Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones. - If I gain weight again, I will talk with the nutritionist to change my portions.

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones.

If I gain weight again, I will talk with the nutritionist to change my portions.

Breakdown of Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones.

Elon.io is an online learning platform

We have an entire course teaching Spanish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Spanish now

Questions & Answers about Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones.

Why is it “Si vuelvo a engordar” and not “Si engordaré otra vez”?

In Spanish, after si (if) to talk about a real or likely future condition, you normally use the present indicative, not the future tense.

Correct: Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré…
(If I put on weight again, I will talk…)
Incorrect: Si engordaré otra vez, hablaré…

This is a standard pattern:

Si tengo tiempo, te llamaré. – If I have time, I’ll call you.
Si llueve, nos quedaremos en casa. – If it rains, we’ll stay home.

So: si + present, then future in the other clause. You almost never say si + future in this type of conditional sentence.

What does “vuelvo a engordar” literally mean? Is “vuelvo a” always “again”?

Literally, vuelvo a engordar is “I return to getting fat,” but the natural meaning is “I gain weight again / I put on weight again.”

The structure is:

volver a + infinitive = to do [something] again

Examples:

Volveré a intentarlo. – I’ll try again.
Nunca volvió a llamarme. – He never called me again.

You could also say:

Si engordo otra vez… – If I get fat again…

Both are fine; volver a + infinitive is very common and sounds natural.

Why is it “hablaré” (future) and not “hablo” (present) like in English “I talk”?

Spanish uses the future tense much more directly here than English does.

English often says:

“If I gain weight again, I talk to the nutritionist…”

But in Spanish, for a planned or expected future consequence, the future tense is standard:

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista.

You can sometimes hear present + present (especially in everyday speech):

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablo con la nutricionista.

…but present + future is the most typical and neutral for this kind of “if X happens, I will do Y” statement.

Why don’t we use the subjunctive, like “Si volviera a engordar, hablaría…”?

Both are possible, but they express different degrees of likelihood:

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré…
- Real, likely, or neutral condition.
- Comparable to English “If I gain weight again, I’ll talk…”
Si volviera a engordar, hablaría…
- More hypothetical or less likely; it feels more distant or “what if.”
- Comparable to “If I were to gain weight again, I would talk…”

In your sentence, the speaker sees gaining weight again as a real/possible scenario, so present + future is the natural choice: Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré…

Why is it “la nutricionista” and not “el nutricionista”? Does -ista always mean female?

The ending -ista does not indicate gender by itself. Words ending in -ista are usually common-gender nouns: they can be masculine or feminine depending on the article:

el nutricionista – the (male) nutritionist
la nutricionista – the (female) nutritionist

Same pattern:

el artista / la artista – the (male/female) artist
el turista / la turista – the (male/female) tourist

So here, la nutricionista implies the nutritionist is a woman.

Could I say “la dietista” instead of “la nutricionista”?

Yes, in many contexts “dietista” and “nutricionista” are used similarly and both exist in Latin America:

la dietista – the dietitian
la nutricionista – the nutritionist

In everyday speech there is often little difference, though in some countries there may be distinct professional titles and qualifications.

Grammatically, they behave the same:

el dietista / la dietista
el nutricionista / la nutricionista

Why is it “para cambiar mis porciones” and not “por cambiar mis porciones”?

Here para expresses purpose / goal:

para + infinitive = in order to / to [do something]

So:

…hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones.
= “…I’ll talk to the nutritionist to change my portions / in order to change my portions.”

Using por + infinitive would usually sound wrong or change the meaning. Por often expresses cause, reason, or exchange, not purpose. In this sentence, the intended idea is a goal, so para is the correct preposition.

Is “engordar” negative or rude? Could I say “ganar peso” instead?

Engordar literally means “to get fat / to put on weight.” It can sound a bit more direct or blunt, but it’s very common and not rude in itself.

Alternatives:

ganar peso – to gain weight (a bit more neutral)
subir de peso – to go up in weight

So you could say:

Si gano peso otra vez, hablaré con la nutricionista…
Si vuelvo a subir de peso, hablaré con la nutricionista…

All are correct. Engordar just sounds more like everyday, plain speech.

Why is it “mis porciones” and not “las porciones”?

Both are possible, but they feel slightly different:

mis porciones – my portions (my serving sizes, the ones I eat)
las porciones – the portions (more general, could be “the portions in my diet”)

Using mis personalizes it: it’s clearly about your own portion sizes.
Spanish often uses definite articles where English uses possessives (e.g., me duele la cabeza = my head hurts), but for things you habitually manage or choose, like your portion sizes, using mi/mis is very natural.

So:

…para cambiar mis porciones. – to change the portion sizes I eat.

What exactly does “porciones” mean here? Is it like “meals” or “servings”?

In this context, porciones means servings / portion sizes, not entire meals.

porción – a portion, a serving
mis porciones – the size/amount of each serving you eat

Rough English equivalents:

“change my portion sizes”
“adjust my portions”

You could also hear:

tamaños de porción – portion sizes
cantidades – amounts (more general)

Can I swap the order and say “Hablaré con la nutricionista si vuelvo a engordar”? Do I still need a comma?

Yes, you can absolutely invert the clauses:

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista…
Hablaré con la nutricionista si vuelvo a engordar…

Both are correct and mean the same thing.

Comma rule:

If the si-clause comes first, you do use a comma.
If the si-clause comes second, you usually omit the comma.

So:

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré… ✅
Hablaré… si vuelvo a engordar. ✅ (no comma)

Why is it “vuelvo” and not “volvo” or “volví”?

The verb is volver (to return, to go back). It’s irregular: o → ue in some forms.

Present indicative:

yo vuelvo
tú vuelves
él/ella vuelve
nosotros volvemos
ustedes/ellos vuelven

We use vuelvo because the whole expression volver a + infinitive must be in the present to match the pattern si + present:

Si vuelvo a engordar… – If I put on weight again…

Volví would be past:

Si volví a engordar – If I gained weight again (in the past)…

That would change the time frame.

Is “para cambiar mis porciones” saying I will personally change them, or that she will change them?

Grammatically, it’s ambiguous in Spanish, like in English “to change my portions.”

In context, it usually implies the nutritionist will help you change your portions, or will tell you how; but the sentence itself only says:

I will talk to the nutritionist with the purpose of changing my portions.

It doesn’t specify who exactly makes the change; the focus is on the goal (changing your portions) rather than on the doer.

Is this sentence specifically Latin American Spanish, or would it also sound natural in Spain?

The sentence is perfectly natural in both Latin American and Peninsular (Spain) Spanish:

Si vuelvo a engordar, hablaré con la nutricionista para cambiar mis porciones.

There’s nothing region-specific in the grammar or vocabulary.
Some countries might prefer subir de peso or ganar peso, or talk more about raciones instead of porciones, but your sentence is widely understandable across the Spanish-speaking world.