# FR: you should have + past participle



## ron2110

*Vous auriez dû aider* = *You should have helped*.

Could you also say *vous devrais avoir aidé*? Would that mean the same thing?

Also, how would you translate "you would have had to help"?

Thanks for your help in advance!


----------



## alahay

"avoir du" et "devoir eu"... hmmmm!

They sound the same to me but wait for the experts!


----------



## irka_hcmc

I should have : J'aurais du

YEah but we have to wait for the experts too lol


----------



## nopal

Bonjour les amis 
Well , I thing you should go and have a look to a thread hidden in the "French-Only"Section , there over there a thread "Passé surcomposé "which might help you to explain .
To answer your pretty  question Ron "i would translate with /vous auriez du avoir aidé .


----------



## ron2110

I don't get it.

If *j'aurais mangé* means _I would have eaten_,
why doesn't *j'aurais dû* mean _I would have had to

_and hence, what does "je devrais" mean???


----------



## hald

*j'aurais mangé*  _I would have eaten_
*j'aurais dû* *manger * _I should have eaten_
*je devrais manger  *_I should eat_

Je devrais est le conditionnel présent du verbe devoir
j'aurais mangé est le conditionnel passé du verbe manger
j'aurais dû est le conditionnel passé du verbe devoir

If you have trouble with conjugations, maybe this will help you : http://www.leconjugueur.com/
It's very useful, even to natives.


----------



## ron2110

Thanks very much, Hald (and everyone else too!)

But Hald:
if, as you said, *j'aurais mangé*  _I would have eaten_

and *dû* is the past participle of devoir JUST AS *mangé* is the past participle of manger, and *dû* = _had to_ JUST AS *mangé* = _eaten_

WHY OH WHY doesn't *j'aurais dû *mean _I would have had to_ ???

I am an unhappy chappy.


----------



## hald

Agnès, au secours !  

I'll try my best to explain,but I'm not sure I'll manage to do it properly.

I would have had to eat : _j'aurais dû manger_ or _j'aurais été obligé de manger_
I should have eaten _: j'aurais dû manger _or_ j'aurais mieux fait de manger_

Devoir can be either should or would in the conditionnal, depending whether it expresses an obligation or not.
Usually when I say "j'aurais dû", I mean "I should have", hence the transaltion I gave you for "j'aurais dû manger". Sorry if I confused you.


----------



## Aupick

I'm afraid I can't offer you much consolation, but _devoir_ is a funny verb and not at all consistent like _manger_ or most other verbs. As soon as you use it in a conditional tense, its meaning changes. 

Je dois: I have to, I must
Je devrais: I should

J'ai dû: I had to
J'aurais dû: I should have

I wonder if it's possible that it _could_ mean "I would have to" (je devrais) and "I would have had to" (j'aurais dû) in the right context, or if it could have in the past. I don't know. (EDIT: hald's latests post suggests it can.) But to all intents and purposes the conditional forms of the verb have been taken over by the conscience to express a sense of moral duty (similar to should) rather than some kind of "legal" obligation (similar to must or have to).

Having said that it's not nearly as bad as most English modal verbs.


----------



## ron2110

So could you also say: "*Je devrais avoir mangé*" for "_I should have eaten_"?


----------



## Sirène

Ça dépend du sens je crois :
je devrais avoir mangé, il est déjà une heure et demie
j'aurais dû manger, elle avait préparé ce gâteau exprès pour me faire plaisir.


----------



## ron2110

merci Sirène! cependant la question reste: comment sais-je _quand_ je dois utiliser un à la place de l'autre?


----------



## Sirène

En fait je me rends compte que mon premier exemple se réfère au présent (à l'heure qu'il est, je devrais avoir mangé) alors que la seconde se réfère au passé (lorsqu'elle m'a invité, j'aurais dû manger).

Si ce n'est pas très clair, ne t'en fais pas, quelqu'un d'autre va sûrement venir et t'expliquer ça mieux que moi.


----------



## ron2110

i think i'm getting the hang of it...
Peut quelqu'un me donner plus d'exemples pour me montrer la difference?
Sorry for annoying everybody!


----------



## Sirène

"On peut passer chez lui, il devrait avoir fini son travail"
"Il aurait dû finir son travail, il en était capable".


----------



## ron2110

"devrait avoir" me parait d'avoir le sens de "... by now"
he should have finished at this moment in time, BY NOW.

"Il aurait dû" est plutot dans le passe
he should have finished THEN.

je suis correcte dans mes conclusions?


----------



## Sirène

ron2110 said:
			
		

> "devrait avoir" me parait d'avoir le sens de "... by now"
> he should have finished at this moment in time, BY NOW.
> 
> "Il aurait dû" est plutot dans le passe
> he should have finished THEN.
> 
> je suis correcte dans mes conclusions?


Tiout à fait, si _devrait avoir_ est suivi d'un verbe au participe passé.
C'est différent dans le cas de _devrait avoir + nom_
"Il devrait avoir des moustaches, c'est un chat !"


----------



## ron2110

how's this:

j'aurais dû aller à la fête parce que je pouvais avoir rencontré plusieurs personnes.
je devrais avoir allé à la fête parce que je m'emmerde maintenant.


----------



## Sirène

*J'aurais dû aller* à la fête parce que j'aurais pu y rencontrer plusieurs personnes
mais aussi
*j'aurais dû aller* à la fête parce que je m'emmerde maintenant.

Dans la deuxième phrase, il manque cette idée de_ by now_ que tu avais si justement soulignée.

On dit "être allé" au fait et non "avoir allé".


----------



## ron2110

"Il devrait avoir des moustaches, c'est un chat !"

d'où obtenez-vous vos exemples? ​


----------



## ron2110

oh yeah:
je devrais être arrivé à la fête -- tout le monde m'attend.


----------



## Sirène

Je les invente... parfois... en l'occurrence...  


> je devrais être arrivé à la fête -- tout le monde m'attend.


Voui !  Vite, selle ton cheval !


----------



## ron2110

mon cheval stupide est allé à la fête sans moi 
mais ça ne fait rien parce que je viens d'apprendre quelque chose nouvelle! merci sirène et tout le monde ici! :-D


----------



## Mooresie

Je veux dire "You should have been there."  Si je comprends bien, je peux dire:

Tu aurais du etre la.
ou

Tu devais etre la.

Y a-t-il une difference entre ces deux phrases? Sinon, est-ce que l'une est meilleure/plus familiale que l'autre?

Merci!

mooresie


----------



## Gil

Tu devais être là.=>you were supposed to be there


----------



## kyu

Hi mooresie,

There is the same difference as in English :
You should have been there -> Tu aurais dû être là. (Past tense) 
You should be there -> Tu devrais être là. (Present tense)


----------



## Mooresie

Merci d'avoir m'aide.  Est-ce que ca veut donc dire que "Tu devais etre la" a le meme sens que "Tu etais suppose d'etre la"?

merci


----------



## Gil

Mooresie said:


> Merci d'avoir m'aide.  Est-ce que ca veut donc dire que "Tu devais etre la" a le meme sens que "Tu etais suppose d'etre la"?
> 
> merci


Oui, dans certains contextes.  On pourrait sans doute imaginer d'autres contextes où le sens est différent.


----------



## Mooresie

J'ai aussi une autre question la-dessus...

"Tu devrais avoir ete la" = "Tu aurais du etre la" ?

Si oui, laquelle est la plus frequente dans la langue courante?

merci!


----------



## Cyrrus

"Tu aurais dû être là" est le plus fréquent.


----------



## kyu

Il y a une différence entre les deux formes.

 - "Tu aurais dû être là" = You should have been there -> past tense : it can be a blame (you were supposed to be there) or a regret (you should have been there, you missed something!))

- "Tu devrais avoir été là" = it expresses a hypothetical future and/or a required condition. Mostly used with active verbs: "Dans deux heures, tu devrais avoir fini de lire" (In two hours, you should have finished reading = probability or warning according to the context).


----------



## Gil

kyu said:


> Il y a une différence entre les deux formes.
> 
> - "Tu aurais dû être là" = You should have been there -> past tense : it can be a blame (you were supposed to be there) or a regret (you should have been there, you missed something!))
> 
> - "Tu devrais avoir été là" = it expresses a hypothetical future and/or a required condition. Mostly used with active verbs: "Dans deux heures, tu devrais avoir fini de lire" (In two hours, you should have finished reading = probability or warning according to the context).


Bonne explication


----------



## Mooresie

Très bonne explication, merci beaucoup!


----------



## frenchie911

I SHOULD HAVE READ???

J'aurais du lu???


----------



## ron2110

frenchie911 said:


> I SHOULD HAVE READ???
> 
> J'aurais du lu???


 
*J'aurais dû lire*


----------



## Tenorman

Hi, I'm a bit confused with the translation of 'You shopuld have'
I've found these two versions in an exercise book and i am wondering if they can both be correct.


You should have got up earlier_Vous auriez dû te lever plus tôt  
_You should have seen the other car._Vous devriez avoir vu l'autre voiture.

Any helpful comments please?
Tenorman_


----------



## Yendred

Take care of the agreement:_*
Vous auriez *dû *vous *lever plus tôt  _
or
_*Tu aurais *dû *te *lever plus tôt  _

The second phrase is correct:
_Vous devriez avoir vu l'autre voiture._
or can also be:
_Vous auriez dû voir l'autre voiture._


----------



## Tenorman

Thank you, Yendred.

Yes, i have no excuse for mixing vous and tu, but are you saying that both these very different translations the opening words 'you should have', are perfectly OK?
They don't even mean slightly different things? 
As a further point, concerning these three words; Could the same translations be used in the sentence; *You should have lots of exercise if you want to stay healthy.
*Here, i suspect there is some significant difference. In english, the examples i originally gave could be expressed as 'You should've...............got up earlier/seen the car'
But in *You should have lots of exercise if you want to stay healthy, *it won't take 'should've. 

TM


----------



## OLN

I'm not sure I understand the difficulty you're facing._

You should have lots of exercice_ is the present tense.
Simply use the present conditional in French: _Tu devrais (vous devriez) faire beaucoup d'exercice._

If this is not about vocabulary, you may want to ask a specific question in the English-French Grammar forum.

PS : 
You should have seen the other car. _
Vous devriez avoir vu l'autre voiture _is grammatically correct, but the meaning is different from _Vous auriez dû voir__ l'autre voiture._
I would apply the past tense on _devoir_ (2nd sentence), not on _voir_.


----------



## Transfer_02

In your examples  "you should have" has different functions (though it might depend on the context and eg the intonation in the voice).

_You should have got up earlier_ is (possibly) a reproach (or "useless advice", if you prefer), so it concerns an "unreal" past (sthg that didn't happen in the past)

_You should have seen the other car_ is an exclamation of regret (she's saying, "it's a shame you missed it"), this also concerns the past

_You should get lots of exercise if you want to stay healthy_  is "timeless" advice.  ie it is not particularly about the past, present or future; it is a general statement.

So, since even in English "should have" has different functions, it is clear that the translation into French may vary.  Especially if the translator wants to avoid any ambiguity.


----------



## Tenorman

Thank you OLN.
You have helped me see the source of my confusion when you point out that 'you should have lots of exercise if...........' is in the present tense.
You see, the point i was making was - whenever i see a sentence starting with 'you should have.......',  can i assume it can be translated using either_*Vous devriez avoir *or *Vous auriez dû.?  *_As you point out, the answer is definately, no; because what follows might involve a different tense. This simply hadn't occured to me.
I would appreciate it if you could confirm that i understand you correctly.
Thanks once again for your help and yes, perhaps i shoud have directed this to the English-French Grammar forum. Sorry about that.

TM


----------



## Transfer_02

Tenorman said:


> 'you should have lots of exercise if...........' is in the present tense.



Yes and no.  Like I tried to explain above, "should" here refers to all time, it's a general statement (advice).  So it concerns the future as much as the present.


----------



## Tenorman

Hello Transfer_02,
Yes, i understand what you are saying. It has caused me quite a lot of confusion, but with the very generous help i've received from you all, i now think i'm on the right road.
Really good lesson, in fact!
Thanks very much,
TM


----------



## OLN

I will add some color to try to explain what each group of words becomes when you go from present to past tense.

EN : You should + *infinitive*  → You should have + past participle 
FR : Tu devrais (present) + *infinitif*→  Vous auriez dû (past) + *infinitive* (it's much simpler in French )


Vous devriez (present) avoir + participe passé (past infinitive) only looks like the English past conditional. 

A l'heure qu'il est, vous devriez avoir lu ce livre : By now, you should be finished reading the book.


Simpler illustrations:

I should have done that = J'aurais dû faire cela.
"Je devrais avoir fait cela" would mean "[I think] I should be done [when we meet again]".

I should know that →  I should have known that
Je devrais le savoir → J'aurais dû le savoir, *not* "Je devrais l'avoir su".


----------

