For Easter, empanadas for everyone

PalmWith the arrival of Holy Week, a well-known scene has been repeated in many homes on the Islands. The kitchen has become the center of everything, with accumulated trays and batches of empanadas that have been succeeding each other to the point where, often, production has ended up exceeding any initial forecast. Amidst this rhythm, it may be that a moment has arrived when someone, half in jest, half in earnest, has posed this question: “For whom are all these empanadas?”. Orally, the phrase generates no doubt. No one gets stuck or sees any problem. But when it has to be written, even if it's on WhatsApp, perhaps we do hesitate a little: ‘por quién’ or ‘para quién’?

This hesitation is entirely common. The distinction between the prepositions ‘por’ and ‘para’ is one of the issues that generates the most doubt when writing, especially among speakers of Eastern Catalan, such as those from the Islands and Barcelona. In these dialects, the difference has been blurring in spontaneous speech, and ‘por’ tends to occupy almost all contexts. In contrast, in other varieties, such as Valencian and Tortosino, the distinction remains much more alive.

In formal registers

In any case, in the formal registers of standard language, it is considered pertinent to maintain this opposition. The good news, however, is that there is no need to memorize an endless list of cases: it is enough to have a clear general idea of what grammar dictates.

That said, 'para' is used to indicate destination or point of arrival. When we say we have bought a book "for Pau" or that there were empanadas "for everyone," we are introducing the recipient or beneficiary of the action. Deep down, there is an idea of direction, of a journey (even if abstract) that culminates in a final term.

On the other hand, 'por' is used, among other meanings, to express cause or motive. This is what we find in phrases like "they awarded him the prize for his latest book" and "we make empanadas out of tradition." In these cases, there is no recipient: the complement serves to explain why something happens.

With this basic opposition, the initial doubt is resolved without great difficulty. The most appropriate way is '¿para quién son estas empanadas?' (who are these empanadas for?), because what is being asked for is the recipient. We don't want to know why they were made, but to whom they are addressed.

The difference is perceived even better if we contrast very similar phrases. Thus, it is not exactly the same to say "he hecho empanadas por la familia" (I made empanadas because of the family) as "he hecho empanadas para la familia" (I made empanadas for the family). In the first case, the family can be interpreted as the motive (for example, because it was their turn, because someone had asked for them, or out of obligation). In the second, on the other hand, the family is the one who should receive them.

Now, this distinction that works quite cleanly with a noun becomes complicated when we move to constructions with infinitives. In these contexts, the traditional Fabian norm established a more precise distribution, but also perhaps more difficult to apply intuitively.

According to this criterion, 'por' should be used when the sentence depends on a verb of voluntary action with an agentive subject. This is the case in phrases like "llamamos a la madre para hablar un rato" (we called the mother to talk for a while) and "el equipo viajó a Valencia para jugar un partido de baloncesto" (the team traveled to Valencia to play a basketball game). It is also the usual preposition in metadiscursive expressions (that is, when we refer to the act of constructing discourse) such as 'para empezar' (to begin) or 'para acabar' (to end).

Instead, ‘para’ is used in other types of final constructions: when they depend on a noun (“it is a book to learn how world geopolitics works”), on an adjective or participle (“thyme soup is ideal to cure stomach ache”), and on a quantitative (“there will not be enough money to cover expenses”). In these cases, the idea of purpose is not linked to a concrete and immediate action, but has a more general value.

However, current regulations are more flexible. The Gramática de la lengua catalana (Grammar of the Catalan Language) from the Institut d’Estudis Catalans admits that, in these contexts with infinitive, one can choose either to maintain the distinction or to neutralize it. This means that we can say that he called his mother “to talk to her” or “to talk to her”, and we can also say that that book is “to learn how geopolitics works” or “to learn it”.

Two possible paths

In practice, then, this opens up two possible avenues: to follow the classical distinction or to simplify and always use a single form before the infinitive. In both cases, the most important thing is consistency: within the same text, it is advisable to maintain the same criterion.

There are, finally, some contexts in which ‘per’ and ‘per a’ can be alternated without significant differences in meaning. This is the case with expressions of opinion (“for me / by me it’s fine”) or certain concessive constructions (“for the age he is / given his age, he is very well”). In these uses, the choice of one form or the other does not substantially alter the interpretation.

All of this does not mean that the exclusive use of ‘per’ by speakers of Eastern Catalan is inappropriate in everyday colloquial speech. On the contrary: it is an widespread and natural solution, and in most situations the context already avoids any ambiguity. However, when we write, especially if the context is formal, keeping this distinction in mind allows us to be more precise, something that our readers will always appreciate.