Talk:Sí se puede

message: Doesn't "Si, se puede" actually literally mean "Yes, it is possible" not
"Yes, we can" (which would be "Si, podemos")?
:I think your right.  "Se puede" is a reflexive verb (the infinitive of "poder" which is "to be able") and "se puede" is the appropriate conjugation for a reflexive verb for a third party or object (hence it being "it" and not "we).  If it were "yes, we can" it would be "Sì, nos podemos."  --Tjss (Talk) 00:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, shouldn't the translation be closer to "Yes, it is itself possible." or "Yes, it is possible itself"?  The translations in the article does not convey the reflexive pronoun properly. Danielgump (talk) 15:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Whenever I've seen this slogan it was "Si se puede," without an accent on the "Si," and without a comma. I've only taken Spanish one year at our university but IMHO that translates to "If it's possible."--TDKehoe (talk) 21:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Those are misspellings. [Ivan]
I think that there are enough people in America who speak both Spanish and English fluently that those of us who have to look these words up in a dictionary should leave the translation to them. There's more to words than the denotation and sometimes a literal translation is not best: connotation counts too. - The Talking Sock talk contribs  16:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The correct meaning of "Si se puede"?

message: "Sí Se Puede" is the title of a third season episode of Dexter. I think maybe there should be a disambig page. - 68.146.211.84 (talk) 08:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, that episode can happily reside at Sí Se Puede (Dexter) and a hatnote can say "for the Dexter episode see Sí Se Puede (Dexter)". It would be just silly to displace this topic because of a TV episode named after the phrase itself. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU! 17:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dexter 

message: Looks like User:MarshalN20 wants to remove the "Alternativa Sí se puede por Tenerife" mention. Can you explain why, please? To me, it seems a prominent use of the term (in the organization's name, no less), by a group that can be assumed to be fluent in Spanish. You disagree? I admit, I'm no expert on either Spanish or the organization, so I'm open to discussing it. --GRuban (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I explained it on my edit to it in the article. It is original research. You are basing the translation of the phrase to the English language based on how a company translates their slogan. There is nothing in that link that direcly states or explains what the meaning of "Si se puede" is; with that link you are simply implying the meaning, and that is original research. Wikipedia does not support original research, therefore the link (and, hence, the unreferenced sentence) should either be deleted (which is the easy option) or somehow incorporated into the article elsewhere and in another manner (which is the hard option). However, the option which is not available is keeping it the way it currently is.--MarshalN20 | Talk 13:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, I can manage that. I'll provide alternate sources that explicitly say that this is how it is translated, and merely keep this as one example of that. --GRuban (talk) 13:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Alternativa" translation 

message: So, let's make it quick. "Si se puede" is a Spanish phrase, correct? Right. Once that is established, next comes the time to evaluate the phrase for what it means. Correct? right. Having a deep knowledge of the Spanish language, I know that the translation of the word to English is: "Yes it can [be done]." Literal translations:
*If it were "Yes it can be done" it would have to be "Si se puede hacer". However, the "hacer" is implied in the "Si se puede."
*For it to be "Yes we can" or "Yes you can," the phrase would need to be "Si podemos" or "Si puedes."
Alright, got it? Good. So then you may ask yourself why exactly are people translating the phrase into English incorrectly. Are these people idiots or are they just completely ignorant about the Spanish language, or is this information I'm providing you wrong?
*Answers: Maybe. Yes. No.
If you want to know how ignorance develops, just scroll up a bit up and see how some of our fellow wikipedians struggle to get the right meaning. These people don't know Spanish (have taken perhaps a year of it in some university), and yet they are trying to impose an English meaning to it. We must assume that they are doing this in good faith (i.e., they don't know any better), but it is completely irrational to take their statements into account when they clearly do not know what they are talking about.
*So, then, how do we go about fixing this article?
I'm not sure really. I tried editing it but someone reverted my edits and told me to discuss it here in the talk page. My suggestion is to split the meaning into the correct literal translation, and into the incorrect political/propagandist/ignorant translation.--MarshalN20 | Talk 13:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish language translation 

message: Responding the translations, it should be pointed out that the 'se' (reflexive particle) has usages in Spanish that cannot be approximated by English oneself/itself/yourself/etc.
Se alquila cuarto: Room for rent (lit. "Room rents itself")
Se vende carro: Car for sale (lit. "Car sells itself")
Ella se ve muy contenta: She looks happy (lit. "She sees herself happy"...more directly "She is seen happy")
Se publico' en marzo: It was published in March (lit. It published itself in March)
.
The second of the four examples above highlight the absence of the passive voice in all but the most academic and technical Spanish. The passive voice in English de-emphasizes the agent (the active participant or subject, hence passive).
So, literally we could read "se puede" as "one can oneself," or, as the above poster mentioned with the implication of the verb "hacer" (mandatory in English with modals, not in Spanish with 'poder') it could be "it can be (done)" (passive). 
However, as those of us who have ever seen what Google translator does to a foreign language paragraph, a literal translation rarely serves meaning. Meaning is the only part of language that needs to be translated, everything else (the little words and how they are arranged and interconnected) are just the whimsy of a given language.
With all this in mind, the anonymous third person implied by "se puede" is actually the collective first person (I and you and probably others), akin to the meaning of "on" in French or "a gente" in Brazilian Portuguese - where "we" is implied by a third person pronoun.
Thus, I must insist that "we" is the correct meaning-bearing translation (which is the only kind of translation that is true) for the construction involved in "se puede."   74.233.115.23 (talk) 18:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "se" in the phrase 

message: this phrase has been common in the US for some time now, and it is ALWAYS rendered as "yes, we can".  perhaps it is obama's influence, but i have never ONCE seen it as "yes, it is possible", "yes, you can", or any of the others listed.
as such, wiki rules require the COMMON EQUIVALENT be given priority.  i.e. "translate" it as "yes we can" -- even if incorrect -- then put "lit. ---" in parentheses.
don't think of it as a translation, necessarily.  think of it as a parallel, competing, slogan.  there are more extreme examples ("coke adds life" becoming every manner of "happy life" in foreign langs); wiki follows actual usage on these. 66.30.47.138 (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  wiki rules