A chef vegetariana explicou‑nos como escolhe as melhores especiarias para cada prato.

The vegetarian chef explained to us how she chooses the best spices for each dish.

Breakdown of A chef vegetariana explicou‑nos como escolhe as melhores especiarias para cada prato.

• para: for
• escolher: to choose
• explicar: to explain
• melhor: best
• o prato: the dish
• como: how
• cada: each
• nos: us
• vegetariano: vegetarian
• a especiaria: the spice
• a chef: the chef

Questions & Answers about A chef vegetariana explicou‑nos como escolhe as melhores especiarias para cada prato.

In A chef vegetariana, does A mean the or a, and why is it capitalised?

A here is the feminine singular definite article, so it means the, not a:

• A chef vegetariana = the vegetarian chef
• Uma chef vegetariana = a vegetarian chef

It is capitalised simply because it is the first word of the sentence, just like The in English. Inside a sentence you would write:

• Conheço *a chef vegetariana do restaurante ali ao lado.*
  “I know the vegetarian chef from the restaurant next door.”

Why is it chef vegetariana and not something like chefa or chef vegetariano? How is gender shown here?

Chef is a borrowed word (from French) and does not change its form for masculine/feminine in Portuguese. The gender is shown by:

• the article: a (feminine) vs o (masculine)
• the adjective: vegetariana (feminine) vs vegetariano (masculine)

So:

• A chef vegetariana = female chef, vegetarian
• O chef vegetariano = male chef, vegetarian

You might also see chefe (with e at the end) in European Portuguese, which does look more like a native Portuguese word:

• a chefe, o chefe

But in all cases, the gender agreement shows up in the words around it, not in chef itself.

Why does the adjective vegetariana come after chef, instead of before it like in English (vegetarian chef)?

In Portuguese, the default position for adjectives is after the noun:

• chef vegetariana = “vegetarian chef”
• prato delicioso = “delicious dish”
• especiarias caras = “expensive spices”

Adjectives can come before the noun, but that usually adds some nuance (emphasis, subjectivity, or a slightly different meaning). For a neutral, descriptive phrase like this, noun + adjective is the normal order.

So chef vegetariana is the natural, neutral way to say vegetarian chef.

Why is explicou‑nos written with a hyphen, and can I say nos explicou instead?

Explicou‑nos is a verb + clitic pronoun combination:

• explicou = “(she) explained”
• nos = “to us”

In European Portuguese, in a normal affirmative sentence like this, unstressed object pronouns (clitics) usually go after the verb and are joined with a hyphen:

• explicou‑nos = “explained to us”
• mostrou‑me = “showed me”
• disseram‑lhe = “they told him/her”

You normally put the pronoun before the verb (without a hyphen) only when certain words attract it, such as não, que, se, quem, já, ainda, etc.:

• Ela não nos explicou. – “She didn’t explain to us.”
• Quando nos explicou, percebemos tudo. – “When she explained to us, we understood everything.”

So in European Portuguese:

• explicou‑nos ✔ (default, normal)
• nos explicou ✖ (sounds Brazilian / non‑standard in Portugal in this context)

In Brazilian Portuguese, nos explicou is common, but in Portugal explicou‑nos is the standard form here.

What is the difference between nos in explicou‑nos and nós?

They are two different pronouns:

• nós = stressed subject pronoun: “we”
  • Nós explicámos. – “We explained.”
• nos = unstressed object (clitic) pronoun: “to us / us”
  • Ela explicou‑nos. – “She explained to us.”

Key points:

• nós usually stands alone and can take a written accent.
• nos is usually attached to a verb (explicou‑nos, disse‑nos) or placed directly before it (nos explicou in BP, or in EP when attracted by certain words: não nos explicou).

Why is it explicou‑nos como escolhe (past + present) instead of explicou‑nos como escolhia (past + past)?

The tense choice changes the meaning slightly:

• explicou‑nos como escolhe
  She explained how she chooses (in general, as a current, ongoing method or habit).

• explicou‑nos como escolhia
  She explained how she used to choose / was choosing (focusing on the way she did it at that time in the past, not necessarily now).

By using escolhe (present), the sentence suggests that the method she explained is still valid now, like a general rule or professional routine. Portuguese allows this mix of past in the main verb and present in the subordinate clause when we talk about things that are still true.

Could I say explicou‑nos como é que escolhe instead of como escolhe?

You can say explicou‑nos como é que escolhe, and it would still be understood.

However:

• In direct questions, como é que…? is very common:
  Como é que escolhe as especiarias? – “How do you choose the spices?”
• In indirect speech (embedded clause after a verb like explicar, dizer, saber), the simpler form is more natural:
  • explicou‑nos como escolhe…
  • disse‑nos como faz…
  • sabia como resolver…

So explicou‑nos como escolhe feels more natural and slightly more formal/neutral than explicou‑nos como é que escolhe.

Where is “she” in this sentence? Why is there no word like ela before escolhe?

Portuguese is a “null subject” (or pro‑drop) language: you can normally omit subject pronouns because the verb ending shows who the subject is.

Here:

• explicou‑nos → verb in 3rd person singular (he/she/you‑formal)
• The context (a chef vegetariana) tells you who it is.

You could say:

• A chef vegetariana explicou‑nos como ela escolhe…

but that sounds redundant unless you need to emphasise ela (contrast with someone else, avoid ambiguity, etc.). In normal speech and writing, ela is just left out because escolhe already tells you it’s 3rd person singular.

Why is it as melhores especiarias and not just melhores especiarias without the article as?

Portuguese tends to use the definite article more than English, especially with:

• superlatives (like melhor / melhores)
• generic or specific groups

As melhores especiarias suggests something like:

• the best spices (available / for that purpose)

If you drop the article and say melhores especiarias, it sounds:

• less natural in this position, and
• more like you’re just listing a type (better spices), not the best ones.

So:

• as melhores especiarias ≈ “the best spices”
• Using the article here is the normal, idiomatic choice.

Why melhores and not something like mais boas for “better/best”?

Melhor / melhores is an irregular comparative/superlative form, just like English good → better/best:

• bom / boa = good
• melhor / melhores = better / best

You don’t normally say mais bom / mais boa to mean “better”. You use melhor:

• Estas especiarias são melhores. – “These spices are better.”
• As melhores especiarias – “the best spices”

So as melhores especiarias is the correct, idiomatic way to say “the best spices”.

What is the difference between especiarias and the word temperos I often hear?

Both relate to flavouring food, but they’re not exact synonyms:

• especiarias = spices, usually dried plant parts with strong aroma/flavour:
  cinnamon, cloves, cumin, paprika, etc.
• temperos = more general seasonings, which can include:
  • especiarias (spices)
  • ervas aromáticas (herbs)
  • sal, pimenta
  • ready‑made seasoning mixes, marinades, etc.

In this sentence, especiarias is a good choice because a chef is picking specific spices for each dish, not just any kind of seasoning.

Why is it para cada prato and not por cada prato? And why is cada followed by a singular noun?

1. para vs. por

• para cada prato = “for each dish” (purpose/target)
  • Which spices are for which dish.
• por prato usually means “per dish” (rate/quantity):
  • Dois euros por prato. – “Two euros per dish.”

So para cada prato is correct for assigning spices to dishes.

2. cada + singular

In Portuguese, cada is always followed by a singular noun:

• cada prato – each dish
• cada pessoa – each person
  (not ✖ cadas pessoas)

Even though the meaning is plural (each of several dishes), the grammar stays singular after cada.