# Past subjunctive tense when the main verb is in present tense



## Cristina Allende

Last year my teacher told me that you only use imperfect subjunctive tense when the verb in the independent clause is in some form of past tense or if it's in the conditional tense.  

Example:
Ella quería que yo comiera el pollo.

But what if I wanted to say something like this:
"I hope that Miguel ate something yesterday while I was away."

I am speaking in the present about something in the past, but I am unsure about it.  It seems to me that it would require past subjunctive, though the verb in the independent clause is not in the past or conditional tense.

Is this correct?
"Espero que Miguel comiera algo ayer mientras no estaba."


----------



## Kangy

^ Sí 
Aunque yo diría "Espero que Miguel *haya comido* algo ayer mientras no estaba".


----------



## Outsider

It would be more common to say _haya comido_, because by the time you are speaking Miguel either has already eaten, or not. But I see that the imperfect could also be used.

Here's a word of advice: be distrustful of teachers and textbooks that present conditional clauses in a linear "tense X in main clause goes with tense Y in dependent clause" sort of way. They are often oversimplifications. What's more, they force you to memorize a long list of rules that are actually wrong.


----------



## maghanish2

Sorry to jump into the discussion, but does it sound better to say 'Espero que haya comido ayer' o 'Espero que comiera ayer', because like Cristina said, my teacher and textbook as well told me that you could NEVER put two different subjunctive tenses like that.  They also said that you could never put a verb in the subjunctive if the main verb is in the same person (No creo que lo sepa), but I've heard that also.

So, like you said, Outisder, should we really not believe these sources, and simply disregard these rules.....or what?


----------



## Outsider

Those rigid rules are oversimplifications. They give what is perhaps the "default", most common way to use the subjunctive tenses in conditional clauses, but there are exceptions where they do not apply. This is usually when the time at which the speaker talks is different from the time of the event he's referring to.

What really matters is that you always keep track of these two "times", and use tenses that suit each one, more or less independently.


----------



## maghanish2

I think that makse sense.  Although, are the exceptions completely acceptable?  I mean saying 'haya comido' and 'comiera' in a sentence with a present/future tense main verb will have the same meaning and be understood by all?  If so, is one more common than the other, or is it simply the speaker's preference?  Gracias de nuevo!


----------



## ampurdan

"Espero que comiera" and "Espero que haya comido" are both ok.

With "ayer" I would only use "comiera". With "(hoy) a las tres" I would only use "haya comido". 

Ha comido hoy a las tres. -> Espero que haya comido (hoy a las tres).
Comió ayer -> Espero que comiera (ayer).

However, this is Spanish from Spain. In other places it's different.


----------



## maghanish2

Gracias, ampurdan, así que, no tendrá sentido si yo digo 'Espero que haya comido ayer', sí?  Espero comprender.


----------



## Outsider

maghanish2 said:


> I mean saying 'haya comido' and 'comiera' in a sentence with a present/future tense main verb will have the same meaning and be understood by all?  If so, is one more common than the other, or is it simply the speaker's preference?


They have different nuances, as always with the preterite and the imperfect, although often the difference will be so subtle that they are almost interchangeable, as in this case.

With the imperfect, you present the act of eating as still a possibility while you were out. With the preterite, you present it as something in the past, which either has actually happened, or actually not happened.


----------



## ampurdan

maghanish2 said:


> Gracias, ampurdan, así que, no tendrá sentido si yo digo 'Espero que haya comido ayer', sí? Espero comprender.


 
En España no se dice así, por lo menos. Se entendería, pero resultaría algo chocante.


----------



## maghanish2

Gracias ampurdan, necesité la clarificación!


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

Hola a todos:
Tengo una pregunta sobre el subjunctivo, condicciones de emoción, y tiempos. Considere esto: supongamos que quiero decir "Me alegro de que vayas/fueras a Madrid." "I´m happy that you went to Madrid." Me alegro _ahora_ sobre algo que pasó en el _pasado. _Las reglas dicen que cuando la oracción principal es en el presente, pretérito perfecto, imperativo o futuro; la oracción subjuntiva debería ser en el presente o pretérito perfecto subjunctivo. La acción en esta oracción subjunctiva, sin embargo, es en el pasado. ¿Cúal tiempo debería usar?


----------



## camilushka

Me alegro de que vayas a Madrid: está bien
Me alegro de que fueras a Madrid: no me suena, sería mejor: Me alegro de que hayas ido a Madrid.
De todas maneras esperá más respuestas, porque no soy una experta en el tema.


----------



## lazarus1907

Para el pasado, solo el imperfecto de subjuntivo; nunca el presente de subjuntivo. Si dices "me alegro de que vayas", solo puedes referirte al presente o al futuro.

Por cierto: subju*nti*vo no tiene ce, y or*aci*ón no tiene doble ce.


----------



## Rayines

Podrías decir: "Me alegro (presente) de que hayas ido (acción en el pasado) a Madrid".


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

The present perfect subjunctive ties the two time frames together nicely. There is, however, a limitation with regard to "temporal adverbs". Someone mentioned it arriba. You wouldn't say "I hope you have eaten yesterday." "Espero que has comido ayer." You would pretty much be forced to say "I hope you _ate_ yesterday." "Espero que comieras ayer." thereby mixing tenses. Interesting.


----------



## San

Cristina Allende said:


> Last year my teacher told me that you only use imperfect subjunctive tense when the verb in the independent clause is in some form of past tense or if it's in the conditional tense.
> 
> Example:
> Ella quería que yo comiera el pollo.
> 
> But what if I wanted to say something like this:
> "I hope that Miguel ate something yesterday while I was away."
> 
> I am speaking in the present about something in the past, but I am unsure about it.  It seems to me that it would require past subjunctive, though the verb in the independent clause is not in the past or conditional tense.
> 
> Is this correct?
> "Espero que Miguel comiera algo ayer mientras no estaba."


Hi,
After having read several threads about the matter, that's the conclusion I've reached:

Espero que Miguel comiera algo ayer (Spanish from Spain)
Espero que Miguel haya comido algo ayer (Latin American Spanish)
Espero que Miguel haya comido ya (hoy) (Spain and Latin American Spanish)

I hope this helps you.


----------



## Kangy

ampurdan said:


> En España no se dice así, por lo menos. Se entendería, pero resultaría algo chocante.



Yo siempre digo "haya comido".
En mi caso sonaría chocante decir "comiera".


----------



## ampurdan

Bueno pero vos vivís en Argentina, al parecer.


----------



## NewdestinyX

I think it's fascinating that for the present + past thing Spain would prefer the 'simple' past subjunctive in the subclause for referring to the immediate past in this case -- and yet Spain Spanish is known for preferring the present perfect for recent past events.

In Latin America -- immediately after you come home from a movie -- a person will ask you -- "¿Te gustó la película?" -- where in Spain you will hear -- "¿Te ha gustado la película?". And yet in the subordinate clause structures with hope and emotion -- Spain prefers the 'simpler past' rather than the perfect past.

So:
Latin America --
Espero que haya comido algo. -pero-
Me gustó la película. (hace una hora).

Spain --
Espero que comiera algo. -pero
Me ha gustado la película (hace una hora).

It's mostly the American and British authored Spanish grammar books that teach the Present + Present and Past + Past sharp time concordance. Until the printing of the Diccionario Panhispánico de Dudas -- the RAE also held the strict rule about time concordance in subclauses as well. They've become more liberal on that issue in the last 2 years.

Even in Spain -- the older generation considers 'espero que comiera...' incorrect.


----------



## ampurdan

NewdestinyX said:


> Spain --
> Espero que comiera algo. -pero
> Me ha gustado la película (hace una hora).


 
Aquí se usa esta equivalencia: 

Indicativo      Subjuntivo
Pret. perf. ->  Pret. perf.
Pret. indef. >   Pret. imperf.

Espero que hayas comido bien (hoy)
Espero que hayas comido bien (en Inglaterra este año)
Espero que hayas comido bien (toda tu vida)

He comido bien (hoy)
He comido bien (en Inglaterra este año)
He comid bien (toda mi vida)

Espero que comieras bien (ayer).
Espero que comieras bien (durante tu viaje a Inglaterra).
Espero que tu abuelo comiera bien (durante su vida).

Comí bien (ayer).
Comí bien (durante mi viaje a Inglaterra).
Comió bien tu abuelo (durante su vida).


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> I think it's fascinating that for the present + past thing Spain would prefer the 'simple' past subjunctive in the subclause for referring to the immediate past in this case -- and yet Spain Spanish is known for preferring the present perfect for recent past events.



What do you mean? In Spain present perfect subjunctive is used to refer to the immediate past.


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> What do you mean? In Spain present perfect subjunctive is used to refer to the immediate past.



In the rest of the Spanish speaking world, as I posed in my example -- if your friend comes home from a movie they would say. Te *gustó *la pelicula. Using simple past -- which is the grammatically logical way to refer to it.

In Spain they prefer -- Te *ha gustado* la película. That's less logical grammatically but a preference in Spain Spanish. And to add 'ayer' is actually grammatically incorrect. ¿Te ha gustado la peli ayer? = incorrecto (but it is common in Spain)

Grant


----------



## Outsider

I would avoid using such terms as 'grammatically logical'. You seem to be using English as your reference for what is logical and what is not (_Did you enjoy the film? / Have you enjoyed the film?_).
But the line between the domains of the preterite and the present perfect can be fuzzy. It's even fuzzy within English.

P.S. Incidentally, NewdestinyX, the preterite/present perfect distinction does not exist in the subjunctive.


----------



## ampurdan

Grant, Spain Spanish prefers perfect tenses (= aspectos no compuestos) in recent past events both in subjunctive and in indicative:

¿Te* ha gustado* la película que acabas de ver? (Pretérito perfecto de indicativo* = *aspecto compuesto)

Espero que te* haya gustado* la película que acabas de ver. (Pretérito perf. compuesto de subjuntivo = aspecto compuesto)

¿Te *gustó* la película que viste la semana pasada? (Pretérito perf. simple, aspecto no compuesto)

Espero que te *gustase* la película que viste la semana pasada. (Pretérito imperfecto, aspecto no compuesto)

It is grammatically consistent.

I don't see why using "pretérito perfecto compuesto" when the action you are referring to is within the same "time division" you are in (day, year, period) would be grammatically illogical.


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

NewdestinyX said:


> ¿Te ha gustado la peli ayer? = incorrecto (but it is common in Spain)


It is not common in Spain! The _ayer_ part sounds awful...


----------



## oeset

NewdestinyX said:


> ¿Te ha gustado la peli ayer? = incorrecto (but it is common in Spain)
> 
> Grant


Common in Spain? I don't think so.



Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo said:


> It is not common in Spain! The _ayer_ part sounds awful...




¿Te gustó la peli _de ayer_/_que viste ayer_?
¿Te ha gustado la peli?

If you use "ayer" that way, I'd answer:
¿Te gustó la peli ayer? Sí, pero hoy no me ha gustado.
Just joking.
Un saludo.


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> Grant, Spain Spanish prefers perfect tenses (= aspectos no compuestos) in recent past events both in subjunctive and in indicative:
> 
> ¿Te* ha gustado* la película que acabas de ver? (Pretérito perfecto de indicativo* = *aspecto compuesto)
> 
> Espero que te* haya gustado* la película que acabas de ver. (Pretérito perf. compuesto de subjuntivo = aspecto compuesto)
> 
> ¿Te *gustó* la película que viste la semana pasada? (Pretérito perf. simple, aspecto no compuesto)
> 
> Espero que te *gustase* la película que viste la semana pasada. (Pretérito imperfecto, aspecto no compuesto)
> 
> It is grammatically consistent.
> 
> I don't see why using "pretérito perfecto compuesto" when the action you are referring to is within the same "time division" you are in (day, year, period) would be grammatically illogical.



Well you just added a lot of extra context and words that allows the 'perfect' tense to sound better. But my comments were aimed at the simpler versions of the sentence. The perfect tenses, by definition, don't commit to any point in time. When a person refers to an event that has happened in the immediate near past -- that is a preterite event, by definition. It is a point in time. A movie is something that happens at one point and then is over. For me, logically, it should be referred to in the preterite. I have read as much as the rest of you on this topic and I know grammarians and enthusiasts alike differ on this topic. So I'm not all that interested in debating 'who's' gotten it right in terms of 'most logical/correct' -- that would quickly dissolve into a circular debate as neither side can be conclusively proven. There's the same rub in American versus British English with regard to 'perfect versus simple past'. 

So for the purposes of me getting at the main position I want to represent on this topic -- let me withdraw my assertions about 'more logical' or 'more correct'.

As several of you have noted by now -- I'm a 'champion' of the Intermediate Student in my interactions on the forum here -- so what's important for 'them' to know is that there is a preference in Spain (and England) to use the present perfect tense rather than the preterite in referring to recent past events. In Latin American Spanish -- it is more like American English in the use of the preterite for the recent past. I think we can all agree to that assertion. It's also important to note -- though as several Spaniards have already disagreed -- that at least in Central Spain particularly Madrid (a place I know well) using time markers like 'ayer' after the 'present perfect' is also very common -- it is an overcorrection for the preference for present perfect for recent past and other Spaniards would find it 'chocante' -- but it does happen. I think most of us here, including Spaniards would want to call that incorrect -- as incorrect as the Laismo you hear in Madrid too.

Thanks,
Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> P.S. Incidentally, NewdestinyX, the preterite/present perfect distinction does not exist in the subjunctive.



Not sure what you meant by that.. There is a distinction in ..que haya comido versus ..que comiera.  And isn't it the same distinction we're talking about? And I of course can't read that article in French you cited, Outs.

Thanks,
Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> Not sure what you meant by that.. There is a distinction in ..que haya comido versus ..que comiera.  And it's the same distinction we're talking about. Do you disagree?


O.K., I'm a bit confused now. Or perhaps I created the confusion all by myself, as sometimes happens. 

I thought you were talking about the preterite/present perfect distinction, not about the preterite/imperfect distinction... 

Comí ayer. --> preterite (or _indefinido_, etc.)
He comido hoy. --> present perfect

Espero que hayas comido ayer. --> preterite + present perfect
Espero que comieras/comieses. --> neither preterite nor present perfect​


NewdestinyX said:


> And I of course can't read that article in French you cited, Outs.


Sorry, I thought you might be able to read the discussion. Konungursvia gave differences between how the present perfect and the simple past are used in American English and British English.


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> O.K., I'm a bit confused now. Or perhaps I created the confusion all by myself, as sometimes happens.
> 
> I thought you were talking about the preterite/present perfect distinction, not about the preterite/imperfect distinction...
> Comí ayer. --> preterite (or _indefinido_, etc.)
> He comido hoy. --> present perfect
> 
> Espero que hayas comido ayer. --> preterite + present perfect
> Espero que comieras/comieses. --> neither preterite nor present perfect​



Well - okay technically it is called the Imperfect Subjunctive. But many grammars call it the Past Subjunctive too. Actually the SPanish Imp subjnctive is both an imperfect and a simple past combined into one. Clearly you can see that in "Si fuera con Dani... and "Espero que comiera.." neither of which are Imperfect in time definition. So I guess I was drawing the same distinction since 'comiera' is a "preterite subjunctive" if I can use that term. And yet my opening comments in this thread were how interesting it is that Spain would prefer the perfect over preterite for recent past and yet the opposite when it came to subordinate clause structures. In essence Spaniards prefer:
How have you liked the movie.
--but then they also prefer--
I hope that he "ate" well. --over-- I hope that he 'has eaten' well-- again referring to an immediate past.

I know I'm using English there to illustrate the point but -- it accurately translates the difference between 'haya comido' and 'comiera'..

Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> Well - okay technically it is called the Imperfect Subjunctive. But many grammars call it the Past Subjunctive too. Actually the SPanish Imp subjnctive is both an imperfect and a simple past combined into one.


No, it's the English simple past which is both a preterite and an imperfect. Main past tenses of Spanish:


indefinido
imperfecto
pretérito perfecto compuesto
Main past tenses of English:


simple past (=1+2)
present perfect (=3)
It's no wonder you get confused about this, since English doesn't have a preterite/imperfect distinction in the explicit way that the Romance languages do.



NewdestinyX said:


> Clearly you can see that in "Si fuera con Dani... and "Espero que comiera.." neither of which are Imperfect in time definition.


Oh, yes they are! Why not?!


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> No, it's the English simple past which is both a preterite and an imperfect. Main past tenses of Spanish:
> indefinido
> imperfecto
> pretérito perfecto compuesto
> Main past tenses of English:
> simple past (=1+2)
> present perfect (=3)
> It's no wonder you get confused about this, since English doesn't have a preterite/imperfect distinction in the explicit way that the Romance languages do.



This topic is a matter of perspective, Outs. It would end up in a circular debate. Neither language is 'missing' anything. And trust me I'm 'not confused about this in the slightest'.  I just think it's interesting - the 'preferences' in Peninsular Spanish being different in two similar cases with regard to time reference point. In one case the preference, for referring to recent past, employs a perfective past and in the other case a non perfective past. "Comiera" is non-perfective. I think that states it more clearly.

Thanks,
Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> NewDestinyX said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you can see that in "Si fuera con Dani... and "Espero que comiera.." neither of which are Imperfect in time definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, yes they are! Why not?!
Click to expand...


Are you asserting that the Spanish Subjunctive Mood can only speak in a 'durative past'?? It can not reference a 'moment' in time?


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> Are you asserting that the Spanish Subjunctive Mood can only speak in a 'durative past'??


I am asserting merely that the Spanish imperfect subjunctive is, as the name suggests, an imperfect(ive) tense.


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> And yet my opening comments in this thread were how interesting it is that Spain would prefer the perfect over preterite for recent past and yet the opposite when it came to subordinate clause structures. In essence Spaniards prefer:
> How have you liked the movie.
> --but then they also prefer--
> I hope that he "ate" well. --over-- I hope that he 'has eaten' well-- again referring to an immediate past.



I think you are a little confused about that, it's just the opposite! As I said before, Spaniards prefer the perfect for recent past:

_Espero que hayas comido bien._

Please read the post #25


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> I am asserting merely that the Spanish imperfect subjunctive is, as the name suggests, an imperfect(ive) tense.



I'm interested in getting at what that means -- not working with the semantics of the terms.Yes or no -- is the Spanish Subjunctive Mood, in the past, able to distinguish between a "moment in time" and "a duration of time"? If so -- how? And if not, why not?

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> I think you are a little confused about that, it's just the opposite! As I said before, Spaniards prefer the perfect for recent past:
> 
> _Espero que hayas comido bien._
> 
> Please read the post #25



No -- that's exactly what I'm asserting, San. I agree with you. But in 'espero que comiera bien' -- they prefer 'comiera' a non-perfect tense over '..que haya comido' a perfect tense for recent past. That's the interesting part to me. That it seems to be an inconsistent preference.

Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> I'm interested in getting at what that means -- not working with the semantics of the terms.Yes or no -- is the Spanish Subjunctive Mood, in the past, able to distinguish between a "moment in time" and "a duration of time"?


I'm not sure I understand which distinction you are alluding to. Some examples would be nice -- and perhaps a new thread!


----------



## ampurdan

NewdestinyX said:


> Well you just added a lot of extra context and words that allows the 'perfect' tense to sound better.


 
No, I just made a normal every-day sentence. 



> So I'm not all that interested in debating 'who's' gotten it right in terms of 'most logical/correct'


 
Good to know. 



> It's also important to note -- though as several Spaniards have already disagreed -- that at least in Central Spain particularly Madrid (a place I know well) using time markers like 'ayer' after the 'present perfect' is also very common


 
I'm not from Madrid, but I don't think this is true. A sentence like "he comido ayer" would sound "chocante" to most Spaniards. I think there is somewhere in Spain where people could say "he comido ayer", but it's not in any way the standard use.


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> I'm not sure I understand which distinction you are alluding to. Some examples would be nice -- and perhaps a new thread!


I don't know how I could ask it any more clearly -- new thread or not. And it's not example driven. It's about syntactic role. I said that in 'espero que comiera' that comiera isn't the least bit 'durative'. You diagreed. I don't understand why you disagreed. In - Espero que comiera. it's obviously talking about a moment in time not an ongoing event. The easy test for what is 'imperfect' in time reference is to check if it can be substituted with 'estaba + -ndo' or '-ía/-aba' if indicative were allowed.

Please understand my posture here too, Outs -- I'm here as a learner. The question as to why the Spanish Subjunctive mood only has one 'past' when the Indicative has two -- is indeed a 'deep topic'. And probably worthy of its own thread. But it seemed like something obvious to you and the opposite seemed obvious to me. And that why I asked the questions I did.

In Espero que comiera bien -- you are referring to a moment as 'fixed in time' as "¿Comiste bien?" Do you disagree?

Grant

(heading out for a couple of hours -- I will respond later)


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

NewdestinyX said:


> No -- that's exactly what I'm asserting, San. I agree with you. But in 'espero que comiera bien' -- they prefer 'comiera' a non-perfect tense over '..que haya comido' a perfect tense for recent past. That's the interesting part to me. That it seems to be an inconsistent preference.
> 
> Grant


Well. The present perfect is the least perfect of perfect tenses...


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> I don't know how I could ask it any more clearly -- new thread or not. And it's not example driven. It's about syntactic role. I said that in 'espero que comiera' that comiera isn't the least bit 'durative'. You diagreed. I don't understand why you disagreed. In - Espero que comiera. it's obviously talking about a moment in time not an ongoing event. The easy test for what is 'imperfect' in time reference is to check if it can be substituted with 'estaba + -ndo' or '-ía/-aba' if indicative were allowed.


In the subjunctive, the distinction between perfect(ive) and imperfect(ive) tenses can be blurred to the point where it disappears. This is why I asked for a context. The perfect(ive)/imperfect(ive) distinction has everything to do with context, as you no doubt know.

Incidentally, it's not true that Spain uses one tense and Latin America uses the other. At least one Spaniard stated that both _espero que haya comido_ and _espero que comiera_ were possible phrases. I would add that it may be that one of the tenses is much more common than the other in practice, leading other natives to overlook the least frequently used tense. Again, context is needed.


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> I'm not from Madrid, but I don't think this is true. A sentence like "he comido ayer" would sound "chocante" to most Spaniards. I think there is somewhere in Spain where people could say "he comido ayer", but it's not in any way the standard use.



Not standard.. well, okay. But I think you will find this search a little startling: Web Results *1* - *10* of about *12,900* for * "he * ayer" site:.es*.  (*0.20* seconds)


----------



## ampurdan

NewdestinyX said:


> No -- that's exactly what I'm asserting, San. I agree with you. But in 'espero que comiera bien' -- they prefer 'comiera' a non-perfect tense over '..que haya comido' a perfect tense for recent past. That's the interesting part to me. That it seems to be an inconsistent preference.


 
What I was trying to say is that Spaniards use the perfect tense (haya comido) for the recent past (so to speak, not exactly) and the imperfect tense (comiera) for the more distant past. That's why I wrote those examples.


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> In the subjunctive, the distinction between perfect(ive) and imperfect(ive) tenses can be blurred to the point where it disappears. This is why I asked for a context. The perfect(ive)/imperfect(ive) distinction has everything to do with context, as you no doubt know.
> 
> Incidentally, it's not true that Spain uses one tense and Latin America uses the other. At least one Spaniard stated that both _espero que haya comido_ and _espero que comiera_ were possible phrases. I would add that it may be that one of the tenses is much more common than the other in practice, leading other natives to overlook the least frequently used tense. Again, context is needed.



Understood and agreed.. But there are preferences and that's the point. As to the way you are posturing the words perfect(ive) and imperfect(ive). That's a little misleading to this topic -- in that the 'imperfect tense' is not 'perfective' in time reference. The distinction I'm making is in the 'perfect tenses' as opposed to the 'non perfect tenses'. The Imperfect Indicative is not a perfect tense in Spanish which all require a helper verb 'haber'. I think I know what you're driving at but we need to keep our nomenclature clear so as not to confuse each other and others.  When I use the term 'perfect'/'perfective' - I am referring to tenses that need the helper verb 'haber' in Spanish.

Grant


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> No -- that's exactly what I'm asserting, San. I agree with you. But in 'espero que comiera bien' -- they prefer 'comiera' a non-perfect tense over '..que haya comido' a perfect tense for recent past. That's the interesting part to me. That it seems to be an inconsistent preference.
> 
> Grant



But I can't understand whrere the inconsistent is supposed to be. People say "haya comido" wherever they would say "ha comido", and the same with "comiera" and "comió". So if you are suggesting that there is some change when we move into the subjunctive, I can't see it.


----------



## ampurdan

NewdestinyX said:


> Not standard.. well, okay. But I think you will find this search a little startling: Web Results *1* - *10* of about *12,900* for *"he * ayer" site:.es*. (*0.20* seconds)


 
Then you'll find this search even more startling:

Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *11.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:mx*. (*0,27* segundos).

Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *14.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:ar*. (*0,04* segundos)


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> What I was trying to say is that Spaniards use the perfect tense (haya comido) for the recent past (so to speak, not exactly) and the imperfect tense (comiera) for the more distant past. That's why I wrote those examples.



That doesn't match my experience Amp -- or my interviews with other Spaniards. That would make it very consistent with the Indicative preferences. But I have data that suggests otherwise. It does show you that there is a wide range of preference on all of these topics -- which makes rules nearly impossible to discern or even 'rules of thumb'. ;-) Thanks for your input -- I'll add it to my data. Very confusing that so many people in a medium sized country would say things so differently. ;-) Did you look at some of the google results from Spain for "he * ayer"?

Un saludo,
Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> Then you'll find this search even more startling:
> 
> Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *11.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:mx*. (*0,27* segundos).
> 
> Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *14.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:ar*. (*0,04* segundos)



It's unfortunate that Google gives you no way to filter punctuation. The vast majority of the hits from those searches are like " ..que *he visto*. *Ayer* estuve..."

That is not the case with the search from the Spanish pages.

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> Then you'll find this search even more startling:
> 
> Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *11.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:mx*. (*0,27* segundos).
> 
> Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *14.400.000* de *"he * ayer" site:ar*. (*0,04* segundos)



Here's a more 'telling' story of the difference.

Web Results *1* - *10* of about *719* for * "ayer he" site:.es*.  (*0.05* seconds)
Web Results *1* - *10* of about *508* for * "ayer he" site:.mx*.
And Mexico is 'how' much larger than Spain? I think that gets my point across a little better. We both agree: "chocante". 

But it would appear that does happen more in Spain than other places.

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> But I can't understand whrere the inconsistent is supposed to be. People say "haya comido" wherever they would say "ha comido", and the same with "comiera" and "comió". So if you are suggesting that there is some change when we move into the subjunctive, I can't see it.



Where 'comió' is expected (recent past) (everywhere but Spain) Spain uses 'ha comido'

But where 'haya comido' is expected (recent past) (everywhere but Spain) Spain uses 'comiera'.

Generally speaking:
Spain: ¿Te ha gustado la peli? (recent past)
LatAm: ¿Te gustó la pelicula? (recent past)
--but then:
Spain: Espero que comiera bien. (recent past)
LatAm: Espero que haya comido bien. (recent past)

That's my point. It seems an 'opposite of what is expected'. 

Grant


----------



## Outsider

San said:


> But I can't understand whrere the inconsistent is supposed to be. People say "haya comido" wherever they would say "ha comido", and the same with "comiera" and "comió". So if you are suggesting that there is some change when we move into the subjunctive, I can't see it.


What?! I would expect "comía" with "comiera"!... 

I'm not challenging what you wrote; you are the native speaker. Just noting that perhaps it's time I fade back into the background, and do some more reading...


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> Not standard.. well, okay. But I think you will find this search a little startling: Web Results *1* - *10* of about *12,900* for * "he * ayer" site:.es*.  (*0.20* seconds)



Yes, and in some places in Spain you can hear the past simple being used as if they were Americans. That's the thing about generalizations . Most of the time we ignore regional matters when talking here, like this usage of the perfect past in Madrid, which by the way I've heard about in this forum far more than talking with people from Madrid.


----------



## jyc_maureen

hola creo que puedes decir las dos cosas :

espero que haya comido ayer mientras no estaba 

o
 espero que comio ( con tilde en o) ayer mientras no estaba


----------



## Outsider

jyc_maureen said:


> hola creo que puedes decir las dos cosas :
> 
> espero que haya comido ayer mientras no estaba
> 
> o
> espero que comio ( con tilde en o) ayer mientras no estaba


Siento, pero después de "espero" hay que usar el subjuntivo.


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> Where 'comió' is expected (recent past) (everywhere but Spain) Spain uses 'ha comido'
> 
> But where 'haya comido' is expected (recent past) (everywhere but Spain) Spain uses 'comiera'.
> 
> Generally speaking:
> Spain: ¿Te ha gustado la peli? (recent past)
> LatAm: ¿Te gustó la pelicula? (recent past)
> --but then:
> Spain: Espero que comiera bien. (recent past)
> LatAm: Espero que haya comido bien. (recent past)
> 
> That's my point. It seems an 'opposite of what is expected'.
> 
> Grant



Well, that could go on forever, the point is, what makes you think that people in Spain say comiera for recent past? I've never noticed that.


----------



## ampurdan

719 in front of 508? Many of the instances being "como comenté ayer, he podido animar" and things like that? That says absolutely nothing.

As for "he visto. Ayer” it occurs 1 time in the first page for Argentina, 4 times for Mexico and 3 times in Spain. 

And México might be much bigger than Spain, but:

Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *2.130.000* de *"quiero" site:es*. (*0,02* segundos)

Resultados *1* - *10* de aproximadamente *2.000.000* de *"quiero" site:mx*. (*0,03* segundos)



NewdestinyX said:


> Generally speaking:
> 
> Spain: Espero que comiera bien. (recent past)
> LatAm: Espero que haya comido bien. (recent past)


 
Generally speaking:
Spain: Espero que haya comido bien (hoy/esta semana/este año/estos años)
Espero que comiera bien (ayer/la semana pasada/esos años)

That's important for learners to know.


----------



## San

Outsider said:


> What?! I would expect "comía" with "comiera"!...
> 
> I'm not challenging what you wrote; you are the native speaker. Just noting that perhaps it's time I fade back into the background, and do some more reading...



Well, I don't know much grammar, and so I didn't want to say anything about that imperfect/perfect question, but in the mind of the speaker it's clear that it is used in that way. Spanish lacks a past simple subjunctive, so we've got to use the imperfect for that purpose. So, perhaps the imperfect subjunctive is not always imperfect after all, I don't know.

I think the problem is that in Peninsular Spanish the past simple has a different meaning, or nuance if you want, than what it has in America. So we would feel as if we were missing something if we used the perfect tense when changing to subjunctive. Look this for example:

Se que el paquete llegó bien.
Espero que el paquete llegara bien.

When you change the verb you must change the mode, but the time frame is the same. In one case you've got something that happend inside this frame, and in the second something that might have happend.  That's why "espero que el paquete haya llegado bien" would be odd in this case, because that changes the time frame, that's to say, now it  reaches the present and it is even possible that the parcel is still in the post. Weird if you are talking about a parcel you send twenty years ago.


----------



## Outsider

Then NewdestinyX was right about that... Intriguing!


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

San said:


> Se que el paquete llegó bien.
> Espero que el paquete llegara bien.
> 
> When you change the verb you must change the mode, but the time frame is the same. In one case you've got something that happend inside this frame, and in the second something that might have happend.  That's why "espero que el paquete* haya llegado bien*" would be odd in this case, because that changes the time frame, that's to say, *now it  reaches the present and it is even possible that the parcel is still in the post*. Weird if you are talking about a parcel you send twenty years ago.


. Yes. That's the way my mind speaks.


----------



## Cristina Allende

Comí bien (ayer).
Comí bien (durante mi viaje a Inglaterra).
Comió bien tu abuelo (durante su vida).[/quote]

Are you sure that these are in the preterite instead of the imperfect? I think my Spanish teacher would tell us to use "Comía bien" for both of those; would that be correct, also?

(MOD NOTE: I've opened a new thread with this question. Rule 10: only one topic in each thread)


----------



## NewdestinyX

ampurdan said:


> 719 in front of 508? Many of the instances being "como comenté ayer, he podido animar" and things like that? That says absolutely nothing.


 Hmm. Bueno. The results make my point at least germane, Amp. 





> Generally speaking:
> Spain: Espero que haya comido bien (hoy/esta semana/este año/estos años)
> Espero que comiera bien (*ayer*/la semana pasada/esos años)
> 
> That's important for learners to know.



You're making my point for me, Amp. Ayer and la semana pasada are the recent past. Even if it's  'ayer' or 'la semana pasada' -- in LatAm it's Espero que haya comido bien. 'Putting in' the 'ayer' with it -- is less common anywhere with the present perfect. I think we all agree on that. My only point was to note that there is indeed a preference for present perfect in Spain where preterite would be expected in the rest of the Spanish speaking world. I just 'happened upon' this aspect of 'comiera' for 'ayer' where the rest of the SSW would expect 'haya comido'. But I also wonder if it has to do with the rules people are taught. A lot of grammar school books in SS'ing countries still state the idea that a 'present' has to follow a present in a subordinate clause. And present perfect subjunctive is the only 'present' that's a 'past' of sorts.

Interesting topic. Thanks for adding to my knowledge.

Un saludo,
Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> What?! I would expect "comía" with "comiera"!...
> 
> I'm not challenging what you wrote; you are the native speaker. Just noting that perhaps it's time I fade back into the background, and do some more reading...



I will read more too -- but that's what I'm saying -- it's not a forgone conclusion that imperfect subjunctive is durative (imperfect-ive). It can be simple past too. 

Estaba (yo) en el coche antes de que él abriera la puerta. (that 'abriera' is clearly a preterite time reference -- no way: abría - but yes:  abrió; if the subjunctive weren't called for. Many grammars call it the past subjunctive.

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

I can now see that there is no real inconsistency from the indicative to the subjunctive in the way Spain Spanish prefers the perfect for recent past --within the same day.

The main preference difference between LatAm and Spain is in the preference for Present perfect for recent past "within the same day". As soon as you go to 'ayer' -- the whole Spanish speaking world prefers the preterite. I think I was overstating my case. Thanks for your patience.

Grant


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

NewdestinyX said:


> I can now see that there is no real inconsistency from the indicative to the subjunctive in the way Spain Spanish prefers the perfect for recent past --*within the same day*.
> 
> The main preference difference between LatAm and Spain is in the preference for Present perfect for recent past "*within the same day*". As soon as you go to 'ayer' -- the whole Spanish speaking world prefers the preterite.


Yes, I think you have a point. It makes sense for me.


----------



## ampurdan

Right. I only want to say that it's not just "within the same day", it's "within the same period" the speaker or writer is in (day, week, month, year, etc.). The only exception, I think is different parts of the same day: there, we use el the perfect tense, even though it's not in the same time division.

"Esta mañana me lo he pasado bien".

"Hoy me lo he pasado bien".

"Ayer me lo pasé bien" but "Esta semana me lo he pasado bien".

"La semana pasada me lo pasé bien" but "Este mes me lo he pasado bien".

"El mes pasado me lo pasé bien" but "Este año me lo he pasado bien".

The same applies to "pretérito perfecto de subjuntivo" and "pretérito imperfecto de subjuntivo" in clauses with "Espero que...".


----------



## Pedro P. Calvo Morcillo

ampurdan said:


> Right. I only want to say that it's not just "within the same day", it's "within the same period" the speaker or writer is in (day, week, month, year, etc.). The only exception, I think is different parts of the same day: there, we use el the perfect tense, even though it's not in the same time division.
> 
> "Esta mañana me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "Hoy me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "Ayer me lo pasé bien" but "Esta semana me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "La semana pasada me lo pasé bien" but "Este mes me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "El mes pasado me lo pasé bien" but "Este año me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> The same applies to "pretérito perfecto de subjuntivo" and "pretérito imperfecto de subjuntivo" in clauses with "Espero que...".


Sí. Es verdad. Ya lo habías explicado antes:

_Este último siglo nos lo hemos pasado matándonos los unos a los otros._


Un saludo.

Pedro.


----------



## Jeromed

ampurdan said:


> Right. I only want to say that it's not just "within the same day", it's "within the same period" the speaker or writer is in (day, week, month, year, etc.). The only exception, I think is different parts of the same day: there, we use el the perfect tense, even though it's not in the same time division.
> 
> "Esta mañana me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "Hoy me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "Ayer me lo pasé bien" but "Esta semana me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "La semana pasada me lo pasé bien" but "Este mes me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> "El mes pasado me lo pasé bien" but "Este año me lo he pasado bien".
> 
> The same applies to "pretérito perfecto de subjuntivo" and "pretérito imperfecto de subjuntivo" in clauses with "Espero que...".


 
Es lo mismo en la mayoría de los dialectos hispanoamericanos, con diferencias sólo para el día de hoy, así:

Esta mañana me lo pasé bien (porque es un hecho consumado).

Hoy me lo pasé bien (si es un hecho consumado)
Hoy me lo he pasado bien (si se espera que ese 'pasarlo bien' va a continuar)

Sin embargo, en el habla y en la escritura formales, es frecuente el uso peninsular: "El día de hoy hemos recibido su amable carta, en la que nos informa..."

En el dialecto porteño (Buenos Aires), sin embargo, el tiempo perfecto se usa muy poco.


----------



## Rayines

Jeromed said:


> Es lo mismo en la mayoría de los dialectos hispanoamericanos, con diferencias sólo .............................En el dialecto porteño (Buenos Aires), sin embargo, el tiempo perfecto se usa muy poco.


No se consideran dialectos. Son todas variaciones regionales -si se quiere- de nuestro querido idioma español .


----------



## Ynez

San, en tu frase puedes decir "haya llegado bien", así que en ese caso usamos las dos:

Espero que el paquete haya llegado/llegara bien hoy.

Para ayer solo decimos:

Espero que el paquete llegara bien ayer.


----------



## Jeromed

Rayines said:


> No se consideran dialectos. Son todas variaciones regionales -si se quiere- de nuestro querido idioma español .


----------



## Rayines

Jeromed said:


>


Mira, debo reconocer que buscando en el Google (por ejemplo en Wikipedia), se los denomina dialectos. Nunca lo había aprendido así, ya que el español de todas partes del mundo es comprendido -excepto jergas un poco locales- por todos los hispanoparlantes.


----------



## Jeromed

Rayines said:


> Mira, debo reconocer que buscando en el Google (por ejemplo en Wikipedia), se los denomina dialectos. Nunca lo había aprendido así, ya que el español de todas partes del mundo es comprendido -excepto jergas un poco locales- por todos los hispanoparlantes.


 
No importa.  Tú estabas pensando en la tercera acepción (abajo), y yo en la segunda.

Del DRAE:
*dialecto.*
(Del lat. _dialectus,_ y este del gr. διάλεκτος).
*1. *m._ Ling._ Sistema lingüístico considerado con relación al grupo de los varios derivados de un tronco común. _El español es uno de los dialectos nacidos __del__ latín._
*2. *m._ Ling._ Sistema lingüístico derivado de otro, normalmente con una concreta limitación geográfica, pero sin diferenciación suficiente frente a otros de origen común.
*3. *m._ Ling._ Estructura lingüística, simultánea a otra, que no alcanza la categoría social de lengua.


----------

