En casa respetamos el turno de palabra para que todas podamos opinar sin gritar.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Spanish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Spanish now

Questions & Answers about En casa respetamos el turno de palabra para que todas podamos opinar sin gritar.

Why does it say En casa without an article, instead of En la casa?

In Spanish, en casa (without article) is a fixed expression meaning “at home / at our house (as a family)”. It’s more about the home environment or family life than the physical building.

  • En casa ≈ “at home / in our home (as we do things in our family)”.
  • En la casa focuses on the physical house: “in the house (building)”, and is less idiomatic here.

So En casa respetamos… naturally means “At home we… / In our family we…”, which fits the context of family rules or habits.

Could I say En mi casa respetamos… instead of En casa respetamos…?

Yes, En mi casa respetamos el turno de palabra… is perfectly correct and very common.

The nuance:

  • En casa: usually understood as “in my/our home” from the speaker’s point of view; it’s a bit more general and idiomatic.
  • En mi casa: makes the ownership explicit: “in my house / in my home”.

Meaning-wise in this context, they’re almost the same. En casa just sounds slightly more neutral and formulaic when talking about “how we do things at home.”

What does respetamos really mean here? Is it literally “we respect”?

Literally respetar = “to respect”, but in contexts like this it often means:

  • “to abide by / to follow / to observe (a rule or system)”.

So respetamos el turno de palabra is better understood as:

  • “we follow / observe speaking turns”
    (i.e. we stick to the system of taking turns to talk)

This is a very natural use of respetar in Spanish:

  • Respetar las normas = to follow the rules
  • Respetar los turnos = to take turns properly / not jump the queue
What exactly does el turno de palabra mean?

El turno de palabra is a set expression meaning “the turn to speak / speaking turn”.

  • turno = turn (in a sequence)
  • palabra = word, but here it stands for “the floor / speaking time”

So el turno de palabra literally is “the turn of word”, but idiomatically:
> the moment when it’s your turn to speak

Some related expressions:

  • Pedir turno de palabra – to ask for the floor
  • Conceder el turno de palabra – to give someone the floor
  • Hablar por turnos – to speak in turns

You could also hear turno de hablar, but turno de palabra is very standard in Spain, especially in formal or semi-formal contexts (meetings, class, etc.).

Why do we need el turno de palabra and not just el turno?

You could say respetamos los turnos, but that’s more general: “we respect (all) the turns.” It doesn’t say what kind of turns.

El turno de palabra is more specific: it clarifies that you’re talking about taking turns to speak, not:

  • turns in a game (turnos de juego),
  • shifts at work (turnos de trabajo), etc.

So el turno de palabra instantly tells you: this is about who speaks when.

Why is it para que and not just para?

In Spanish, you choose between para and para que based on what comes after:

  • para
    • infinitive (same subject)
  • para que
    • conjugated verb in the subjunctive (usually a different subject, or at least explicitly mentioned)

Examples:

  • Respetamos el turno de palabra para opinar sin gritar.
    → “We respect turn-taking in order to give opinions without shouting.”
    (same subject: “we”)

  • Respetamos el turno de palabra para que todas podamos opinar sin gritar.
    → “We respect turn-taking so that we can all give opinions without shouting.”
    (explicit subject after: todas)

Here todas is expressed (and implies todas [nosotras]), so Spanish naturally uses para que + subjunctive: para que todas podamos…

Why is podamos in the subjunctive?

Podamos is the present subjunctive of poder (we can / may).

After para que, Spanish normally uses the subjunctive to express a purpose or intention:

  • para que [someone] + subjunctive = “so that [someone] can / will / may …”

So:

  • …para que todas podamos opinar…
    = “so that we can all give our opinions…”

The subjunctive is not about doubt here; it’s about goal/purpose:

  • We do X (respetamos el turno de palabra)
  • in order that Y can happen (todas podamos opinar sin gritar).
Is todas here standing for nosotras? What is the subject of podamos?

Yes. The structure is:

  • (Nosotras) respetamos el turno de palabra
  • para que todas (nosotras) podamos opinar sin gritar.

The explicit subject of podamos is todas, which implicitly refers to todas nosotras (“all of us [women]”). Spanish often omits the pronoun nosotras because the verb ending (-mos) already shows “we”.

So the subject of podamos is:

  • todas (understood as all of us)
Why is it todas (feminine) and not todos?

Todas is the feminine plural form of “all”.

Spanish grammar rules:

  • todos = all (masculine / mixed group)
  • todas = all (group understood as female)

Using todas implies:

  • The group is only women/girls, or
  • The speaker is deliberately using feminine grammar for an all-female or strongly female-identified group (e.g. a group of women housemates, a girls’ group, etc.).

If the group were mixed or unknown by default, you would expect:

  • para que todos podamos opinar…

So todas here gives information about the gender makeup or the way the speaker is choosing to refer to the group.

What’s the nuance of opinar here? How is it different from hablar or decir?

Opinar means “to give an opinion / to state what you think”.

  • hablar = to talk / to speak (more general)
  • decir = to say / to tell (focus on the content said)
  • opinar = to express your opinion

So:

  • podamos hablar – “we can talk” (could be about anything, not necessarily opinions)
  • podamos decir cosas – “we can say things” (very general)
  • podamos opinar – “we can give our views / we can have our say”

In the sentence, opinar matches the idea of everyone having the chance to voice their opinion.

Why is it sin gritar with the infinitive, not something like sin gritamos?

In Spanish, after a preposition (like sin, para, por, a, de), you must use the infinitive, not a conjugated verb:

  • sin gritar – without shouting
  • sin gritar nosotros – without us shouting
  • but not: sin gritamos

General rule:

  • preposition + infinitive:
    • para estudiar, antes de comer, después de cenar, sin hablar, etc.

If you want a full clause with a conjugated verb after sin, you use sin que + subjunctive:

  • …para que todas podamos opinar sin que gritemos.
    (grammatical, but heavier; less natural here than sin gritar)

The simple sin gritar is shorter and idiomatic.

Could we say sin que gritemos instead of sin gritar? Would it change the meaning?

Yes, you could say:

  • …para que todas podamos opinar sin que gritemos.

Grammatically correct, same basic meaning: “so that we can all give our opinions without us shouting.”

Nuance:

  • sin gritar (preposition + infinitive) is shorter and more neutral, very common in spoken and written Spanish.
  • sin que gritemos (conjunction + subjunctive) sounds a bit more formal or emphatic, highlighting “without us shouting” as a full event.

In everyday speech and in a family context, sin gritar is more natural.

Could the word order be para que podamos todas opinar sin gritar? Is that also correct?

Yes, para que podamos todas opinar sin gritar is also grammatical.

Word order options:

  • para que todas podamos opinar… (original)
  • para que podamos todas opinar…

Both are possible. The original order (subject word todas before the verb) is more typical and sounds a bit smoother here. Moving todas after podamos can sound slightly more marked or emphatic (“so that we can all give opinions”), but the difference is subtle.

The key is:

  • Keep todas close to what it modifies (the implied nosotras, the subject “we”), not far away in the sentence.