Would "sino" or "sino que" be used if the following noun is modified by a past participle?
for example:
... sino (que) la destrucción hecha por los conquistadores.
Thanks!
In Spanish, both "sino" and "sino que" can be used to express contrast or exception, but the choice between them depends on the context and the structure of the sentence. However, when a noun is modified by a past participle, it is common to use "sino" rather than "sino que".
In your example sentence: "...sino (que) la destrucción hecha por los conquistadores," the more appropriate option is "sino". This is because the noun "destrucción" is being modified by the past participle "hecha", and "sino" is used to introduce an alternative or exception that contrasts with what was previously mentioned.
To determine this, first, identify the main idea of the sentence. In this case, it is "la destrucción hecha por los conquistadores" (the destruction made by the conquerors). Then, determine if there is any contrast or exception being introduced. If there is, use "sino" to introduce that contrast or exception. The word "que" is optional and can be omitted in this context.
So, in summary, when a noun is modified by a past participle, use "sino" to express contrast or exception. However, keep in mind that context is crucial, and there may be cases where "sino que" is more appropriate.