized for quite some time.")

    I would say that this actually means "The problem had been recognised quite some time ago".

    "He estado tratado mal por mi jefe por muchos años"
    ("I have been treated badly by my boss for many years")

    In this case, I would think that only "ser" is possible, as you mention the agent and it is understood as a "true passive".
    However, I'll be more than glad to be corrected, and as JJ says, usually other forms are preferred.
     

    indoctus

    Senior Member
    Canada English
    Hi Inib:

    You are right on both counts.

    "hace mucho tiempo" means "a long time ago" and "por mucho tiempo" means "for a long time"

    Also "ser" should be used for the second sentence so "I have been treated badly by my boss for many years" is "He sido tratado mal por mi jefe por muchos años"

    Thanks for your response.
     

    Julvenzor

    Senior Member
    Español propio (Andalucía, España)
    In these structures, the distinction between "ser" and "estar" may often dilute. I remember this example when writing my novel:

    Tú nunca has sido secuestrado.
    Tú nunca has estado secuestrado.


    Here, both sentences mean almost the same: with "ser" we emphasize the "action of kidnapping"; with "estar", the "feeling of being kidnaped". At that time, I choosed the second one. I prefered the "feeling".

    Cheers!
     

    duvija

    Senior Member
    Spanish - Uruguay
    In these structures, the distinction between "ser" and "estar" may often dilute. I remember this example when writing my novel:

    Tú nunca has sido secuestrado.
    Tú nunca has estado secuestrado.


    Here, both sentences mean almost the same: with "ser" we emphasize the "action of kidnapping"; with "estar", the "feeling of being kidnaped". At that time, I choosed the second one. I prefered the "feeling".

    Cheers!

    :tick:
     

    indoctus

    Senior Member
    Canada English
    In these structures, the distinction between "ser" and "estar" may often dilute. I remember this example when writing my novel:

    Tú nunca has sido secuestrado.
    Tú nunca has estado secuestrado.


    Here, both sentences mean almost the same: with "ser" we emphasize the "action of kidnapping"; with "estar", the "feeling of being kidnaped". At that time, I choosed the second one. I prefered the "feeling".

    Cheers!

    Very interesting. My grammar book shows as I mentioned above that the distinction is one of action as opposed to state or condition. So that aligns with actual usage, the action of kidnapping (ser) or the state or condition, in your case the feeling of being kidnapped (estar).
     
    Top