It's amazing to me that the Engish word "lost" has two distinct, unrelated meanings and the Spanish word "perdir" has the same two, unrelated meanings. The same as the words "second" and "segundo:" both meaning "second" as in "first, second..." and "second" as in "seconds, minutes..."
Hola,Torgrim1. I assume you are referring to the phrase "...había estado perdida" in the previous sentence. "Había" is the only conjugated verb in the sentence. "Estado" is the past participle of estar and "perdida" is an adjective (see my reply to UzbekSultana above).
In answer to your original question, no, I can think of no instance where you can have a conjugated verb following another conjugated verb. When a conjugated verb is followed by another verb, the second verb will either be an infinitive (Yo sé nadar), a past participle (as in "...había estado..."), or a present participle (Él está trabajando).
The past participle has a few uses. Two of its uses include forming the perfect tenses and forming adjectives. http://www.spanishdict.com/topics/show/33
The past perfect (pluscuamperfecto) is formed using the imperfect of haber + Past participle. http://youtu.be/5VpGDhJ8eNw
In the sentence (Ella nunca había estado perdido,) había estado is the past perfect conjugation of estar in the third person/single (ella, él, Ud.) http://www.wordreference.com/conj/esverbs.aspx?v=estar
Perdido is an adjective and not a second past perfect right up against the other past perfect.
Ok, you're probably thinking that you don't care what I call it, the point is, can we use that english sentence construction in spanish. I have been trying to figure that out since i first started studying spanish, and i have never found a clear answer. It's not a construction taught on any of the spanish grammar sites. However, there are references to its use in forums. I suspect that that construction can be used the same way in spanish as in English, but it's just not as common.
Here are some forum discussions on this construction:
I believe it would be either of the following, but my hunch is that the first is more natural in Spanish:
1) Ella nunca se había perdido.
2) Ella nunca había estado perdido.
I think sentence 1 puts a bit more of the blame on the person who got lost, sort of like "She got lost," vs. "She was lost."
no,its okay i am argentinian and you was mixing the genres "ella" is for females and "perdido" is male there is no examples in english but in spanish the las letter changes the genre for example el conejo(male) la coneja(female) the male usually ends in E or O and females on A
DuoLingo provides hints for each word regardless of whether they can be used in the given context. I like this feature because it helps me understand that the same word may have quite different meanings in other contexts.
In this case they provide "had gotten lost" as a translation for "había perdido", but because getting lost is something you do to yourself it would require the reflexive form "perderse".
So "She had never gotten lost" = "Ella nunca SE había perdido"
Hope that helps.
You have answered your own question in a way. If it is an adjective then perdido/perdida/perdidos/perdidas need to match the noun in number and gender. In this sentence though, "perdido" is the participle not an adjective.
Some examples with adjectives...
El recuerdo de un paraíso perdido = The memory of a lost paradise
Sentía nostalgia de mi libertad perdida = I felt nostalgia for my lost freedom
Se sintió dichoso con poder recuperar las horas perdidas = He was happy to be able to recover the lost hours
Esfuerzos perdidos = Wasted effort
(Note that perdido is sometimes translated as "wasted")
Doesnt anyone have the problem with the usage of the past perfect here in the first place? I mean shouldnt this sentence be: she has never lost. (Present perfect) if it means what i think its supposed to mean and that is that the women has never lost, than the right form to use is present perfect. Whereas if you wanted to say she had never lost (past perfect) up until now (since she lost now) than past perfect would be ok. Isnt past perfect supposed to be used to point out to the action which happened before another action or in any case to indicate sth that happened in the past and stayed in the past. e.g. She had never lost until 1989. Than its fine. If you want to say she has never lost and thats still true, than you should use present perfect and not the past perfect. This is in my opinion a typical present perfect sentence.
The "H" is always silent in Spanish. The "B" and "V" are often pronounced alike (more like a "B"). Although, in some places, you will hear more of a distinction between the two. So, "había" (note the accent) would often sound like "ah-BEE-ah," but sometimes like "ah-VEE-ah." Duo seems to use both pronunciations. The link below will let you hear native speakers pronouncing the word.
(Sorry, but the link seems to choke on the "í." You have to type in the "ía/#es.")
It's not poor English, just British English. ;)
Most Americans would say, "She had never gotten lost." If you mean it should be, "She had never been lost," instead, well that's just another perfectly valid way to put it with a slightly different meaning. "Getting" lost is more like "becoming" lost than simply "being" lost. And I wouldn't suggest saying, "She had never become lost."
It's used as transitive and intransitive in English. Typically it's used without the subject when it's already known. For example, if the woman in this question was a boxer, this sentence could be said with the assumptino understood that she has never lost, a boxing match. Or anything else, really.
A game of checkers, a tennis match, a 400 meter dash. I think the sentence makes perfect sense in that context. (As opposed to her having lost an object, such as her left shoe.) And since "lago" confirmed that they are both proper usages for "perdido", I think there's no problem.
If referring to a lost physical item it would need to be stated but something like a political election, fight, contest or game would not.
Hillary lost the 2016 Presidential Election. She had never lost.
Ronda Rousey got her ass kicked by Holly Holm. She had never lost