# El tiempo futuro y probabilidad?



## maghanish2

Hola a todos!  Espero que ustedes estén bien!

En mi libro de la clase de español, yo leí que el tiempo futuro puede usarse para expersar probabilidad.

Por ejemplo:

Qué hora será? - I wonder what time it is.
Serán debajo de la cama - They are probably under the bed.
Seré econtrarlos - I will probably find them/I wonder if I'll find them.

Es esto verdad?  A mí parece un poco extraño y confundido, pero se usa el tiempo futuro así?

Gracias por la ayuda!!  La agradezco!


----------



## ieracub

Hola, maghanish2:

Sí, el futuro de indicativo tiene valor de conjetura o probabilidad. De hecho, es el valor más común en el habla, mientras que con verdadero valor de futuro aparece más en la escritura.

¿Qué hora será? - I wonder what time it is.
Estarán debajo de la cama - They are probably under the bed.
¿Los encontraré? - I will probably find them/I wonder if I'll find them.

Saludos.

Edito:

También tiene valor imperativo, forma usada en los mandamientos de Moisés:

No matarás = No mates


----------



## maghanish2

Así que, si yo digo 'Me pregunto qué hora es', entonces no suena tan bien como 'qué hora será'?

Esta forma es muy común, dijiste, pero si digo la traducción directa (por ejemplo, probablemente estén debajo de la cama), tendrá sentido, y sonaría bien!?

MUCHAS GRACIAS!


----------



## ieracub

maghanish2 said:


> Así que, si yo digo 'Me pregunto qué hora es', entonces no suena tan bien como 'qué hora será'?
> 
> Esta forma es muy común, dijiste, pero si digo la traducción directa (por ejemplo, probablemente estén debajo de la cama), tendrá sentido, y sonaría bien!?


 Todas las oraciones que has dado están perfectas. No hay problema, son alternativas que aportan diversos matices al discurso.

'Me pregunto qué hora es' = '¿qué hora será?'. La primera puede ser un poco más formal; la segunda más coloquial, propia del habla. 

Cuando digo que es una forma muy común, me refiero a que cuando queremos hablar de algo que ocurrirá en el futuro, normalmente preferimos usar el verbo ir como auxiliar:

_¿Dónde irás mañana?_ -- Menos usado en el habla.
_¿Dónde vas a ir mañana?_ --Más usado en el habla.

Entonces, cuando usamos el futuro al hablar, lo más común es que lo estemos usando para expresar una probabilidad o uno se esté cuestionado algo.

Distinto es en la escritura. En este caso sí es muy usado para expresar futuro. 





> MUCHAS GRACIAS!


 De nada. Saludos.


----------



## maghanish2

Gracias de nuevo!  Ahora comprendo!


----------



## Outsider

Yo diría que en las preguntas el futuro no representa "probabilidad", sino "duda".

_¿Qué hora será?_ No sé que hora es.
_¿Los encontraré?_ No sé si los encontraré.​


----------



## virgilio

maghanish2,
                I would be surprised, if you yourself didn't use English equivalents of such futures on your side of the Pond.
e.g.
A: What time is it?
B: Sorry, I left my watch at home but it will be around four, I guess.

Such expressions are certainly common in the UK.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> Yo diría que en las preguntas el futuro no representa "probabilidad", sino "duda"._¿Qué hora será?_ No sé que qué hora es.
> _¿Los encontraré?_ No sé si los encontraré.​


That translation only works for the 'question forms'. In my opinion it's not really a matter of doubt or of probability. It's a matter of 'conjecture' or 'venturing a guess' in the declarative forms and of 'wondering' in the interrogative forms (where 'no sé' can work fine as you've noted). 

I agree that a person doesn't 'fully' know for sure what they're commenting about when they use this form (so "no sé" is a statement of the reality but not the intent of the communication). And many grammars call it the 'future of probability' (which is not really accurate either). But what's really happening here is making one's best guess or wondering. The  Spanish words: Probablemente, Adivino que, Supongo que are the best alternatives for the declarative forms and ¿Me pregunto si/qué/cuándo, etc. and 'supones que' best give other words in Spanish that could be used to translate the interrogative forms.
 -->In English the declaratives translate to: "probably/likely/must/must have". And the interrogatives translate to: do you suppose, I wonder whether, [question word] + do you suppose, I wonder + [question word].

So for me:
_¿Qué hora será? =_ Me pregunto qué hora es.
_¿Los encontraré? =_ Me pregunto si los encuentro/puedo encontrar.
_Regresará a las 6 (¿no?). =_ Probablemente/Adivino que/Supongo que él regresa a las 6.

The important thing also to point our on this topic is that the 'future tense', when used as a conjecture/supposition is actually a 'present' utterance and not a future one. The English verb (or corresponding verb in another language) would be in the 'present tense' in most cases. Sometimes there's a future projection in it with verbs of eventuality like 'llegar', 'encontrar', regresar', etc. With these verbs the language other than Spanish could use a future form as well but the supposition is 'always' about a present occurrence.

So when you are trying to translate the 'future of conjecture' with other words of conjecture In Spanish or another language -- the verb form must switch to 'present'. Also noteworthy is that the version in English is never a 'question' or interrogative.

Is this form of the verb also used in 'Portuguese', Outs?

Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> Is this form of the verb also used in 'Portuguese', Outs?


The interrogative version is common, and seems to be used the same way. The affirmative version, not so much. 
Look, we can find many different keywords to explain it. I don't like "probability", because when you ask a question with the future indicative you are not necessarily referring to something you consider likely. Sometimes, you just _hope_ it may be true, or _wonder_ whether it might be true. The point is that you don't know whether it's true or not as you speak, but you believe that there's a definite answer out there, even though you may not know it (yet). Often, you expect the person you're asking to tell you the answer.

¿Todavía se podrá comprar tarjetas? (addressed at the ticket seller in a movie theater)​Although not necessarily:

¿Habrá vida después de la muerte?​


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> The interrogative version is common, and seems to be used the same way. The affirmative version, not so much.
> Look, we can find many different keywords to explain it. I don't like "probability", because when you ask a question with the future indicative you are not necessarily referring to something you consider likely. Sometimes, you just _hope_ it may be true, or _wonder_ whether it might be true. The point is that you don't know whether it's true or not as you speak, but you believe that there's a definite answer out there, even though you may not know it (yet). Often, you expect the person you're asking to tell you the answer.¿Todavía se podrán comprar tarjetas? (addressed at the ticket seller in a movie theater)​Although not necessarily:¿Habrá vida después de la muerte?​



In the interrogative form -- I agree with your analysis completely. But this form is used in the declarative as much or ever more than in the interrogative and I wanted to make sure the forero didn't get the idea that 'no sé' is the case for all or even the majority of the uses of this. 'No sé' only works for the interrogative versions. That's an important distinction for a learner of Spanish. That's why I expanded on your answer. Leaving it at 'no sé' doesn't work for all cases of this usage. Agreed?

Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> Leaving it at 'no sé' doesn't work for all cases of this usage. Agreed?


Which is why my post was only about questions:



Outsider said:


> Yo diría que *en las preguntas* el futuro no representa "probabilidad", sino "duda".
> 
> _¿Qué hora será?_ No sé que hora es.
> _¿Los encontraré?_ No sé si los encontraré.​


----------



## virgilio

maghanish2,
                New Destiny has made an excellent point which I overlooked. Such futures express probable *present* tenses.
e.g
A:How old is Uncle George now?
B: He'll be ninety, if he's a day! = I'm not sure but he *is* probably ninety years old.

Virgilio


----------



## Outsider

"Present", "past" and "future" can be subjective notions. These constructions can be justly called "futures", in as much as, for the speaker, the truth value of the statement is presently unknown, that is yet-to-be-unveiled. 

Taking advantage of Virgilio's example, uncle George's actual age is probably ninety (according to the information that the speaker has at present), but _still to be confirmed_ (in the future).


----------



## NewdestinyX

maghanish2 said:


> Así que, si yo digo 'Me pregunto qué hora es', entonces no suena tan bien como 'qué hora será'?
> 
> Esta forma es muy común, dijiste, pero si digo la traducción directa (por ejemplo, probablemente estén debajo de la cama), tendrá sentido, y sonaría bien!?
> 
> MUCHAS GRACIAS!



Using 'me pregunto' there -- for the question forms is perfectly fine, Maghanish. It's just not as native sounding.

Your book, if it doesn't shortly should also teach you about other Spanish forms of conjecture too. The future perfect, conditional and conditional perfect in Spanish also have double meanings for conjecture that unfortunately, for us English speakers, have different tense inflections when being used as the conjecture meaning.

I'll use one interrogative and one declarative sentence for each type:

The future perfect of conjecture in Spanish -- translates to a simple past or present perfect utterance:
_Habrán llegado luego. {¿no?}_ = You all probably/must’ve arrived later.
_¿Se habrán llevado a casa Uds. su trabajo?_ = I wonder if you all brought home your work.

The conditional of conjecture in Spanish -- translates to a durative/imperfect past utterance:
_Odiarías trabajar para ella {¿no?}_ = You probably/must’ve hated working for...
_¿Cuándo estudiarían ellas?_ = When do you suppose they were studying?

The conditional perfect of conjecture in Spanish -- translates to a past perfect utterance:
_Mi tío se habría ido allí para el martes. {¿no?}_ = My uncle had probably/likely already gone there by Tuesday.
_¿Qué habría visto ella aquella noche antes de que...?_ = What do you suppose she had seen that night before...?

Hope that gives you some more to feed your learning hunger about this amazing language we all study.

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

Outsider said:


> "Present", "past" and "future" can be subjective notions. These constructions can be justly called "futures", in as much as, for the speaker, the truth value of the statement is presently unknown, that is yet-to-be-unveiled.
> 
> Taking advantage of Virgilio's example, uncle George's actual age is probably ninety (according to the information that the speaker has at present), but _still to be confirmed_ (in the future).



I agree that with the future of conjecture in Spanish there is a 'semantic' future implied -- but it is semantic only and can't accurately be expressed with future wording in English without confusing the issue. As I said in one of the other posts some verbs -- because of the limits of English need a future wording to express a present. Like 'find', 'arrive' -- Your sentence with 'encontrar' really probably needs a future wording in the supposition as well -- since 'am finding' is a little strange as a translation. But 'encuentro' would have been more accurate in the Spanish than 'encontrará' when you add the 'probablemente' in the translation side of the equation.

The semantic nuance you mention for the future of supposition disappears in the other three supposition uses that I outline for the forero in one other post here.

Grant


----------



## Outsider

NewdestinyX said:


> The semantic nuance you mention for the future of supposition disappears in the other three supposition uses that I outline for the forero in one other post here.


I disagree, but since this point is not essential to make Maghanish2 understand the structure he asked about, I will not pursue this line of discussion.


----------



## NewdestinyX

A complete discussion of this topic isn't complete without pointing out to students that these suppositional and conjectural uses are also pretty commonly expressed with "deber de" also. Though with all the confusion in the SSW about when the 'de' is used and when not -- sometimes the intended communication is better with these usages of the conditional and future tenses.

Let me be clear also that the interrogative uses of the future, future perfect, conditional and conditional perfect are more often easily discernable as the conjecture meaning where the declarative examples without hearing tone of voice could be misunderstood in writing -- which is why I wrote '(¿no?)' at the end of each declarative one to show that the speaker would have to have 'questioning' in their tone of voice to make the conjecture use clear. In writing it's harder to see -- where with the interrogatives it's completely clear.

As to '_deber de_' -- at least with it -- there is not jumping around of tenses.

_ Debe de ser a las seis. (¿crees?)_  = It must be/is probably six o'clock.
_ ¿Debe de ser a las seis todavía?_ = Do you suppose it's six o'clock yet?

_ Debía de tener 8 años._ = He was probably/must've been 8 years old.

_ ¿Cuándo debes de llegar? _= When do you suppose you're arriving?

_ ¿Cuándo debes de llegar?_ = _¿Cuándo llegarás?_

Un saludo,
Grant


----------



## maghanish2

Muchas gracias a todos por sus respuestas detalladas!  Las agradezco mucho!  Y, virgilio, irónicamente, nunca he oído esta oración que pusiste:

'Sorry, I left my watch at home but it will be around four, I guess.'

Suena MUY extraño a mí, pero obviamente a ti, es natural.  Nunca sabía que el inglés americano y el inglés británico fueron TAN diferentes!  Idiomas siempre me asombran!

Gracias de nuevo!


----------



## Ivy29

NewdestinyX said:


> That translation only works for the 'question forms'. In my opinion it's not really a matter of doubt or of probability. It's a matter of 'conjecture' or 'venturing a guess' in the declarative forms and of 'wondering' in the interrogative forms (where 'no sé' can work fine as you've noted).
> 
> I agree that a person doesn't 'fully' know for sure what they're commenting about when they use this form (so "no sé" is a statement of the reality but not the intent of the communication). And many grammars call it the 'future of probability' (which is not really accurate either). But what's really happening here is making one's best guess or wondering. The Spanish words: Probablemente, Adivino que, Supongo que are the best alternatives for the declarative forms and ¿Me pregunto si/qué/cuándo, etc. and 'supones que' best give other words in Spanish that could be used to translate the interrogative forms.
> -->In English the declaratives translate to: "probably/likely/must/must have". And the interrogatives translate to: do you suppose, I wonder whether, [question word] + do you suppose, I wonder + [question word].
> 
> So for me:
> _¿Qué hora será? =_ Me pregunto qué hora es.
> _¿Los encontraré? =_ Me pregunto si los encuentro/puedo encontrar.
> _Regresará a las 6 (¿no?). =_ Probablemente/Adivino que/Supongo que él regresa a las 6.
> 
> The important thing also to point our on this topic is that the 'future tense', when used as a conjecture/supposition is actually a 'present' utterance and not a future one. The English verb (or corresponding verb in another language) would be in the 'present tense' in most cases. Sometimes there's a future projection in it with verbs of eventuality like 'llegar', 'encontrar', regresar', etc. With these verbs the language other than Spanish could use a future form as well but the supposition is 'always' about a present occurrence.
> 
> So when you are trying to translate the 'future of conjecture' with other words of conjecture In Spanish or another language -- the verb form must switch to 'present'. Also noteworthy is that the version in English is never a 'question' or interrogative.
> 
> Is this form of the verb also used in 'Portuguese', Outs?
> 
> Grant


 

Future tense and conditional do not express ' posteriority' to the timing of the moment but simultaneity when it is referred as possibilities or probabilities at a given moment but whose reality is ignored.

Serán las diez
Tendrá mucho dinero, pero no lo demuestra.
El chico quizás/tal vez no sabrá lo que hizo.

Estos valores SON MODALES. (es decir posibles o probables)

Ivy29


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> Future tense and conditional do not express ' posteriority' to the timing of the moment but simultaneity when it is referred as possibilities or probabilities at a given moment but whose reality is ignored.
> 
> Serán las diez
> Tendrá mucho dinero, pero no lo demuestra.
> El chico quizás/tal vez no sabrá lo que hizo.
> 
> Estos valores SON MODALES. (es decir posibles o probables)
> 
> Ivy29



The Future Perfect of Supposition and Conditional Perfect of Supposition do indeed express posteriority to the timing of the utterance. And so does the Conditional of Supposition -- as it refers to a durative past. The Future of Supposition is the only one that doesn't express posteriorty as it refers to a current moment. My examples show the common time references when compared to English.

Grant


----------



## kratu

maghanish2 said:


> Y, virgilio, irónicamente, nunca he oído esta oración que pusiste:
> 
> 'Sorry, I left my watch at home but it will be around four, I guess.'
> 
> Suena MUY extraño a mí, pero obviamente a ti, es natural.


Qué interesante. No sabía que no se usaba ese tipo de construcción en inglés americano. Como ha dicho virgilio, es de uso común aquí y suena completamente natural.


----------



## Ivy29

NewdestinyX said:


> The Future Perfect of Supposition and Conditional Perfect of Supposition do indeed express posteriority to the timing of the utterance. And so does the Conditional of Supposition -- as it refers to a durative past. The Future of Supposition is the only one that doesn't express posteriorty as it refers to a current moment. My examples show the common time references when compared to English.
> 
> Grant


 
*I don't quite understand you about future perfect and conditional perfect* being *posterior* to the utterance timing. Would you mind to give me some examples that support that statement ???

Ivy29


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> *I don't quite understand you about future perfect and conditional perfect* being *posterior* to the utterance timing. Would you mind to give me some examples that support that statement ???
> 
> Ivy29



I'm sorry, Ivy. I made an error. I have a mental block about the English words 'posterior' and 'anterior'. You know how sometimes you have put an 's' on the end of 'hablaste'? All of us have some words and forms in our native language that just 'slip our minds'. What I should have said is that the conditional, conditional perfect and future perfect, when used in conjectures in Spanish, speak about something 'anterior' to the utterance of the speaker.

So your original assertion was correct. The future and conditional of supposition do not speak 'posteriorally' which means 'after' or 'upcoming'. The suppositional uses of future and conditional speak to a concurrent time frame or an *anterior *one.

I gave several sentence examples in a former post in this thread. You can refer to that post for the examples. But I think we're in agreement now.

Ciao,
Grant


----------



## Ivy29

NewdestinyX said:


> I'm sorry, Ivy. I made an error. I have a mental block about the English words 'posterior' and 'anterior'. You know how sometimes you have put an 's' on the end of 'hablaste'? All of us have some words and forms in our native language that just 'slip our minds'. What I should have said is that the conditional, conditional perfect and future perfect, when used in conjectures in Spanish, speak about something 'anterior' to the utterance of the speaker.
> 
> So your original assertion was correct. The future and conditional of supposition do not speak 'posteriorally' which means 'after' or 'upcoming'. The suppositional uses of future and conditional speak to a concurrent time frame or an *anterior *one.
> 
> I gave several sentence examples in a former post in this thread. You can refer to that post for the examples. But I think we're in agreement now.
> 
> Ciao,
> Grant


 
*I want just stress that the perfect tenses or aspects are anteriorly, and simple future and simple conditional are posterior timing.*

Ivy29


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> *I want just stress that the perfect tenses or aspects are anteriorly, and simple future and simple conditional are posterior timing.*
> 
> Ivy29



In their normal usage that may be true -- but their usage for supposition is a different semantic and timing. In the suppositional usage --simple future is 'present', not anterior or posterior. And the conditional of supposition in 'anterior' not 'posterior.

Your statement is only correct for their 'non-conjecture' usages.

Condicional normal: Vendría mañana por la noche, si tuviera..... (posterior)
Condicional de probabilidad/suposición: Tendría 8 años cuando lo vi hace un año. = Debía de tener 8 años cuando lo vi..... = Probablemente tenía 8 años cuando lo vi.... (*anterior*)

Grant


----------



## zpoludnia swiata

I have heard the following types of utterances in American English:

(Someone is knocking at the door)  Who will that be?  That'll be John I guess.

It may not be present in all dialects of US English.  And, probably is more common in British English, though not absent in North America.


----------



## NewdestinyX

zpoludnia swiata said:


> I have heard the following types of utterances in American English:
> 
> (Someone is knocking at the door)  Who will that be?  That'll be John I guess.
> 
> It may not be present in all dialects of US English.  And, probably is more common in British English, though not absent in North America.



I think you've found the 'one' example of this in American English.  It's really a 'very' British thing to say. 

Ciao,
Grant


----------



## Magmod

Me pregunto si los ejemplos de Newdestiny y los otros siguen la regla de ieracub post#2 así:



ieracub said:


> Sí, el futuro de indicativo tiene valor de conjetura o probabilidad. De hecho, es el valor más común en *el habla*, mientras que con verdadero valor de futuro aparece más en *la escritura.*


 
  Es decir la diferencia entre el habla y la escritura 

Un saludo


----------



## NewdestinyX

Magmod said:


> Me pregunto si los ejemplos de Newdestiny y los otros siguen la regla de ieracub post#2 así:
> 
> 
> 
> Es decir la diferencia entre el habla y la escritura
> 
> Un saludo



Context tells the difference in writing and speech -- and in speech -- tone of voice. The simple future for real future is more common in Spain's speech too.

It's also important to note that the 'interrogative' forms of the conjectures are more commonly noticed as such than the declarative ones. The declarative ones are more discernable by vocal inflection. In writing the declarative ones are harder to spot - especially the simple future of conjecture. With the other tenses another element of the sentence tips you off as is the example I gave to Ivy:

Tendría 8 años cuando lo vi hace un año. (He must've been 8 years old when I saw him a year ago.) Obviously that's not the 'typical' use of the conditional -- but the conjectural use. The 'hace un año' gives away the true meaning.

Grant


----------



## Ivy29

NewdestinyX said:


> In their normal usage that may be true -- but their usage for supposition is a different semantic and timing. In the suppositional usage --simple future is 'present', not anterior or posterior. And the conditional of supposition in 'anterior' not 'posterior.
> 
> Your statement is only correct for their 'non-conjecture' usages.
> 
> Condicional normal: Vendría mañana por la noche, si tuviera..... (posterior)
> Condicional de probabilidad/suposición: Tendría 8 años cuando lo vi hace un año. = Debía de tener 8 años cuando lo vi..... = Probablemente tenía 8 años cuando lo vi.... (*anterior*)
> 
> Grant


 

When used the conditional as probability or possibility they just mean that.

Me gustaría verle otra vez.
Serían las 10 a,m.
Tendría entonces 50 años.
Cuando lo vi ( simple past) tendría 50 años)
Vi= simple past this action happens first or simultaneously with *tendría=*  the possibility of having 50 years.

Future simple= Yo comeré a las seis ( posterior)
Present ( future connotation ) yo como mañana a las 6 pm. (Posterior)
Cuando llegue, estaré dormido ( estar copulative verb, stative condition)the stative condition or *action of sleeping* is already there, cuando llegue is POSTERIOR).
*The actions towards the FUTURE* are *posterior* from the PRESENT of the utterance or speaker present time. The actions towards the PAST are anterior from the present utterance or speaker present tense.

Ivy29


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> When used the conditional as probability or possibility they just mean that.
> 
> Me gustaría verle otra vez.
> Serían las 10 a,m.
> Tendría entonces 50 años.
> Cuando lo vi ( simple past) tendría 50 años)
> Vi= simple past this action happens first or simultaneously with *tendría=*  the possibility of having 50 years.
> 
> Future simple= Yo comeré a las seis ( posterior)
> Present ( future connotation ) yo como mañana a las 6 pm. (Posterior)
> Cuando llegue, estaré dormido ( estar copulative verb, stative condition)the stative condition or *action of sleeping* is already there, cuando llegue is POSTERIOR).
> *The actions towards the FUTURE* are *posterior* from the PRESENT of the utterance or speaker present time. The actions towards the PAST are anterior from the present utterance or speaker present tense.
> 
> Ivy29


I'm sorry to disagree, but, your explanations there are all regarding the 'common' (non-conjecture) usage of the future and conditional. They are not referring to the idiomatic usage of them to express conjecture. Please reread Manuel Seco and Emilio Alarcos on this topic. They have the correct view from my study and input from natives.

The simple future of conjecture refers to a '*present' time -- not posterior or anterior*. The conditional of conjecture speaks *anterior -- not posterior*. It is irrefutable, unless you wish to redefine the use of these tenses when being used for conjecture.

¿Serán las diez? -- Conjecture about the present, does not project posteriorally toward future.
¿Tendría casi 50 años cuando lo vimos? --  Conjecture about the past - conjectures about an anterior time frame.

Grant


----------



## Ivy29

NewdestinyX said:


> I'm sorry to disagree, but, your explanations there are all regarding the 'common' (non-conjecture) usage of the future and conditional. They are not referring to the idiomatic usage of them to express conjecture. Please reread Manuel Seco and Emilio Alarcos on this topic. They have the correct view from my study and input from natives.
> 
> The simple future of conjecture refers to a '*present' time -- not posterior or anterior*. The conditional of conjecture speaks *anterior -- not posterior*. It is irrefutable, unless you wish to redefine the use of these tenses when being used for conjecture.
> 
> ¿Serán las diez? -- Conjecture about the present, does not project posteriorally toward future.
> ¿Tendría casi 50 años cuando lo vimos? -- Conjecture about the past - conjectures about an anterior time frame.
> 
> Grant


 

Well, GranT, then you have a blank idea about *probability and possibility* (conjecture), Even its utterance with future at the present moment = ¿Serán las 10 am? This timing is posteriorly NOT 9am, not 9:30 am, not 9:45 am but around 10 not before, logical probability or possibility is posteriorly or from the past towards the future. No llegó  anoche, ¿Le pasaría algo? first he didnt arrive last night, then you utter ¿Le pasaría algo? it is after something did not occur, then posterior to the past fact.

*Cuando lo vimos tendría 50 años*, first you did see him, then your surmise of having  about 50 years old. It is not anterior to the simple past, it is posterior to it.

At least I look my probabilities and possibilities *towards the future*, even into the past, the conditional is *future from the past* in its conjecture meaning. I see it clearly. Would you give me the numeral and page of *Alarcos* where it says that the timing  of conditional is *anterior* to the simple past ??? *I wait for your numeral and page of Alarcos.*

Ivy29


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> Well, GranT, then you have a blank idea about *probability and possibility* (conjecture), Even its utterance with future at the present moment = ¿Serán las 10 am? This timing is posteriorly NOT 9am, not 9:30 am, not 9:45 am but around 10 not before, logical probability or possibility is posteriorly or from the past towards the future. No llegó  anoche, ¿Le pasaría algo? first he didnt arrive last night, then you utter ¿Le pasaría algo? *[but you are uttering it from the "present" - not the moment of 'anoche'] *it is after something did not occur, then posterior to the past fact. *[you are very confused and having to 'jump thru hoops' to try and make your illogical statement logical]*
> 
> *Cuando lo vimos tendría 50 años*, first you did see him, then your surmise of having  about 50 years old. It is not anterior to the simple past, it is posterior to it.
> 
> At least I look my probabilities and possibilities *towards the future*, even into the past, the conditional is *future from the past* in its conjecture meaning. I see it clearly. Would you give me the numeral and page of *Alarcos* where it says that the timing  of conditional is *anterior* to the simple past ??? *I wait for your numeral and page of Alarcos.*
> 
> Ivy29



No. I appreciate that you love consistency in your analysis of the verb tenses but your analysis is incorrect here. 'You' may be able to see a logic in your analysis in your own mind but grammatically it's not logical and more importantly it's not accurate semantically. Can you show some grammar source that backs your claims? I will go find my Alarcos numeral and post it in my next post. But the burden of proof is upon you since you countered my claims. The conjectural uses change the time frame of the normal verb utterance. A 'conditional of possibility' projects 'anterior' not 'posterior'. With it, one is conjecturing, in the present time, about a 'past event'. This is called: 'anterioridad'.  "Past" can never be 'posterior' to the present time. Illogical.

Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

Ivy29 said:


> Would you give me the numeral and page of Alarcos where it says that the timing  of conditional is *anterior* to the simple past ??? *(Please, I never stated that it projected anterior to the simple past. Never. I have only ever said that it projects anterior to the current time frame and moment of utterance. And that is the germane point. Please read my posts more carefully, compadre.)* I wait for your numeral and page of Alarcos*.*



Ivy,
Please refer to Alarcos *page 197, numeral 221, paragraph 5*.
"_También se ha visto antes cómo el futuro «cantarás» y el pospretérito «cantarías» *no retringen su capacidad referencial a situar los hechos en la posterioridad*, sino que pueden señalar una *posibilidad* *simultánea* respecto del momento de habla o de uno *anterior*." ---_Gramática de la Lengua Española, Emilio Alarcos

And then on *pages 194-195, numeral 218, paragraph 1b*.
"_Sin embargo, a veces ambas formas (el futuro y pospretérito) *no denotan posterioridad* al punto temporal en que nos situemos, sino simultaniedad con él; con lo cual se refieren a hechos que se estiman posibles o probables en el momento dado pero cuya realidad se ignora. «Serán las diez», [Puede que sean ahora las diez]; «Serían las cuatro cuando salió de casa»,__ [probablemente eran las cuatro]." ---_Gramática de la Lengua Española, Emilio Alarcos

Alarcos makes this issue perfectly clear and conclusively proves my point. The 'conditional of possibility (conjecture)' clearly projects 'anterior' from the moment of utterance and not posterior. And the "future of possibility" projects a simultaneous time frame, not an anterior or posterior one. --still reading and learning.

Grant


----------



## fenixpollo

Moderator note: Although this is a fascinating analysis of the minutiae of _posterior_ and _anterior_ in the future of possibility, it is serving to derail the thread into a two-person argument about a secondary issue -- rather than to maintain a group discussion that provides a clear answer to the original question:


maghanish2 said:


> En mi libro de la clase de español, yo leí que el tiempo futuro puede usarse para expersar probabilidad.
> 
> Por ejemplo:
> 
> Qué hora será? - I wonder what time it is.
> Serán debajo de la cama - They are probably under the bed.
> Seré econtrarlos - I will probably find them/I wonder if I'll find them.
> 
> Es esto verdad? A mí parece un poco extraño y confundido, pero se usa el tiempo futuro así?


 Please limit further posts in this thread to answering the question as stated.


----------

