Breakdown of A advogada prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei com palavras simples.
Questions & Answers about A advogada prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei com palavras simples.
A advogada literally means “the (female) lawyer”.
- a = the feminine singular definite article (like “the” in English).
- advogada = “female lawyer”.
In Portuguese, most common nouns normally appear with an article, especially when you’re talking about a specific person:
- A advogada prometeu… = The lawyer (that we have in mind) promised…
Using the article makes it clear we are talking about a specific lawyer, not lawyers in general.
Yes, advogada is the feminine form and refers to a female lawyer.
- o advogado = male lawyer (or, in some contexts, a generic lawyer)
- a advogada = female lawyer
Portuguese professions are usually gendered:
- o médico / a médica – (male/female) doctor
- o professor / a professora – (male/female) teacher
In everyday European Portuguese, if you know the person is a woman, you normally use the feminine form (advogada). The masculine advogado can sometimes be used generically (when gender is unknown or irrelevant), but if you clearly know it’s a woman, the feminine is standard.
Both patterns exist, but they’re slightly different:
prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei…
Literally: “(she) promised that she would explain the law…”- Here que introduces a full clause with a conjugated verb (haveria).
prometeu explicar a lei…
Literally: “(she) promised to explain the law…”- Here explicar is an infinitive directly after prometer.
In practice, both are correct and natural. Using que + clause often sounds a bit more formal or explicit; prometer + infinitive is a bit more compact and neutral. In many contexts, they’re interchangeable in meaning.
haver de + infinitive expresses:
- strong intention,
- moral obligation or
- a future event (especially in European Portuguese).
In the sentence:
- haveria de explicar ≈ “would explain”, “was going to explain”, “was bound to explain”.
Some approximate English feelings it can give:
- “she would explain the law (for sure / as she had promised)”
- “she was to explain the law”
The -ria ending (haveria) is the conditional, so here it’s a future in the past (“she promised that later she would explain…”).
Both use the same pattern haver de + infinitive, but in different tenses:
há de explicar – present (or future from the present point of view):
- “she is going to explain / she will certainly explain”
haveria de explicar – conditional (future from a past point of view):
- “she would explain / she was going to explain”
Because the main verb is in the past (prometeu = “she promised”), Portuguese typically also shifts the future-like verb to a “future in the past” form:
Ela promete que há de explicar a lei.
She promises that she will explain the law.Ela prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei.
She promised that she would explain the law.
So haveria de matches the past perspective of prometeu.
Yes, you could, with only small nuances:
ia explicar a lei
- Uses ir in the imperfect (ia) + infinitive.
- Very common in speech.
- Meaning: “was going to explain / would explain”.
explicaria a lei
- Simple conditional.
- Slightly more neutral/standard; also common.
- Meaning: “would explain the law”.
haveria de explicar a lei
- Uses haver de, which can sound a bit more formal, old‑fashioned, or emphatic in European Portuguese.
- Adds a nuance of “was bound/definitely supposed to explain”.
All three can fit:
- A advogada prometeu que ia explicar a lei…
- A advogada prometeu que explicaria a lei…
- A advogada prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei…
Same core meaning; haveria de is just a slightly different stylistic choice.
In European Portuguese:
- haver de + infinitive is still understood by everyone and used, but:
- It is more common in writing than in casual speech.
- It often sounds formal, literary, or slightly old‑fashioned, depending on context.
In everyday informal speech, people more often say:
- vou explicar (“I’m going to explain”)
- ia explicar (“I was going to explain”)
- explicarei / explicaria (“I will / would explain”), though explicarei is also relatively formal in speech.
So the sentence as given is perfectly correct and natural, but has a somewhat elevated / careful tone.
Portuguese uses the definite article with abstract nouns much more than English:
- a lei = “the law” (as a general system, or a specific law, depending on context)
- English often says just “law”, but Portuguese tends to say a lei.
Compare:
- A lei é importante. – Law is important / The law is important.
- Aprender a lei é difícil. – Learning (the) law is difficult.
In this specific sentence, a lei most naturally means “the law” in general, or the relevant law they are talking about. Leaving out the article (∅ lei) would usually sound wrong or at least very strange here.
Because explicar in Portuguese, like “explain” in English, takes a direct object:
- explicar a lei – to explain the law
When you say who you’re explaining to, then you add a preposition:
- explicar a lei aos clientes – to explain the law to the clients
- explicar o problema a alguém – to explain the problem to someone
So the pattern is:
- explicar + [thing] + a + [person]
In your sentence, only the thing (the law) appears, so there’s no preposition before a lei.
Both com and em can sometimes translate as “in” in English, but they’re used differently.
Here, com expresses the means / instrument / manner:
- com palavras simples = “with simple words”, “using simple words”.
This is the standard way to talk about the way something is explained:
- Explica isso com exemplos. – Explain that with examples.
- Fala comigo com calma. – Talk to me calmly / with calm.
You can find em palavras simples in Portuguese, but it’s less common and usually part of fixed expressions like:
- em poucas palavras – in a few words
In your sentence, com palavras simples is the usual and most natural choice.
Yes, but with some nuances.
The most neutral word order is:
- explicar a lei com palavras simples
Other orders are possible, especially in more literary or emphatic styles:
- explicar, com palavras simples, a lei – possible, slightly more marked/emphatic.
- explicar com palavras simples a lei – grammatically possible, but sounds less natural in everyday speech.
As a general rule, in neutral modern Portuguese:
- Verb
- Direct object (a lei)
- Adverbial phrases / complements (com palavras simples)
So your original order is the most typical and idiomatic.
prometeu is the pretérito perfeito simples (simple past) of prometer.
Functionally, it usually corresponds to English “promised”:
- Ela prometeu. – She promised.
This tense is used for completed actions in the past, often seen as a single event:
- Ontem, ela prometeu que ia ajudar.
Yesterday, she promised she would help.
So A advogada prometeu… is directly parallel to “The lawyer promised…” in English.
You only need to change the article and the noun for the profession:
- O advogado prometeu que haveria de explicar a lei com palavras simples.
Changes:
- A advogada → O advogado
- a (feminine article) → o (masculine article)
- advogada (female lawyer) → advogado (male lawyer)
Everything else in the sentence stays the same; verbs don’t change with gender.
The sentence is grammatically fine in Brazil, but Brazilian Portuguese speakers would less often use haver de in everyday speech.
More typical Brazilian-style versions:
- A advogada prometeu que ia explicar a lei com palavras simples.
- A advogada prometeu que explicaria a lei com palavras simples.
Both are very natural in Brazil.
European Portuguese speakers also use these versions, but are a bit more likely than Brazilians to accept or produce haveria de explicar in everyday language, especially in more formal or careful speech.