Sin levadura, la masa no crece; con levadura, sí.

Without yeast, the dough doesn’t rise; with yeast, it does.

Breakdown of Sin levadura, la masa no crece; con levadura, sí.

• con: with
• ;: semicolon
• sin: without
• .: period
• no: not
• ,: comma
• sí: yes
• la levadura: the yeast
• la masa: the dough
• crecer: to rise

Questions & Answers about Sin levadura, la masa no crece; con levadura, sí.

Why does sin mean without here, and how is sin + noun used in Spanish?

Sin is a preposition meaning without. The pattern sin + noun is very common to express the absence of something: sin levadura = without yeast.
Prepositions in Spanish don’t change form, and you don’t add de (so not sin de levadura).

Why is it con levadura and not con la levadura?

In Spanish, when you’re talking about an ingredient in general (yeast as a substance/ingredient), it’s common to omit the article: con levadura = with yeast.
You might use la if you mean a specific yeast already known in the context (e.g., la levadura que compraste): con la levadura, but that’s more specific than the sentence needs.

What does la masa mean, and why does it have la?

La masa here means the dough (bread/pastry dough). It’s a specific thing in the situation (the dough you’re working with), so Spanish typically uses the definite article: la.
Also, masa is grammatically feminine, so it takes la.

Why is it no crece and not no crezca or no crecer?

Crece is present indicative (it rises / grows), used for factual, general statements: Without yeast, dough doesn’t rise.

• Crezca (subjunctive) would appear after triggers like para que, aunque, es posible que, etc.
• Crecer is the infinitive and would need a structure like no va a crecer (it’s not going to rise) or no puede crecer (it can’t rise).

Can crecer mean both grow and rise? Which is intended here?

Yes. Crecer literally means to grow, but with dough it naturally means to rise (increase in volume). In baking contexts, Spanish commonly uses crecer for dough rising.

What is the role of the commas in Sin levadura, la masa no crece?

The comma marks an introductory prepositional phrase: Sin levadura, .... This is stylistically normal, especially when the phrase is at the beginning and sets a condition/contrast. You’ll often see this with con/sin phrases.

Why is there a semicolon (;) instead of a period or comma?

The semicolon links two closely related independent statements that form a clear contrast:

• Without yeast, dough doesn’t rise; with yeast, it does.
  A period would also be possible, but the semicolon emphasizes the tight comparison. A comma would usually be too weak (and could become a comma splice).

What does sí mean here? Is it just yes?

Here sí means yes / it does, but it’s functioning as a “pro-form” that stands in for the repeated verb phrase crece.
So con levadura, sí ≈ con levadura, (la masa) sí crece = with yeast, it does (rise).

Why does sí have an accent?

The accent distinguishes:

• sí = yes / affirmative response / emphatic affirmation
• si = if
  In this sentence you need sí because it’s affirming the opposite of no crece.

Is con levadura, sí a complete sentence? What’s missing?

It’s an elliptical (shortened) clause. Spanish often omits repeated words when they’re obvious from context. What’s implied is:
Con levadura, (la masa) sí (crece).
So the subject (la masa) and the verb (crece) are understood.

Could I also say Con levadura, la masa sí crece?

Yes, that’s a fully explicit version and sounds completely natural:
Sin levadura, la masa no crece; con levadura, la masa sí crece.
The original uses ellipsis to avoid repetition and sound punchier.

Why is sí placed at the end, instead of before the verb like sí crece?

Because the verb is omitted. When you drop crece, the remaining affirmative marker sí naturally sits where the emphasis lands—at the end of the second clause: con levadura, sí.
If you keep the verb, you typically place sí right before it for emphasis: sí crece.