Log inSign up

Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica dos bilhetes no telemóvel, para o caso de perder o papel.

Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica dos bilhetes no telemóvel, para o caso de perder o papel.
I always keep an electronic version of the tickets on my phone, in case I lose the paper one.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Portuguese grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Portuguese now

Questions & Answers about Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica dos bilhetes no telemóvel, para o caso de perder o papel.

Why is it Guardo and not Eu guardo? Is the subject pronoun usually omitted?

Yes. In European Portuguese, subject pronouns like eu, tu, ele are often omitted because the verb ending already shows the subject.

  • Guardo already tells you it’s “I keep” (1st person singular).
  • Saying Eu guardo is possible, but you tend to use eu only:
    • for emphasis: Eu guardo sempre… (I, specifically, always keep…)
    • to contrast with someone else: Eu guardo, mas tu não guardas.

So Guardo sempre… is the most natural neutral version.

Why is sempre placed between guardo and uma versão? Can it go somewhere else?

In Portuguese, adverbs like sempre usually come:

  1. Between the conjugated verb and its object, as in the sentence:

    • Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica…

  2. Or before the verb, often for emphasis or a slightly different rhythm:

    • Sempre guardo uma versão eletrónica… (sounds a bit more emphatic/dramatic).

Putting sempre at the end (Guardo uma versão eletrónica sempre) is possible but sounds less natural in this specific sentence; it can feel slightly awkward or marked.

The most neutral, everyday order here is exactly what you see:
[Verb] + [sempre] + [object] → Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica…

Why is it uma versão eletrónica, but dos bilhetes (with the definite article)? Why not de bilhetes?

Two different things are happening:

  1. Uma versão eletrónica

    • uma = an / one → an electronic version (not a specific one already known in the conversation).
    • It’s an indefinite thing you keep.

  2. dos bilhetes = de + os bilhetes

    • os bilhetes = the tickets (specific ones: e.g. the tickets for this trip, this concert, etc.)
    • de links versão and bilhetes: a version of the tickets.
    • So uma versão eletrónica dos bilhetes = an electronic version of the tickets (those particular tickets).

de bilhetes (without the article) would sound like “a version of tickets (in general)”, which doesn’t fit this context as well. You’re talking about the tickets for a given event or journey.

What exactly does dos mean in versão eletrónica dos bilhetes?

dos is the contraction of the preposition de + the definite article os:

  • de (of) + os (the, plural masculine) → dos (of the)

So:

  • versão eletrónica dos bilhetes
    = versão eletrónica de + os bilhetes
    = electronic version of the tickets.
Why is it no telemóvel and not no meu telemóvel? Isn’t it “on my phone”?

In English you have to say “on my phone”, but in Portuguese the possessive is often omitted when:

  • it’s obvious who the owner is, especially for:
    • body parts: Lavei as mãos. (I washed my hands.)
    • personal objects: Esqueci a carteira. (I forgot my wallet.)
    • things that are clearly “yours” in this context, like your phone.

So no telemóvel is naturally understood as “on my phone” in this sentence.

You can say no meu telemóvel; it’s correct and can add clarity or emphasis, but it isn’t necessary.

What’s the difference between telemóvel and celular / telefone?
  • telemóvel
    • Standard term in European Portuguese for mobile phone / cell phone.
  • celular
    • Standard term in Brazilian Portuguese.
    • In Portugal, celular is understood but sounds Brazilian.
  • telefone
    • General word for telephone.
    • Can be:
      • a landline
      • a mobile phone (from context)
    • To be specific in Portugal, people say telemóvel.

In Portugal, the most natural word in this context is telemóvel.

How does para o caso de perder o papel work grammatically? Why perder, not a conjugated verb like perca?

Para o caso de… is a fixed pattern meaning “in case (of)…” or “for the possibility of…”.

Structure here:

  • para (for)
  • o caso (the case / the situation)
  • de (of)
  • perder o papel (losing the paper → infinitive phrase)

So perder is the infinitive, used as a kind of noun phrase: the case of (me/you/one) losing the paper.

Portuguese normally prefers this infinitive construction after para o caso de:

  • Guardo… para o caso de perder o papel.
    (I keep… in case I lose the paper.)

You could say a fully conjugated form like:

  • para o caso de eu perder o papel
  • para o caso de que eu perca o papel (very formal / literary)

…but in everyday speech the infinitive perder o papel is by far the most natural choice.

Who is the subject of perder in para o caso de perder o papel? Is it clear?

The subject is understood from context: it’s the same as the main sentence’s subject, eu (I).

So:

  • Guardo… → I keep…
  • (eu) perder o papel → (I) lose the paper.

In Portuguese, when the subject of the infinitive is the same as the subject of the main verb, it’s often not repeated:

  • Guardo… para o caso de perder o papel.
    = Guardo… para o caso de eu perder o papel.
    (The second is explicit but less idiomatic here.)
Why is it perder o papel (“lose the paper”) and not perder o bilhete (“lose the ticket”)?

Here o papel refers to the paper ticket (the physical piece of paper), to contrast with the electronic version.

If you said perder o bilhete, it would be perfectly understandable, but:

  • o papel emphasizes the physical medium (paper)
  • You’re implying: If I lose the paper copy, I still have the digital one.

So it’s a natural way to contrast paper vs electronic versions.

Could I say para o caso de eu perder o papel instead? Is that wrong?

It’s not wrong; it’s grammatically correct:

  • para o caso de eu perder o papel = “in case I lose the paper”

However, in everyday European Portuguese:

  • The version without “eu” is more natural and smoother:
    • para o caso de perder o papel

Adding eu can sound a bit more formal or slightly heavier. You’d typically only include it for extra clarity or emphasis.

Can I change perder o papel to perdê-lo (lose it)? How would that work?

Yes, you can refer back to o papel with a clitic pronoun:

  • para o caso de o perder
  • para o caso de perdê-lo

Both mean: in case I lose it (the paper).

Notes:

  • o perder: pronoun before the infinitive, more typical in European Portuguese.
  • perdê-lo: pronoun after the infinitive, joined with a hyphen (also correct and common).

All of these are acceptable in Portugal; the original perder o papel is just clearer and more explicit.

Why is the present tense guardo used here? In English we’d say “I always keep”—is that the same idea?

Yes. Portuguese presente do indicativo covers:

  • current actions
  • habitual actions
  • general truths

Here Guardo sempre… expresses a habit / routine:

  • Guardo sempre uma versão eletrónica…
    = I always keep an electronic version…

This use of the simple present matches English “I always keep…” very closely.

Why guardar and not salvar or ter for “keep/save” the ticket?

Nuances:

  • guardar

    • very common in European Portuguese
    • means to keep / to store / to put away safely
    • fits perfectly for keeping a copy of tickets.

  • salvar

    • closer to English “save” in a computer/IT sense
    • salvar um ficheiro = save a file
    • You might hear salvar for digital things, but guardar is more general and idiomatic.

  • ter

    • just means to have
    • Tenho uma versão eletrónica… = I have an electronic version…
    • Correct, but it doesn’t emphasize the idea of deliberately keeping/storing it as a precaution.

So guardar is the best verb here to express “I make a point of keeping an electronic version.”