Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo, no solo del examen. - Your anxiety must come from work, not only from the exam.

deber + infinitive → obligation / duty
- Tu ansiedad debe venir del trabajo.
  = Your anxiety has to / must come from work (it sounds more like a strong statement, almost certain, sometimes even a kind of rule or obligation in other contexts).
deber de + infinitive → probability / supposition
- Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.
  = Your anxiety must (probably) come from work. It expresses a guess or inference, not a rule.

In everyday speech in Spain, you will hear both forms, and many speakers don’t keep the distinction very strictly, but textbook “correct” Spanish recommends:

deber = obligation
deber de = probability / assumption

Here, the speaker is inferring the cause of your anxiety, so debe de is the more “careful” option.

What is the function of de in debe de venir? Could I omit it?

Here, the de is part of the verbal construction deber de + infinitive that expresses probability.

deber venir → “must / has to come” (stronger, more like certainty or obligation)
deber de venir → “must come / probably comes” (probability, guess)

So if you omit the de, you slightly change the nuance:

Tu ansiedad debe venir del trabajo.
Stronger: “Your anxiety has to come from work” (speaker sounds more certain).
Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.
Softer: “Your anxiety must (probably) come from work” (educated guess).

Both are grammatically possible; what changes is the degree of certainty.

Why is it venir de and not venir desde?

Both de and desde can translate as “from”, but they’re used differently:

venir de + noun → usual way to say “come from” a place or source, especially abstract causes.
- Vengo de Londres. – I come from London.
- Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo. – Your anxiety must come from work.
venir desde + place/time → emphasizes the starting point of a movement in space or time, often with distance or duration.
- Vengo desde muy lejos. – I’m coming from very far away.
- Lleva viniendo desde las ocho. – He’s been coming since eight.

For origins or causes (especially abstract ones like el trabajo, la familia, la presión social), Spanish almost always uses venir de, not venir desde.

So venir de is the natural choice here.

Why is it del trabajo and del examen instead of de el trabajo / de el examen?

In Spanish, de + el contracts to del:

de + el trabajo → del trabajo
de + el examen → del examen

You must use del whenever de is directly followed by el (the masculine singular article):

❌ de el coche
✅ del coche

But you do not contract with la, los, las:

de la casa, de los amigos, de las clases (no contraction)

Why is it tu ansiedad and not tus ansiedad?

The choice between tu and tus depends on the number of the noun, not on the owner:

tu → with a singular noun
- tu ansiedad (your anxiety)
- tu casa (your house)
tus → with a plural noun
- tus ansiedades (your anxieties)
- tus casas (your houses)

Here, ansiedad is singular, so you must say tu ansiedad, even if “you” is more than one person in English. (In that case you would switch to vuestra/vuestras in Spain, or su/sus in Latin America, but the singular/plural rule still applies the same way.)

Why is it tu and not su? When would I say su ansiedad instead?

Spanish has a T–V distinction (informal vs formal “you”):

tu / tus → “your” (informal tú)
- tu ansiedad = your anxiety (talking informally to one person)
su / sus →
- “your” (formal usted, and also ustedes)
- “his / her / its / their”

Su ansiedad can therefore mean:

your anxiety (talking formally to usted)
his anxiety / her anxiety / their anxiety

In Spain:

To a friend / family member → Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.
To someone you address formally (usted) → Su ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.

What exactly does no solo del examen mean here? Is something missing after “no solo”?

The phrase no solo normally appears in the structure:

no solo X, sino (también) Y
= not only X, but (also) Y

A more “complete” version of the sentence could be:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir no solo del examen, sino también del trabajo.
Your anxiety must come not only from the exam, but also from work.

In the original sentence:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo, no solo del examen.

Spanish places the focus on “from work” and then adds “not just from the exam” as a contrast. The sino también part is understood from context; it doesn’t have to be explicitly said.

So no solo del examen means:

“not just from the exam (but also from something else, here: work).”

Could I move no solo and say No solo del examen viene tu ansiedad?

Yes, that’s possible, but it changes the emphasis and sounds more formal or literary:

No solo del examen viene tu ansiedad, sino también del trabajo.

This order:

emphasizes “not only from the exam” at the start
is more typical in careful or written language

Everyday speech in Spain would be more likely to use something close to:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir no solo del examen, sino también del trabajo.
Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo, no solo del examen.

All are grammatical; what changes is which part feels highlighted.

Why is it ansiedad and not estrés or nervios? Do they mean the same?

They overlap, but they’re not identical:

ansiedad
- more like “anxiety” in English
- often suggests a psychological state, worry, inner tension
- can be clinical (trastorno de ansiedad) but also everyday
estrés
- basically “stress” (often from work, life pressure)
- more linked to external pressure / overload
- estrés laboral = work-related stress
nervios
- literally “nerves,” often used colloquially
- tener nervios / estar de los nervios = to be nervous / on edge
- less clinical-sounding than ansiedad

In the sentence, the speaker probably wants to highlight a state that fits well with work + exam pressure, so ansiedad is natural. You could also say:

Tu estrés debe de venir del trabajo… (focusing more on stress)
Tus nervios deben de venir del trabajo… (more colloquial, “your nerves”)

Why is the verb in the present (debe de venir) and not something like a future form?

The present tense in debe de venir does two things at once:

Presents a current assumption about where the anxiety comes from right now.
Uses the modal meaning of deber de to express probability.

So:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.
= Right now, I suppose your anxiety comes from work.

You could use other tenses depending on context:

Tu ansiedad debió de venir del trabajo.
Your anxiety must have come from work. (past supposition)
Tu ansiedad deberá de venir del trabajo.
Your anxiety will probably come from work. (future supposition, sounds a bit formal/careful)

But for a general present-time inference, present indicative is standard.

Could I say Tu ansiedad tiene que venir del trabajo instead? What’s the difference?

Yes, you can, but the nuance changes:

deber de + infinitive → probability, supposition
- Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo.
  = Your anxiety must (probably) come from work. (educated guess)
tener que + infinitive → necessity, strong inference, or external obligation
- Tu ansiedad tiene que venir del trabajo.
  = Your anxiety has to come from work. (sounds more certain)

In everyday speech, many speakers use them very similarly when talking about inference, but:

deber de is a bit softer, more like “I suppose / I imagine”.
tener que often feels more categorical: “it has to be this.”

Is the word order Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo fixed, or can I move things around?

Spanish word order is flexible, but some versions sound more natural than others.

All of these are grammatically possible:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo. (most neutral and common)
Debe de venir tu ansiedad del trabajo. (possible, more marked / stylistic)
Del trabajo debe de venir tu ansiedad. (emphasizes “from work”)

In everyday Spanish, you would almost always hear something close to the original:

Tu ansiedad debe de venir del trabajo, no solo del examen.

The alternatives are more for emphasis or literary style.