Translation:Five months later a basic program was initiated.
That would be: "Cinco meses después de que tú/usted/él ella iniciases/iniciara un programa básico".
oh, ok. Wasn't thinking right. que just means that here. Five months after that...
Nope. The "que" in that structure has to do with the fact that there's a new clause, with its own subject and verb. In English we often introduce a clause with a "that", but we're pretty permissive about allowing the "that" to vanish. "I hoped [that] she would arrive early." Spanish is much pickier about this -- the "que" in an equivalent spot is almost always obligatory. "Esperé que ella llegara temprano."
@Babella, I'm wondering why you used the imperfect subjunctive here, rather than just preterite? If I'm understanding the English phrase that you were translating, I would've put it in Spanish as, "Cinco meses después de[l momento en] que tú iniciaste un programa básico... algo ocurrió." Which is a phrase, not a complete sentence. "Five months after [the time that] you started a basic program... something happened."
The original Spanish prompt, on the other hand, is a complete sentence, using the reflexive particle for a passive construction. Reflexive as passive -- as a way to eliminate the actor -- is extremely common. "Se habla español aquí," does not mean, "Spanish speaks itself here." It means, "Spanish is spoken here. (By whoever happens to speak, which we're not going to tell you about right now.)"
(And then the third major use of the reflexive particle is completion. Comerse is "to eat up, to devour," that is, to eat such that there is no more eating to do. Similarly, si tu estás cayendo, you're falling, and there's a chance you may catch yourself. Si tú te has caído, you've already gone splat, because the se in caerse indicates completion.)
"Se inició" is the part that translates as "was initiated". If you say "began", that would be "empezó" or "comenzó".
You could probably translate se inició as was begun. I think the point is that the se makes the verb reflexive, so you need the was here.
More to the point, the se makes it passive, which is a thing se does. Don't let the term "reflexive pronoun" mislead you. "Reflexive" verbs are sometimes true reflexives, but just as often the reflexive particle indicates a passive verb, or a completed verb. I offered more examples in a comment in a different part of this page.
I used the word "after" for después rather than "later" and I was counted incorrect despite the fact that "after" is one of the accepted definitions for "después". Is this an actual problem or is this just the program having too narrow a definition?
I also used "after" but I guess I understood why I was wrong: "after" is usually "después de", not just "después".
Why is this wrong? : Five months after a basic program was initiated. And this one?: Five months later he initiated a basic program. It doesn't accept anything or give me a translation so I'm stuck, help?
Se inició is a sort of passive voice, so there is no "he" to initiate the program. The program was initiated - we don't know by whom. As for Five months after, that sounds funny in English. Five months after what...?
Yes, "se" is often used for passive voice. It always looks like a reflexive to me; "a basic program initiated itself."
Okay thanks! By the way, I knew that that one wasn't finished as a sentence, but duo often has these weird unfinished sectences, so I thought I'd try.. :)
You could say the same of later. Later implies after something. Inicio is on its own was initiated isn't it? So couldnt it in effect be by he, she etc. As someone has to initiate it. Yes we don't know who but we never do know. Isn't this really a matter of context or am I way off base here?
Can someone tell me what "Five months later he initiated a basic program" is in Spanish? (Without using él.) Is it the same except without the "se"?
I would translate it as "Cinco meses después inició un programa básico." So, yes, the same but without "se". Without "él", however, it can also mean "you initiated" or "she initiated", but it is fine if "he" is understood from the context.
'Five months later a basic program was initiated' is the passive voice. Shouldn't such a translation use a past participle for such a translation: 'Cinco meses después un programa básico fue inicido'?
I feel like 'Five months later a basic program initiated' is the better english here
as I'm not a native English speaker, I wonder do you really says "five months later a program WAS initiated"? coz I thought five months later make it "will be initiated" and lost a heart
It depends on the context. You could be talking about, say, a failure in something six years ago, in June. 'Five months later, a programme was initiated'. You would say 'a programme will be initiated' if you are speaking about the present 'This is not working correctly, so a programme will be initiated to correct it'
Can I ask anyone out there. If I was to say. 5 years after a basic program was initiated. Meaning I'm talking about the present day been 5 years after the initiation. How would that be translated. As the sentence is translated as 'later' its suggesting I was talking about another passed event before thiis.
Why isn't "a basic program was initiated five months later " also acceptable?
Update today, now when I get something wrong I can no longer see the text where I made the mistake. It's completely covered over, ridiculous.
Why not "five months later they initiated..."? While it is not passive voice, "they" in English is often used when the subject is unknown or intended to be indefinite.