Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): Mi sobrina dice que la bruja no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido, para que la historia sea más emocionante. - My niece says that the witch shouldn’t find the wand so fast, so that the story is more exciting.

In Spanish, when you report what someone says in an indirect way (not quoting their exact words), you almost always need que to introduce the clause.

Mi sobrina dice que la bruja no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido.
= My niece says (that) the witch shouldn’t find the wand so quickly.

Without que, the sentence is ungrammatical in standard Spanish:

❌ Mi sobrina dice la bruja no debería encontrar…

So the pattern is:

decir que + [sentence]
Pienso que + [sentence]
Creo que + [sentence], etc.

English can drop that; Spanish normally cannot drop que in this structure.

Why is it no debería encontrar and not no debería encuentra?

In Spanish, verbs like deber, poder, querer, tener que, etc. act like modal verbs and are followed by an infinitive, not a conjugated verb.

Structure:

[subject] + deber / poder / querer + infinitive

So:

La bruja no debería encontrar la varita. ✅
(subject la bruja
- debería
  - infinitive encontrar)

Using a conjugated verb after debería is incorrect:

❌ no debería encuentra (mixing a modal with a conjugated verb)

What’s the difference between no debería encontrar and no debe encontrar?

Both translate roughly as “shouldn’t find”, but the nuance is different:

no debe encontrar
- Uses deber (present).
- Sounds stronger, more like a rule or obligation:
  “She must not / is not allowed to find it.”
no debería encontrar
- Uses debería (conditional).
- Softer, more hypothetical or ideal:
  “She shouldn’t / it would be better if she didn’t find it.”

In the context of a story’s plot, no debería encontrar fits better because it talks about what would make the story better, not a strict rule.

Why is there no a before la varita in encontrar la varita?

The “personal a” in Spanish is used before a direct object that is a specific person (or sometimes a beloved animal).

Here:

la bruja = subject
la varita = direct object (an object, not a person)

So:

La bruja no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido. ✅
(no a before la varita)

You would use a before a direct object that is a person:

La bruja no debería encontrar a la niña tan rápido. ✅
(The witch shouldn’t find the girl so quickly.)

Why is it tan rápido and not tanto rápido or just muy rápido?

Spanish distinguishes tan, tanto, and muy:

tan + adjective/adverb = so / that / such …
- tan rápido = so fast / that fast
tanto/tanta/tantos/tantas + noun = so much / so many
- tanta emoción = so much excitement
muy + adjective/adverb = very
- muy rápido = very fast

In the sentence:

tan rápido, para que la historia sea más emocionante
implies a degree that affects the result (so fast that the story is less exciting).

You could say muy rápido, but it loses that idea of a degree that changes the outcome. Tan is very natural before a purpose/explanation clause like this.

Why is rápido used as an adverb (in tan rápido) instead of rápidamente?

In everyday Spanish, many adjectives can also function as adverbs, especially common ones like:

rápido (fast)
lento (slow)
fuerte (strong/loud)
claro (clear)

So:

La bruja encuentra la varita rápido. ✅
La bruja encuentra la varita rápidamente. ✅ (more formal/literary)

In speech and informal writing, rápido is much more common than rápidamente.
Tan rápido is the most natural choice here.

Why do we say para que instead of just para?

Use:

para + infinitive when the subject of both verbs is the same.
- No quiero encontrar la varita para mantener el suspenso.
  (I don’t want to find the wand to keep the suspense. → I do both actions.)
para que + conjugated verb when the subject changes.
This construction requires the subjunctive.

In the sentence:

Mi sobrina dice que la bruja no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido, para que la historia sea más emocionante.

Subject 1: la bruja (not finding the wand)
Subject 2: la historia (being more exciting)

Because the subject is different (bruja vs historia), Spanish uses para que + subjunctive:

para que la historia sea más emocionante ✅

Why is it sea and not es after para que?

After para que, Spanish almost always uses the subjunctive, because we are talking about purpose, intention, or desired outcome, not a simple statement of fact.

Pattern:

para que + subjunctive

Examples:

Estudia para que sus padres estén orgullosos.
Hablamos despacio para que nos entiendas.

So in the sentence:

…para que la historia sea más emocionante. ✅

Using es (indicative) would sound incorrect in standard grammar:

❌ para que la historia es más emocionante

Why do we use ser (sea) and not estar (esté) with emocionante?

Ser vs estar:

ser: describes essential or characteristic qualities.
estar: describes temporary states or conditions.

Emocionante (exciting) is treated here as a quality of the story, not just a temporary mood, so ser is natural:

La historia es emocionante. (The story is exciting / an exciting story.)

Thus:

para que la historia sea más emocionante ✅
(so that the story will be more exciting as a type of story)

Estar could be used in some contexts to focus on a temporary state:

La historia está muy emocionante ahora.
(The story is really exciting right now.)

But with para que + general quality, ser is preferred.

Why is dice in the present tense? Could we say Mi sobrina está diciendo que… like in English “My niece is saying that…”?

Spanish uses the simple present much more often than English to talk about what someone says (in general) or is saying (right now):

Mi sobrina dice que…
can mean:
- She says this regularly.
- She is saying this now (in the story context).

Mi sobrina está diciendo que… exists, but it’s less common and sounds like you’re stressing that the action is in progress at this exact moment, often a bit annoyed:

¿Qué está diciendo tu sobrina ahora?
Mi sobrina está diciendo que la bruja no debería encontrar la varita…
(Right now she keeps going on about how…)

In most narrative or general contexts, dice is the normal choice.

Why do we use la bruja, la varita, and la historia with la everywhere? English might say “witch” or “wand” without “the”.

Spanish uses definite articles (el, la, los, las) more frequently than English “the”. In stories, when we’re talking about known or specific elements (the witch of this story, the wand in this story, the story itself), definite articles are natural:

la bruja = the witch (of this story)
la varita = the wand (the special wand in the plot)
la historia = the story (we’re talking about this particular story)

In English, you might say:

My niece says the witch shouldn’t find the wand too fast so that the story is more exciting.

But in some contexts you might drop “the” in English and just say “witches”, “stories” in general. In Spanish, when the reference is clearly specific (this witch, this story), you normally keep la.

Could the word order be no debería tan rápido encontrar la varita, or is no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido the only correct option?

The most natural and standard word order is:

no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido ✅
(verb + object + adverb)

Spanish does allow some flexibility, but:

no debería tan rápido encontrar la varita
sounds awkward and very unnatural in normal speech.

General rule: place short adverbs like rápido, despacio, bien, mal after the verb or after the verb phrase, especially when there’s a direct object:

Encontró la varita rápidamente.
Encontró rápidamente la varita. (possible, but more formal / marked)
No debería encontrar la varita tan rápido. ✅

Could we say para hacer la historia más emocionante instead of para que la historia sea más emocionante?

Yes, that’s also correct, but the structure changes slightly:

para hacer la historia más emocionante
= to make the story more exciting
Structure: para + infinitive (hacer)
para que la historia sea más emocionante
= so that the story is more exciting
Structure: para que + subjunctive

Both are fine, but:

para que la historia sea más emocionante
sounds a bit more neutral and standard in Spanish for expressing this kind of purpose/result.

The choice is partly stylistic:

…no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido, para que la historia sea más emocionante. ✅
…no debería encontrar la varita tan rápido, para hacer la historia más emocionante. ✅ (perfectly acceptable too)