To Be or Not to Be

(Posted with apologies to Lee and Marlene Talma, whom I promised not to bore with tales of Spanish verbs.)

Marlo and I are resting in our room between morning Spanish class and afternoon outing.

I say, “El pobre no esta sobre la acerca hoy. (The poor man is not on the sidewalk today.)”

Then I wonder aloud which “to be” verb I should have used: ser or estar.

Marlo says localization of events requires ser.

I respond that on the other hand, there’s that rhyme:

                “How you feel and where you are,

                Always use the verb estar.”

 Other rules: temporary—use ser. Permanent—use estar.

Is the beggar an event or not? Is he there temporarily or permanently?

Uncertain, we move to a review of verb tenses.

Let’s see—

Ser in imperfect tense—era, eras, era, eramos, eran. . .

Estar in imperfect—fui, fuiste, etc.

No, no—that’s wrong--estar in the imperfect is estaba, estabas. . .

 Fui, fuiste…is ser in the perfect tense.

And estar in perfect is estuvo, estuviste . . .

With the helping verb haber, there are further forms for each.

I become the Sesame Street Count. I want to pound my head on a piano. “I’ll never get it right. Never, never, never. . . ”

Yesterday, Marlo was in search of the third person perfect singular for “to give.” Was it regular or irregular? 

Was it or was it not reflexive?

Fellow North American Matthew—a Spanish major in Granada for more fluency—thought the correct form was “dio” but wasn’t sure.

He disappeared into his room and returned with a fat volume. He found a page and confirmed. Yes, it was dio.

Then he showed Marlo the book title: The Big Red Book of Spanish Verbs.  "For future learning," he said.

Marlo managed a weak laugh. “I should live so long,”

We won’t.

Perhaps in the mystery beyond, there will be time to master Spanish verbs.

I think it’s called eternity.