Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): Preparo un batido con avena, plátano y almendras cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar. - I make a smoothie with oats, banana, and almonds when I don’t have time for breakfast.

preparar un batido = to make/prepare a smoothie (emphasis on putting the ingredients together)
hacer un batido is also possible and common, but preparar sounds a bit more specific and “kitchen-like.”
me preparo would mean I get myself ready (e.g. me preparo para salir = I get ready to go out), not I make myself a smoothie.

So preparo un batido is a natural way to say I prepare/make a smoothie in Spanish. Hago un batido would also be correct and understandable; it’s just a slightly more general verb.

Why is there no yo at the beginning? Can I say Yo preparo un batido…?

Spanish usually drops subject pronouns because the verb ending already shows who the subject is:

preparo already tells us it’s yo (I).
In normal, neutral speech, people just say Preparo un batido…

You can say Yo preparo un batido…, but then you’re usually emphasizing the subject:

Yo preparo un batido… = I make a smoothie (as opposed to someone else).

So it’s grammatically correct but slightly more emphatic.

Why is it un batido and not el batido or just batido?

batido is a masculine noun, so the article is un (a).
un batido = a smoothie / a shake in a general, non-specific sense.

If you said:

El batido = the smoothie, a specific one that both speaker and listener know about.
Preparo batido (no article) is not natural here; in Spanish, singular countable nouns normally need an article.

So Preparo un batido = I make a (any) smoothie.

What exactly does batido mean? Is it the same as licuado or smoothie in Latin America?

Batido literally means something “beaten” or “whipped,” and as a noun it means a drink made in a blender:

Often milk-based (milkshakes)
Or fruit/oat drinks like smoothies

Regional variation:

In many Latin American countries, batido and licuado are very similar and can both refer to blender drinks.
In some places (e.g. parts of Mexico, Central America):
- licuado is more common for blended fruit drinks with milk or water.
- batido might be reserved for milkshakes or used less often.
smoothie is understood in big cities and younger crowds, but it’s an English borrowing and not necessary.

In this sentence, un batido is best understood as a smoothie / shake.

What does avena mean exactly? Is it “oat” or “oatmeal”? Why is it singular?

avena is a feminine noun and is usually uncountable:

It means oats (the grain) in general.
In many contexts, it also corresponds to oatmeal in English.

So:

avena (singular, no article here) = the ingredient, like saying with oats or with oatmeal.
You normally don’t say avenas to mean “oats” in the food sense.

Examples:

Como avena en el desayuno. = I eat oatmeal / oats at breakfast.
Le pongo avena al batido. = I add oats/oatmeal to the smoothie.

Does plátano mean “banana” or “plantain”? Why use plátano instead of banana?

This is very regional:

In much of Latin America, plátano can refer to:
- The sweet banana you eat raw,
- Or the larger, starchier plantain (often cooked), depending on the country.
banana is also widely used, especially in some regions (e.g. parts of the Caribbean, Colombia, etc.).

In the context of a batido, plátano here is almost certainly the sweet banana used in smoothies.

So:

plátano ≈ banana in many Latin American contexts.
Exact usage (banana vs. plátano vs. guineo) varies by country.

Why is almendras plural? Could I say almendra instead?

In recipes or ingredient lists, Spanish often uses the plural for items that naturally come in multiple units:

almendras = almonds (several individual nuts)
Saying con almendras implies some indeterminate number of almonds.

You could say:

con almendra = with almond (flavor) / with almond as an ingredient in general.

But:

For whole nuts or pieces, almendras (plural) is the natural choice.
For something more abstract like almendra molida (ground almond/almond meal), singular might appear with a modifier.

So con… almendras is the normal form here.

Why is the verb after cuando in the present indicative (no tengo) and not in the subjunctive?

cuando can be followed by:

Indicative when referring to habits, facts, or specific times:
- Cuando no tengo tiempo, preparo un batido. = When I don’t have time (in general), I make a smoothie.
Subjunctive when talking about future, uncertain, or hypothetical time:
- Cuando no tenga tiempo, prepararé un batido. = When I don’t have time (in the future), I’ll make a smoothie.

Here, the sentence describes a general habit, something that repeatedly happens, so the present indicative (no tengo) is correct and natural.

How does the structure tener tiempo para + infinitive work? Could I say no tengo tiempo de desayunar?

tener tiempo para + infinitivo means to have time to do something:

No tengo tiempo para desayunar. = I don’t have time to eat breakfast.

You can also say:

No tengo tiempo de desayunar.

In practice:

Both para and de are used with tiempo
- infinitive.
In much of Latin America, tiempo para + infinitivo is very common and fully correct.
tiempo de + infinitivo is also correct and often sounds a bit more colloquial or natural in some regions.

So both:

no tengo tiempo para desayunar and
no tengo tiempo de desayunar are acceptable.

Why is desayunar used (a verb) instead of desayuno (the noun)?

Spanish often uses a verb where English uses “eat + noun”:

desayunar = to have breakfast / to eat breakfast
almorzar = to have lunch
cenar = to have dinner

So:

No tengo tiempo para desayunar. Literally: I don’t have time to breakfast. Natural English: I don’t have time to eat breakfast.

You could say no tengo tiempo para el desayuno, but it sounds more formal or less idiomatic than using desayunar in everyday speech. The verbal form is the most natural here.

Can the part cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar go at the beginning of the sentence?

Yes. Spanish is flexible with clause order here. Both are correct:

Preparo un batido… cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar.
Cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar, preparo un batido con avena, plátano y almendras.

Placing cuando… at the beginning often highlights the condition (the situation) first. At the end, it feels a bit more like additional information explaining when you do this.

Should there be a comma before cuando in the original sentence?

In the original order:

Preparo un batido con avena, plátano y almendras cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar.

Spanish grammar does not require a comma before cuando when the main clause comes first and the time clause follows. That’s the normal punctuation.

You normally add a comma when the cuando-clause comes first:

Cuando no tengo tiempo para desayunar, preparo un batido… ✅ (comma after the initial clause)

Does no tengo tiempo para desayunar mean literally “I don’t have time for having breakfast,” or is it more like “I don’t have time to eat breakfast”?

In English terms, it’s best understood as:

I don’t have time to eat breakfast.

Literally, para = for, but in this construction:

tener tiempo para + infinitivo is equivalent to to have time to + verb.

So the natural translation is with to eat breakfast, not for having breakfast. The Spanish grammar pattern just happens to use para + infinitive.