"Now all has been determined."
Translation:Ahora todo se ha determinado.
Your option is right, but we don't use the passive too much, so it's better if you can avoid it.
That's what I thought, but since it is correct it should be accepted as a correct answer.
its correct in the english world.... but thats not how the natives use it.... strictly speaking when something is not commonly use by the natives, it should be considered wrong...
Does the 'se' replace the use of 'lo' for establishing the subject of the sentance?
Yes, although I believe you mean "object", not "subject". "Se" is the reflexive object marker, indicating that the object is the subject.
When you say "ha determinado," you are saying "has determined." When you say "se ha determinado," you are saying "has BEEN determined." What everyone in this thread is talking about is that object marker pronouns (Thank you, Yerrick, for that term!) translate into passive voice in English. This is not a literal word-for-word translation. Rather, it is the colloquial usage of each language.
Why not "todo se ha determinado ahora". It seems more natural to me ... and wrong by DL.
I have noticed that it seems to be more natural to start Spanish sentences with the adverb, unlike in English where it's optional to place the adverb at the beginning, end, or middle of the sentence, depending on the other things you want the sentence to accomplish.
Why isn't "Ya todo se ha determinado." accepted? Doesn't "ya" trtanslate to "now"?
Reading through this comment board I got a little confused. I wrote "ahora todo ha determinado" and it was marked wrong. saying I missed a word: "se". For the record, is "se" totally necessary, and if so, does "Se ha" translate to "has been" and is that usted often?
Jason, as another student, I am sure the "se" is necessary because the subject of the sentence (all) did not perform the action (determined). Spanish grammar requires us to indicate this "Passive Voice" by adding the "se". Secondly, has been translates to he/has/ha/hemos/han (has) sido (been).
Yes, but 'has been' is gotten from this sentence, and the "ha sido" is not present, so my question was if "se ha [verb]" effectively translates to "has been [verb]" and if that structure is used often.
"Has been" is not simple present. However, it is present perfect, which combines "has"(which in Spanish is "ha"), an English word that is in perfect tense, and "been," a word that always denotes passive voice in English. The "been" is not a word in the Spanish sentence that can be translated. Rather, the reflexive "se" indicates that "ha determinado" (has determined) needs to have "se" added in order to make it translatable to "has been determined" (se ha determinado).
Though I guess the "ha determinado" translates to 'has been determined' and the "se" is necessary for the reasons you pointed out.
Thanks Linda...it's so discouraging to be downvoted, but not given an explanation or alternative solution. a Lingot to you :)
Looking at this thread, I did some more digging and found a website (http://www.spanishdict.com/answers/100040/ser-vs.-estar#.V6tbnq6Twfo) explaining the different uses of "ser" (participle: sido) and "estar" (participle: estado). In fact, "ser" cannot be used with a reflexive pronoun (http://www.spanishdict.com/conjugate/ser). These verbs' participles both mean "been," but they are used in different contexts.
The logic of the perfect tenses is the same in both Spanish and English, in that they each are speaking of a completed action. However, the two Spanish verbs that mean "have," "haber" and "tener," are used in different contexts, depending on whether the helping verb (haber) is needed or the main verb (tener) is needed.
You probably got down voted as you talked about passive voice rsther than reflexive. The English naturally uses passive, but as explained in early comment this is non-idiomatic Spanish. A reflexive pronoun is in answer, suggesting all sorted itself out. Seriously, there's too much translation in DL, you build fluency & good habits by using a language, NOT by analytically doing word for word translations.
Isn't "all" plural, so wouldn't it be "han"? Also, I thought this would be a good time to insert "ya" but DL didn't hear me, nor did it hear the "los" I put in because I thought "all" was a plural direct object that needed another pronoun (I tend to guess at these things). So what I really said was: "Ahora ya los han todo determinado" and it apparently heard: " Ahora todo se ha determinado" so I remain confused about how much I said was really wrong. Can someone correct me?
All is a collective pronoun so the verb is singular. (ie: All is well). All is the subject of the sentence. The sentence is in the past tense, so "ya" cannot be translated as now, but as already. Hope this helps?