Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Con esta suscripción gratuita puedes leer sin límite, pero yo pongo un límite de una hora al día. - With this free subscription you can read without a limit, but I set a limit of one hour a day.

In all these, the pattern is -scribir → -scripción or -cribir → -cripción. Writing subcripción or subscripción is a common error by analogy with English subscription, but in Spanish those forms are incorrect.

What’s the difference between “gratuita” and “gratis”? Why use “suscripción gratuita” here?

Gratis and gratuito/a are closely related but behave differently:

gratis is invariable (doesn’t change for gender/number) and is often used as an adverb:
- La suscripción es gratis.
- Puedes entrar gratis.
gratuito / gratuita is an adjective:
- una suscripción gratuita
- servicios gratuitos

Here we have suscripción, a feminine noun, so the natural adjective form is gratuita:

Con esta suscripción gratuita = With this free subscription

You could also say in everyday speech:

Con esta suscripción, que es gratis…

In Spain, gratis is more common in casual speech, and gratuito/a sounds a bit more formal or written, but both are correct.

Why is it “puedes leer sin límite” and not just “lees sin límite”?

Both are grammatically correct but they don’t mean exactly the same:

Lees sin límite = “You read without limit.”
- Describes a habitual action or fact.
Puedes leer sin límite = “You can/may read without limit.”
- Emphasises possibility/permission.
- This matches the idea of what the subscription allows you to do.

Because the sentence is talking about what the subscription lets you do, puedes leer sin límite (you are allowed to read without limit) is more natural.

If the context were describing your behavior rather than the subscription’s conditions, lees sin límite could work.

Why is it “sin límite” and not “sin límites”? Are both possible?

Both sin límite and sin límites are possible and correct; the difference is stylistic:

sin límite (singular)
- More abstract or general: “without limit” as a concept.
- Very common in advertising or formal descriptions:
  - llamadas sin límite
  - datos sin límite
sin límites (plural)
- Suggests multiple possible limits that are all absent.
- Often feels slightly more emphatic, almost like “without any limits at all”.

In your sentence, sin límite fits the neutral, descriptive tone of explaining subscription conditions.

Why is “pero” used here and not “sino”?

pero and sino both translate to “but” in English, but they’re used differently:

pero = “but / however”, adds a contrast:
- Puedo ir, pero no quiero.
  (I can go, but I don’t want to.)
sino = “but rather / but instead”, used to correct or replace a previous negative idea:
- No quiero café, sino té.
  (I don’t want coffee, but tea instead.)

In your sentence, we don’t have a correction of a negative; we have a contrast between what the subscription allows and what I personally decide:

Con esta suscripción gratuita puedes leer sin límite, pero yo pongo un límite de una hora al día.

So pero (contrast) is correct; sino would be wrong here.

Why does the sentence say “yo pongo un límite” instead of just “pongo un límite”? Isn’t “yo” optional?

In Spanish, subject pronouns like yo are usually optional because the verb ending shows who is doing the action:

pongo already tells you it’s first person singular (yo).

So both are correct:

Pongo un límite de una hora al día.
Yo pongo un límite de una hora al día.

Including yo here gives emphasis or contrast:

Implicitly: The subscription doesn’t have a limit, but *I (personally) set one for myself.*

So yo is not needed for grammar, but it’s very natural for highlighting the contrast with the previous idea.

What exactly does “poner un límite” mean? Is it idiomatic? Are there other common verbs?

Yes, poner un límite is a very common and idiomatic expression. It literally means “to put a limit”, but idiomatically:

poner un límite a algo = to set a limit on something

Examples:

Tengo que poner un límite al tiempo que paso en redes sociales.
Deberías poner un límite a tus gastos.

Other verbs that work in a similar way:

fijar un límite (a bit more formal)
establecer un límite (formal, official)

But in everyday Spanish, poner un límite is perfectly natural and very common.

Why is it “un límite de una hora” and not “un límite de uno hora”?

Two separate points:

Gender agreement with “hora”
- hora is feminine: la hora, una hora
- So you must say una hora, never uno hora.
- uno is used on its own or before masculine nouns:
  - Tengo uno.
  - Tengo un libro.
Structure “un límite de + time / amount”
- de here introduces the quantity or measure of the limit:
  - un límite de dos horas
  - un límite de diez páginas
  - un límite de 50 euros

So un límite de una hora = “a limit of one hour”.

What does “al día” mean exactly? How is it different from “por día” or “cada día”?

al día is a very common expression meaning “per day / a day” in the sense of a rate or maximum:

un límite de una hora al día = a limit of one hour per day

Grammar point:

al = a + el (contraction)
Literally: “to the day”, but idiomatically: “per day”.

Differences:

al día
- Very standard for expressing allowed quantities per day:
  - dos pastillas al día
  - tres litros de agua al día
por día
- Also means “per day”; often used in similar contexts:
  - Gana 50 euros por día.
cada día
- Means “every day” (frequency), not a rate:
  - Leo una hora cada día. = I read one hour every day.

In your sentence, al día is natural because we’re talking about a limit per day.

Why is the verb “pongo” (present tense) used instead of future like “pondré” or something else?

Pongo is present tense, first person singular of poner.

Here it’s used to state a general, habitual rule the speaker follows:

pero yo pongo un límite de una hora al día
= “but I (generally) set a limit of one hour per day (for myself).”

Using pondré (future) would mean:

but I will (at some future moment) set a limit…
which doesn’t match the context of a standing personal rule.

So pongo is the right tense to describe the speaker’s ongoing habit or policy.

Is this sentence formal or informal? How would it change in formal speech in Spain?

The sentence is informal, because it uses puedes (tú form):

Con esta suscripción gratuita puedes leer sin límite…
→ addressing someone as tú.

For more formal address (to usted) in Spain, you’d say:

Con esta suscripción gratuita puede leer sin límite, pero yo pongo un límite de una hora al día.

Changes:

puedes → puede (usted form)
Everything else stays the same. The second clause yo pongo… refers to the speaker’s habit and doesn’t change with formality.

Why is the adjective “gratuita” placed after “suscripción”? Can you say “esta gratuita suscripción”?

In Spanish, most adjectives normally go after the noun:

una suscripción gratuita
un libro interesante
una casa grande

So esta suscripción gratuita is the natural order.

You could say esta suscripción gratuita or esta suscripción, gratuita y sin compromiso, etc.

The order esta gratuita suscripción is grammatically possible but sounds very literary, old-fashioned, or rhetorical. In everyday Spanish, it’s unusual and would feel affected. So stick with:

Con esta suscripción gratuita…

Why is it “con esta suscripción” and not “en esta suscripción” or “por esta suscripción”?

The preposition con here expresses the idea of “with” = having / using:

Con esta suscripción, puedes leer sin límite.
= When you have / use this subscription, you can read without limit.

Comparisons:

en esta suscripción
- Would sound more like “in this subscription”, which is odd in this context.
- You might see en tu suscripción in phrases like:
  - En tu suscripción se incluyen estos servicios.
por esta suscripción
- Often means “because of / in exchange for / for the price of”:
  - Pagas 5 euros al mes por esta suscripción.

So here, con is correct because it refers to the condition of having that subscription.

Why is there no article in “leer sin límite”, but there is one in “pongo un límite”?

This is a subtle but common pattern:

sin + noun (no article) often expresses an indefinite absence:
- sin luz (without light)
- sin problemas (without problems)
- sin límite (without limit)
When you introduce a specific, concrete instance of that noun, you use an article:
- Pongo un límite.
- Hay un problema.
- Tenemos una solución.

So:

puedes leer sin límite = you can read with no limit at all (no specific limit exists).
yo pongo un límite = I introduce one particular limit (one hour per day).

Both patterns are normal and idiomatic in Spanish.