Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): Mi tía va saliendo poco a poco de sus deudas y ya no entra en pánico cuando escucha noticias sobre la crisis. - My aunt is gradually getting out of her debts and no longer panics when she hears news about the crisis.

estar + gerundio (está saliendo) = simply “is leaving / is getting out” at this moment, with no extra nuance.
ir + gerundio (va saliendo) = “is gradually getting out / is little by little getting out.” It emphasizes a slow, progressive process and change over time.

So Mi tía va saliendo poco a poco de sus deudas suggests:

She used to be in a lot of debt.
Step by step, that situation is improving.
The focus is on the gradual progress.

If you said Mi tía está saliendo de sus deudas, it would be correct, but it loses that strong idea of “bit by bit, over time.” In many contexts, Latin Americans prefer ir + gerundio to show that kind of gradual change.

What exactly does the construction ir + gerundio mean, and can I use it with many verbs?

Ir + gerundio (ir conjugated as voy, vas, va, vamos, van + a gerund) adds the idea of:

gradual progress,
step-by-step development,
or a process unfolding over time.

Examples:

Voy aprendiendo español.
= I’m gradually learning Spanish / I’m getting the hang of Spanish.
Las cosas van mejorando.
= Things are slowly getting better.
El niño va creciendo.
= The child is growing (bit by bit over time).

You can use it with many verbs where a gradual process makes sense. It’s very common in everyday Latin American Spanish. It won’t work well with actions that are normally instantaneous, like explotar (to explode) or morir (to die), unless you’re being metaphorical.

What does poco a poco mean exactly, and could it go somewhere else in the sentence?

Poco a poco literally means “little by little.” Its sense is:

gradually,
step by step,
slowly over time.

In the sentence:

Mi tía va saliendo poco a poco de sus deudas…

you could move poco a poco without changing the meaning much:

Mi tía poco a poco va saliendo de sus deudas.
Poco a poco, mi tía va saliendo de sus deudas.

The last one (with a comma at the beginning) is very natural in speech and writing.

Synonyms with slightly different nuance:

gradualmente (more formal),
lentamente (focus on slowness, not always on progress),
paso a paso (step by step, often about method or strategy).

Poco a poco is very common, friendly, and neutral in Latin American Spanish.

Why is it de sus deudas and not just sus deudas?

The verb salir (to leave / to exit / to get out) normally takes the preposition de:

salir de la casa = to leave the house
salir de la cárcel = to get out of jail
salir de un problema = to get out of a problem

So for debts:

salir de deudas / salir de sus deudas
= to get out of debt / to get out of her debts.

Leaving out de would be ungrammatical here:

❌ Mi tía va saliendo sus deudas (wrong)

You need de, because the idea is “to come out of something.”

Why is it sus deudas and not mis deudas if we are talking about my aunt?

The possessive agrees with whose debts they are, not with who is talking.

sus deudas = her debts (belonging to mi tía)
mis deudas = my debts (belonging to the speaker)

So:

Mi tía va saliendo de sus deudas.
= My aunt is getting out of her debts.

If you said:

Mi tía va saliendo de mis deudas.

you would mean “My aunt is getting me out of my debts” (unexpected but grammatically possible in the right context!). In this sentence, the natural meaning is that the debts belong to the aunt, so sus is correct.

Why are all the verbs in the present tense (va saliendo, ya no entra, escucha) if this seems like an ongoing or general situation?

Spanish often uses the simple present where English uses present continuous or a more “descriptive” tense.

Here:

Mi tía va saliendo…
= My aunt is slowly getting out…
…y ya no entra en pánico…
= and she no longer panics…
…cuando escucha noticias…
= when she hears news…

All of these describe:

an ongoing process (getting out of debt),
a new general behavior (she doesn’t panic anymore),
a repeated or habitual situation (whenever she hears news).

In Spanish, the plain present covers:

current states: Vive en México. (She lives in Mexico.)
habits: Siempre se levanta temprano.
gradual processes: Cada año gana un poco más.

You could say está saliendo, está escuchando, but the simple present (and ir + gerundio here) is totally natural and often preferred.

What does ya no add in ya no entra en pánico? Could we just say no entra en pánico?

No entra en pánico = “She does not panic.”
Ya no entra en pánico = “She no longer panics / She doesn’t panic anymore.”

Ya in this structure highlights a change compared to the past:

Before: she did panic when she heard news about the crisis.
Now: she doesn’t anymore.

So:

ya no + verb = not anymore / no longer
- Ya no fuma. = He doesn’t smoke anymore.
- Ya no trabajo allí. = I don’t work there anymore.

You could say only no entra en pánico, but then you lose the idea that this is a new, improved behavior compared with the past.

Why do we say entra en pánico instead of something reflexive like se pone nerviosa?

Several expressions exist to express “to panic” in Spanish. Entrar en pánico is a common, semi-literal one:

entrar en pánico = to go into panic / to panic

Other natural options:

se pone nerviosa = she gets nervous (weaker, not exactly panic)
se asusta mucho = she gets very scared
se desespera = she gets desperate / freaks out
se angustia = she gets very anxious

Entrar en pánico is:

clear, direct, and widely understood,
a neutral register (not slang, not super formal).

The pattern entrar en + noun is also common:

entrar en crisis = to go into crisis
entrar en pánico = to go into panic

It’s not reflexive because the focus is on “entering” a state, not “making oneself” that way.

Why is it cuando escucha noticias and not cuando escuche noticias? Isn’t cuando often followed by the subjunctive?

Cuando can take either indicative or subjunctive, depending on meaning.

Use indicative after cuando for:

habitual actions,
general truths,
things that actually happen.

Use subjunctive after cuando when talking about:

future events that have not yet happened,
hypothetical or uncertain situations.

In the sentence:

…ya no entra en pánico cuando escucha noticias sobre la crisis.

This is a habitual situation: whenever she hears news, this is what happens. So we use escucha (indicative).

Compare:

Se pone nerviosa cuando escucha noticias.
Whenever she hears news, she gets nervous. (habitual → indicative)
Se pondrá nerviosa cuando escuche las noticias.
She’ll get nervous when she hears the news. (future, not yet → subjunctive escuche)

What’s the difference between escucha noticias and oye noticias here?

Both escuchar and oír relate to hearing, but:

oír = to hear (physically, sound reaching your ears)
escuchar = to listen (more intentional, paying attention)

In context:

cuando escucha noticias sobre la crisis
suggests she is actually paying attention to the news (e.g., watching TV, listening to the radio, following it).

If you said:

cuando oye noticias sobre la crisis,

it would be more like “when she hears (any) news about the crisis,” maybe even by chance.

Both are grammatically correct. Escuchar is a bit stronger here because we usually listen to the news, not just accidentally hear it.

Why say noticias sobre la crisis instead of noticias de la crisis? Are both correct?

Both sobre and de can be used, and both are understandable:

noticias sobre la crisis
= news about the crisis (on the topic of the crisis)
noticias de la crisis
can also mean “news about the crisis,” but sometimes may sound more like:
- news that comes from the crisis, or
- news that is related to the crisis in some way.

In everyday speech, sobre is very common when talking about subjects or topics:

un libro sobre México = a book about Mexico
una película sobre la guerra = a movie about the war
noticias sobre política = news about politics

So noticias sobre la crisis is very natural and clearly means “news whose topic is the crisis.”

Why is it la crisis and not just crisis without the article?

In Spanish, the definite article (el, la, los, las) is used more often than in English.

We use la crisis when:

We refer to a specific, known crisis, often one people are already talking about (for example, a particular economic crisis).
It’s like saying the crisis everyone knows about.

Examples:

Desde la crisis, muchos han perdido su trabajo.
= Since the crisis, many have lost their jobs.

Without the article:

❌ …noticias sobre crisis

would sound incomplete or too generic, like “news about crisis as a concept,” which is not what is meant here.

So la crisis indicates a specific, identifiable crisis, just like the crisis in English.

Could we say Mi tía sale poco a poco de sus deudas instead of va saliendo? What’s the difference?

Sale is the simple present of salir.
So:

Mi tía sale de sus deudas
would tend to mean “My aunt gets out of her debts” in a more neutral, less process-focused way. It can sound a bit abrupt or less natural for an ongoing, gradual improvement.
Mi tía va saliendo poco a poco de sus deudas
emphasizes that this is a continuous, step-by-step process that is happening over time. It sounds more idiomatic and expressive in this context.

So:

sale de sus deudas → could be understood, but feels more like a summary fact.
va saliendo de sus deudas → fits better when you want to stress the gradual nature of her progress.