"The baby has been born."
Translation:Ha nacido el bebé.
What exactly would be the difference between "Ha nacido el bebé" and "El bebé ha nacido"? I know that their meaning is the same, but how would a Spanish speaking person see these two sentences differently?
Son exactamente iguales en su significado y se usa cualquiera de las dos frases. Hablo español. greetings
Isn't this actually in the passive voice "has been born", and thus require the "se" in front of the ha nacido?????
In English, there are certain events that can only be described in passive voice. To be born is one of these passive only events: I was born on the first of June. See: http://www.elementalenglish.com/the-passive-voice-passive-only-verbs-part-3/
In Spanish, nacer is an intransitive verb that means to be born. So, yo nací el primero de junio is in active voice (thus no se) but means English passive voice I was born on the first of June. See: http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/courses/PASSIVE.HTM (at the very end of the page).
Yo nací "el uno de junio". In Spanish cardinal numbers are used for the days of the month, while in English the ordinals are used "the first of June"
Blas_de_Lezo00, although I agree with you for other days of the month, are you sure this is true for the first day of the month. I notice that many spanish speakers use the ordinal number primero (first) or 1o (1st) rather than the cardinal number uno (1).
Hi SFJuan!. Exactamente. Decimos 1° de enero, febrero, etc. (first) , para el resto del mes usamos: dos, tres, etc (de enero, febrero, etc). Saludos:)
"El bebé se ha nacido" was marked wrong, but "El bebé ha nacido" was accepted by DL.
Hablo español rogercchristie y el "se" no corresponde en la oración Ej: " Él se puso el pantalón", "ella se peinó el cabello", alguien se hizo algo a si mismo, pero una persona no se nace. He put on his pants, she combed her hair, someone make something to himself , but a person "no se nace a si misma". greetings. I hope you understand me.
Thank you grace. Yes indeed, I follow what you say. As SMAGringo suggested, I guess I was trying to make the sentence passive (as it is in English) but, as you say, that doesn't work in Spanish.
As I have said before "El español no es inglés con palabras diferentes". I should follow my own advice!
We are the same!! I say also: The English is not Spanish with different words! ja,ja,ja . Greetings
Neither haber nor nacer are reflexive verbs, so that's an incorrect use of the direct object pronoun. Otherwise, this could imply that the baby gave birth to itself.
Yes, it is wrong in that there is no pronomial form nacerse.
haber here is the auxiliary verb.
"Give birth to" is parir or tener cría.
That's redundant. "Nacer" is "to be born", so you're saying "The baby has been has been born."
I put that too. I don't see the button to subscribe to comments so I'm hoping leaving this comment will do it.
Está bien, es correcto decirlo así. Soy argentina hablo español. greetings
Hablo español . El "se" no corresponde en la oración Ej: " Él se puso el pantalón", "ella se peinó el cabello", alguien se hizo algo a si mismo, pero una persona no se nace. He put on his pants, she combed her hair, someone make something to himself , but a person "no se nace a si misma". greetings. I hope you understand me.
Why is "el bebe se ha sido nacer" incorrect," besides the fact that it is clumsy as all get-out?
Hablo español . El "se" no corresponde en la oración Ej: " Él se puso el pantalón", "ella se peinó el cabello", alguien se hizo algo a si mismo, pero una persona no se nace. He put on his pants, she combed her hair, someone make something to himself , but a person "no se nace a si misma". Nacer= to be born, then : el bebé ha nacido" it is enough, no more words.greetings. I hope you understand me.
No, but this section is working on the compound tenses. So, for the exercise at hand, those wouldn't be correct.
Why would nado or nato be incorrect? Are you saying that those versions of the past participle of nacer are only used as adjectives and never for the compound tenses?
Past participles can also be used as adjectives, in which case they must also match the plurality of the noun being modified. For example, if the noun being modified is a feminine gender and plural, then the past participle must also have a feminine ending and also be plural. But, when used as a compound tense, then the past participle is not changed.
In the current exercise, we are only using compound tenses. So, for the exercise, only a compound tense would be used. When I look at the conjugations for nacer, I don't see nado or nato listed for any conjugations of the infinitive nacer, to be born. Nato/nata are solely shown as adjectives. My dictionary shows nado as a conjugation of nadar which means "to swim." Nado would mean "I swim." The past participle for nacer is nacido.
There are three past participles for nacer: nacido, nado, and nato.
Interesting! I will refer to "501 Spanish Verbs" & Franklin Merriam-Webster electronic dictionary, both of which show only nacido as a past participle. And nato/nata as adjectives. Has anyone else seen alternative past participles for nacer ????
I would mark "to have been born" as incorrect in English. As far as I can remember, grammatically the present perfect describes an ongoing event, placed in the past. "I have been born" would mean that your birth is continuous, wouldn't it? You can't say "I have been born since 1986", can you?.. I agree with SFJuan
When someone I know had a baby recently, I got a text from the grandmother: "The baby has been born, and everything's OK, but [mother] is in surgery right now, so don't come to the hospital just yet."
The difference is between past and present perfect tenses:
Past: The baby was born.
Present perfect: The baby has been born.
With past tense was born, the act of being born was completed in the past, but has no connection with the present. What is important with past tense is the past, and you can tag it with a time/date: The baby was born yesterday.
With present perfect tense has been born, the act of being born was completed in the past also, but it has a connection with the present. In fact what is actually important in present perfect tense is not the past but the present: as of right now the act of being born is completed. The actual time of being born is not important. And you can't tag present perfect with a time/date. The baby has been born yesterday is incorrect.
The same is true for Spanish:
Past: el bebé nació ayer.
Present Perfect: el bebé ha nacido.
Nice explanation, John. Well laid out, and summed up, too. Sometimes I see technical explanations ending without tying it to anything we can relate to.
Liam684: Corresponde usar "el bebe", if you do not know if the baby is girl o boy. Saludos
Kola Lahaun! No hay diferencia, significan lo mismo. Both sentences are good
hablo español, Benjamin, "nene" is a boy until 12 years old, baby is from birth to 1 year old
Translation sounds like "She has born the baby." which clearly the one giving birth to the baby is not the subject, it's the baby being born. So wouldn't it be, "El babé ha sido nacer."?
That means "The baby has been to be born." Nacer needs to be conjugated, and ser is unnecessary in this sentence, since nacer includes being in its translation.
Ira, hablo español: Ha "nacido" el bebé ", nacido es masculino or "Ha nacido la bebé", if was a baby girl Saludos
When using present perfect, the past participle does not match the subject. So in this case, the past participle must be nacido even if the subject is feminine (and/or plural).
present perfect verbs always ends in 'o' regardless of the sex of the subject.
I have seen the man - Yo he visto el hombre I have talked to the woman - Yo he hablado con la mujer She has spoken with me - Ella ha hablado conmigo He has not eaten for a week - El no ha comido por uno semana
Basically, all of the verbs referred to by 'has, have' with end in 'do', never 'da'.
Nacido ha el Bebe was marked wrong word and it seems it was the positioning of the first two words. Also, I find that this iPad does not have accent capabilities for the comments section here.