# Debí hacerlo / Debí hacerlo / No debí hacerlo



## donbill

Estimados foreros:

¿Cuáles de las combinaciones siguientes son sintáctica y lógicamente aceptables?

a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que lo hice.
a2. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que no lo hice.

b1. Debí hacerlo, y lo hice.
b2. Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.

c1. No debí hacerlo, y no lo hice.
c2. No debí hacerlo, pero lo hice.

¡Gracias!


----------



## chileno

donbill said:


> Estimados foreros:
> 
> ¿Cuáles de las combinaciones siguientes son sintáctica y lógicamente aceptables?
> 
> a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que lo hice.
> a2. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que no lo hice.
> 
> b1. Debí hacerlo, y lo hice.
> b2. Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.
> 
> c1. No debí hacerlo, y no lo hice.
> c2. No debí hacerlo, pero lo hice.
> 
> ¡Gracias!




Todas están bien.

Now, what phrase are you considering in English for those translations. 

Deber and debería/debiera get complicated....


----------



## Plangam

donbill said:


> a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que lo hice.
> a2. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que no lo hice.
> 
> b1. Debí hacerlo, y lo hice.
> b2. Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.
> 
> c1. No debí hacerlo, y no lo hice.
> c2. No debí hacerlo, pero lo hice.



Aunque eso no signifique que las otras opciones estén incorrectas...pero creo que un libro de gramática española pondría las opciones anteriores como las más aceptables (y, por lo tanto, a las demás como incorrectas.)


----------



## Lurrezko

donbill said:


> Estimados foreros:
> 
> ¿Cuáles de las combinaciones siguientes son sintáctica y lógicamente aceptables?
> 
> a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que lo hice.
> a2. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que no lo hice.
> 
> b1. Debí hacerlo, y lo hice.
> b2. Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.
> 
> c1. No debí hacerlo, y no lo hice.
> c2. No debí hacerlo, pero lo hice.
> 
> ¡Gracias!



Estimado donbill: a mi juicio todas son sintácticamente aceptables, pero en los casos a1, b1, y c1 yo personalmente usaría *tuve que hacerlo*:

a1. ¿Tuve que hacerlo? No lo sé. Sólo sé que lo hice.
b1. Tuve que hacerlo, y lo hice.
c1. No tuve que hacerlo, y no lo hice.

Algo me dice que por ahí va tu consulta...


----------



## Plangam

a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? (+) No lo sé. Sólo sé que no lo hice (-).
a2. ¿No debí hacerlo? (-) No lo sé. Sólo sé que lo hice (+).


b1. Debí hacerlo (+), pero no lo hice (-).
b2. No debí hacerlo (-), pero lo hice (+).


----------



## chileno

También ¿Debía hacerlo? ...


----------



## capitas

donbill said:


> Estimados foreros:
> 
> ¿Cuáles de las combinaciones siguientes son sintáctica y lógicamente aceptables?
> 
> a1. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que lo hice.
> a2. ¿Debí hacerlo? No lo sé. Solo sé que no lo hice.
> 
> b1. Debí hacerlo, y lo hice.
> b2. Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.
> 
> c1. No debí hacerlo, y no lo hice.
> c2. No debí hacerlo, pero lo hice.
> 
> ¡Gracias!


 
Don Bill from my point of view all of them are GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT.
About logic, it appeas to me not to be so simple.
All of them are logic if you consider "Debí" as "I must in the past".
 But, specially with C1 and C2, "No debí hacerlo" means (at least to me), "I did it, but i shouldn't have done it" (it sounds like another recent thread), so logically neither of your endings sounds logical.
It's more clear if you change to 2ª person: No debiste hacerlo (forastero) ,typical of westerns: it means that you have already done it.


----------



## donbill

chileno said:


> Todas están bien.
> 
> Now, what phrase are you considering in English for those translations.
> 
> Deber and debería/debiera get complicated....




_Debería_ and _debiera_ get complicated, but for most English speakers _deber_ in the _pretérito indefinido_ is almost impossible to master. _Should_ and _Must_--we've already had numerous threads on the issue--don't vary for tense unless we combine them with an auxiliary (_should have, must have_), and even then they get most of their temporal orientation from context. So it's very hard for an English-speaker to use the Spanish equivalents of _should _or_ must_ when certain tense choices are involved. As I have already stated, the _pretérito indefinido_ (we usually just say "preterit") is probably the most difficult choice we face.

I want to investigate the issue for a study that I am doing.

¡Un saludo!


----------



## Lurrezko

donbill said:


> _Debería_ and _debiera_ get complicated, but for most English speakers _deber_ in the _pretérito indefinido_ is almost impossible to master. _Should_ and _Must_--we've already had numerous threads on the issue--don't vary for tense unless we combine them with an auxiliary (_should have, must have_), and even then they get most of their temporal orientation from context. So it's very hard for an English-speaker to use the Spanish equivalents of _should _or_ must_ when certain tense choices are involved. As I have already stated, the _pretérito indefinido_ (we usually just say "preterit") is probably the most difficult choice we face.
> 
> I want to investigate the issue for a study that I am doing.
> 
> ¡Un saludo!



Mi opinión personal es que *debí hacerlo* implica que no lo hiciste, y *no debí hacerlo* implica que lo hiciste, de tal manera que no dices *debí hacerlo* si lo hiciste ni *no debí hacerlo* si no lo hiciste. No sé si me explico

_¿Por qué fuiste a la cena de empresa?
Debí hacerlo_ (implica que no fuiste)
_Tuve que hacerlo_ (FUISTE)

_¿Por qué no fuiste a la cena de empresa?
No debí hacerlo_ (implica que fuiste)
_No tuve que hacerlo_ (NO FUISTE)


----------



## donbill

Lurrezko oinak said:


> Mi opinión personal es que *debí hacerlo* implica que no lo hiciste, y *no debí hacerlo* implica que lo hiciste, de tal manera que no dices *debí hacerlo* si lo hiciste ni *no debí hacerlo* si no lo hiciste. No sé si me explico
> 
> _¿Por qué fuiste a la cena de empresa?
> Debí hacerlo_ (implica que no fuiste)
> _Tuve que hacerlo_ (FUISTE)
> 
> _¿Por qué no fuiste a la cena de empresa?
> No debí hacerlo_ (implica que fuiste)
> _No tuve que hacerlo_ (NO FUISTE)




¡Hola Lurrezko! Tu opinión personal--y la de otros foreros--es exactamente lo que busco por medio de este post. Y, como siempre, te has explicado muy bien.

Un saludo


----------



## donbill

Plangam said:


> Aunque eso no signifique que las otras opciones estén incorrectas...pero creo que un libro de gramática española pondría las opciones anteriores como las más aceptables (y, por lo tanto, a las demás como incorrectas.)



Muchas gracias por tus observaciones. Estoy seguro de que ya has visto que coincides exactamente con otro forero.

Un saludo


----------



## chileno

donbill said:


> _Debería_ and _debiera_ get complicated, but for most English speakers _deber_ in the _pretérito indefinido_ is almost impossible to master. _Should_ and _Must_--we've already had numerous threads on the issue--don't vary for tense unless we combine them with an auxiliary (_should have, must have_), and even then they get most of their temporal orientation from context. So it's very hard for an English-speaker to use the Spanish equivalents of _should _or_ must_ when certain tense choices are involved. As I have already stated, the _pretérito indefinido_ (we usually just say "preterit") is probably the most difficult choice we face.
> 
> I want to investigate the issue for a study that I am doing.
> 
> ¡Un saludo!



That's why I was asking you for the original English phrases.


----------



## donbill

Lurrezko oinak said:


> Estimado donbill: a mi juicio todas son sintácticamente aceptables, pero en los casos a1, b1, y c1 yo personalmente usaría *tuve que hacerlo*:
> 
> a1. ¿Tuve que hacerlo? No lo sé. Sólo sé que lo hice.
> b1. Tuve que hacerlo, y lo hice.
> c1. No tuve que hacerlo, y no lo hice.
> 
> Algo me dice que por ahí va tu consulta...



Tienes razón; por ahí va. Es por eso que les he preguntado si son lógicamente aceptables. Entiendo tu uso de *tener que* en vez de *deber*. En inglés todas las combinaciones son aceptables y lógicas, creo yo. (Vamos a ver si los foreros angloparlantes están de acuerdo conmigo.)

_Should I have done it? I don't know. I only know that I did it.
Should I have done it? I don't know. I only know that I didn't do it.

I should have done it, and I did it.
I should have done it, but I didn't do it.

I should not have done it, but I did it.
I should not have done it, and I didn't do it._

El problema para nosotros (los angloparlantes), es que s_hould have done _ y _should do _(pasado) pueden expresarse de varias maneras en español y no estamos acostumbrados a escoger entre tantas posibilidades.

un saludo


----------



## donbill

chileno said:


> También ¿Debía hacerlo? ...




Con el pretérito imperfecto es mucho más comprensible para nosotros (angloparlantes) porque se trata de una situación y no de un punto en el pasado.

Un saludo


----------



## donbill

capitas said:


> Don Bill from my point of view all of them are GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT.
> About logic, it appeas to me not to be so simple.
> All of them are logic if you consider "Debí" as "I must in the past".
> But, specially with C1 and C2, "No debí hacerlo" means (at least to me), "I did it, but i shouldn't have done it" (it sounds like another recent thread), so logically neither of your endings sounds logical.
> It's more clear if you change to 2ª person: No debiste hacerlo (forastero) ,typical of westerns: it means that you have already done it.



Thanks, capitas! Your comments are very consistent with those of other foreros, and they're a big help. I really like your example, "No debiste hacerlo, forastero" = "You shouldn't have done that, stranger!" because it gets to the very heart of my post! As you point out, it means that something has already happened. It makes us want to ask the question, "Why did you do that, stranger?". (I'll use your example many times!)


----------



## blasita

Sorry, I think I´m late for this!  Yes, thanks to capitas (always with the right explanation) and everyone else.

But I´d like to know what you think about the difference (apart from tenses) between: 

_¿Hablaste con él?  No, pero debí haberlo hecho/debería haberlo hecho._
Wouldn´t them both translate: _I should have done it_?

Thank you.


----------



## plsdeluno

blasita said:


> Sorry, I think I´m late for this! Yes, thanks to capitas (always with the right explanation) and everyone else.
> 
> But I´d like to know what you think about the difference (apart from tenses) between:
> 
> _¿Hablaste con él? No, pero debí haberlo hecho/debería haberlo hecho._
> Wouldn´t them both translate: _I should have done it_?
> 
> Thank you.


 
Hola a todos
Usando los dos ejemplos de aquí arriba, por favor ¿podrían aclararme algo?
Lo que me gustaría en concreto es ¿hay una diferencia? ¿podrían explicarmelo? si hay.
Personalmente siempre uso la segunda opción.
Saludos


----------



## blasita

Yo también, plsdeluno.  Pero me han asegurado que la primera es correcta, y he oído ambas (aunque puede no ser gramaticalmente correcta, y desde luego, yo también me decanto por la segunda: _debería..._.  A ver lo que los otros foreros tienen que decir al respecto. Saludos.


----------



## Lurrezko

blasita said:


> Yo también, plsdeluno.  Pero me han asegurado que la primera es correcta, y he oído ambas (aunque puede no ser gramaticalmente correcta, y desde luego, yo también me decanto por la segunda: _debería..._.  A ver lo que los otros foreros tienen que decir al respecto. Saludos.



Para mí ambas son correctas y significan lo mismo. Es más habitual la segunda, desde luego.


----------



## capitas

blasita said:


> Yo también, plsdeluno. Pero me han asegurado que la primera es correcta, y he oído ambas (aunque puede no ser gramaticalmente correcta, y desde luego, yo también me decanto por la segunda: _debería..._. A ver lo que los otros foreros tienen que decir al respecto. Saludos.


 
I prefer "debería haberlo hecho" a "debí haberlo hecho", and I think that they mean nearly the same: it's just a detail on the point of time you are/were considering your obligation, and I'm sure both are correct.
The real problem I think, answering to Don Bill and to help you English-speaking to feel quiet about it, is "Debí hacerlo" against "Debí haberlo hecho". I really think that we Spanish-speaking use them wrong, and say The former instead of the latter. That's why it turns out so difficult for you, but it's our fault.


----------



## plsdeluno

capitas said:


> I prefer "debería haberlo hecho" a "debí haberlo hecho", and I think that they mean nearly the same: it's just a detail on the point of time you are/were considering your obligation, and I'm sure both are correct.
> The real problem I think, answering to Don Bill and to help you English-speaking to feel quiet about it, is "Debí hacerlo" against "Debí haberlo hecho". I really think that we Spanish-speaking use them wrong, and say The former instead of the latter. That's why it turns out so difficult for you, but it's our fault.


 
Muy interesante, es la primera vez que veo el uso de ''debí hacerlo'' y te agradezco la explicación.

Muchas gracias


----------



## capitas

Pisdeluno, there's another thread about it, and it´s not easy.

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?p=9916334&highlight=#post9916334


----------



## plsdeluno

Muchas gracias


----------



## hfp

When I lived in Santander, Spain, I remember learning and hearing "Debería haber..." in the sense of "I should have...".  Once I left Spain, I continued using this way, but I feel as though this use is not the first choice among Spanish speakers in my city, who tend to be from Mexico, El Salvador, Venezuela, Cuba and Honduras.

A friend of mine from Mexico usually says "Debí + infinitive of some verb" (_Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.)

_However, to avoid any confusion whatsoever I always say "Debería haber..."  Although it may not be the most natural way for people in my city, they always understand.

The thing is, in my opinion, Spanish speakers have several ways of expressing this idea, and "Debería haber" seems to be synonymous with most of them. The following is a collection of structures I've seen to express _should have_ in Spanish.  Some of these ways may look agrammatical, but they're used in some parts of the world. 

I should have studied, but I didn't. = Debería haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
Debí estudiar, pero no lo hice.
Tenía que haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
Tendría que haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
Hubiera estudiado, pero no lo hice.

The Spanish language is wonderful.


----------



## donbill

blasita said:


> Sorry, I think I´m late for this!  Yes, thanks to capitas (always with the right explanation) and everyone else.
> 
> But I´d like to know what you think about the difference (apart from tenses) between:
> 
> _¿Hablaste con él?  No, pero debí haberlo hecho/debería haberlo hecho._
> Wouldn´t them both translate: _I should have done it_?
> 
> Thank you.



Good question. I'm waiting for the answer too. I would definitely translate both of them as "I should have done it," but I'd be hard pressed to tell you any difference in their meaning, and I don't know how that meaning could be expressed in English without going into much more contextual detail to explain issues of time.

I think it's safe to say that the verb _deber_, by its very nature, tends to be used in tenses other than than the pretérito indefinido. Do you agree? That being said, I would add that debí _haberlo hecho_ and _debería haberlo hecho_ are, in my opinion, easier to understand and master for English speakers than _debí hacerlo_. I think this is true because of the presence of the auxiliary _haber_, which functions in this case, and others, like our auxiliary_ have_.


----------



## blasita

I do agree, donbill.

The thing is in real life, we prefer _debería, tendría que_ to _debí, debiera._ 

Sorry, can´t be of more help, but sure the other foreros will have the ultimate explanation which will help you with your study


----------



## donbill

capitas said:


> I prefer "debería haberlo hecho" a "debí haberlo hecho", and I think that they mean nearly the same: it's just a detail on the point of time you are/were considering your obligation, and I'm sure both are correct.
> The real problem I think, answering to Don Bill and to help you English-speaking to feel quiet about it, is "Debí hacerlo" against "Debí haberlo hecho". I really think that we Spanish-speaking use them wrong, and say The former instead of the latter. That's why it turns out so difficult for you, but it's our fault.



Entonces tenemos que echarles la culpa a ustedes, ¿eh? Les confieso--y esto lo puse en otro post que, por razones desconocidas, no ha salido en el hilo--que he visto y oído el verbo _deber_ en pretérito infefinido mucho menos que en otros tiempos. He dicho también que para nosotros es mucho más fácil usar _dedería haberlo hecho_, porque hay una correspondencia más cercana con la construcción nuestra _should have done_. Y repito una vez más que el problema nuestro es que la morfología--o la carencia casi total de la misma--de _should_ y _must_ nos limita. Tenemos que expresar la orientación temporal de otras maneras.

¡Muchas gracias a todos!


----------



## donbill

blasita said:


> I do agree, donbill.
> 
> The thing is in real life, we prefer _debería, tendría que_ to _debí, debiera._
> 
> Sorry, can´t be of more help, but sure the other foreros will have the ultimate explanation which will help you with your study




You have helped a lot! I find it truly fascinating that we find such different ways to express what we want to say and that the ways we express ourselves rarely are exact matches. But if they were, they wouldn't be nearly so interesting, right? And anyway, questions are usually more interesting than answers.


----------



## donbill

hfp said:


> When I lived in Santander, Spain, I remember learning and hearing "Debería haber..." in the sense of "I should have...".  Once I left Spain, I continued using this way, but I feel as though this use is not the first choice among Spanish speakers in my city, who tend to be from Mexico, El Salvador, Venezuela, Cuba and Honduras.
> 
> A friend of mine from Mexico usually says "Debí + infinitive of some verb" (_Debí hacerlo, pero no lo hice.)
> 
> _However, to avoid any confusion whatsoever I always say "Debería haber..."  Although it may not be the most natural way for people in my city, they always understand.
> 
> The thing is, in my opinion, Spanish speakers have several ways of expressing this idea, and "Debería haber" seems to be synonymous with most of them. The following is a collection of structures I've seen to express _should have_ in Spanish.  Some of these ways may look agrammatical, but they're used in some parts of the world.
> 
> I should have studied, but I didn't. = Debería haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
> Debí estudiar, pero no lo hice.
> Tenía que haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
> Tendría que haber estudiado, pero no lo hice.
> Hubiera estudiado, pero no lo hice.
> 
> The Spanish language is wonderful.



hfp,

I agree that the Spanish language is wonderful. Thanks for your observations. I think I've heard all of those too.

Cheers!


----------



## capitas

blasita said:


> Sorry, I think I´m late for this! Yes, thanks to capitas (always with the right explanation) and everyone else.
> 
> But I´d like to know what you think about the difference (apart from tenses) between:
> 
> _¿Hablaste con él? No, pero debí haberlo hecho/debería haberlo hecho._
> Wouldn´t them both translate: _I should have done it_?
> 
> Thank you.


 
Blasita, I choose your message because is the beginning of other interesting comments about it, bit i'll try to explain other foreros' dobts from my point of view.
As Don Bill said, you are very limited by the morphology of your language. So, you say you can't express it in another simple way and I agree.
But you can in Spanish; you just have to compare using must/should but in the past, to understand thet debí haberlo hecho is much stronger then debería haberlo hecho, although you can't do that in English.
Always with the sense of obligation ( not possibility).

I must do,   I had to do, I would have to do . YO DEBI HACERLO.
I should do, I should do,  I should have to do. YO DEBERIA HACERLO. 
It's so easy.... It's so difficult....
I think it's Arabs who have not past perfect in their language. It's so difficult for them to understand that it expresses a future in the past, according to the moment of the speaker expresses.


----------



## blasita

I agree that _debí haberlo hecho_ sounds stronger than _debería haberlo hecho_, and that Spanish is fascinating and difficult (at least for me!).  Anyway, in my opinion, the context,  and sometimes intonation, will be very important.

As to _I should have to do it_, I would actually translate it:  1 _debería tener que hacerlo_.  And _I should do it_:  2 _debería hacerlo_.   Am I right?  Any difference? 

Saludos.


----------



## chileno

Now we are getting round the full circle. And that's why I asked Don Bill for the English sentences/phrases he had in mind, in post #2.


----------



## donbill

chileno said:


> Now we are getting round the full circle. And that's why I asked Don Bill for the English sentences/phrases he had in mind, in post #2.



Pues, más vale tarde que nunca, ¿no?

I actually have some more in mind. This will be somewhat repetitive, but it may be help. I hope I'm not beating this point to death or boring everyone to tears.

Here' some English context that makes the temporal situation clearer, I think.

_a. "I left my money at home. I shouldn't have done that. Now I can't buy what I need(ed) to buy."

b. " I didn't leave my money at home. I should have. I bought things I didn't (don't) need."_

And what about this one in English and Spanish?

_"I really put my foot in my mouth / (I've really put my foot...). I shouldn't have said what I said."

"Metí la pata / (He metido la pata). No debí decir / no debí haber dicho / no debería haber dicho lo que dije / (lo que he dicho).

_¿comentarios?


----------



## capitas

donbill said:


> Pues, más vale tarde que nunca, ¿no?
> 
> I actually have some more in mind. This will be somewhat repetitive, but it may be help. I hope I'm not beating this point to death or boring everyone to tears.
> 
> Here' some English context that makes the temporal situation clearer, I think.
> 
> _a. "I left my money at home. I shouldn't have done that. Now I can't buy what I need(ed) to buy." _
> 
> _b. " I didn't leave my money at home. I should have. I bought things I didn't (don't) need."_
> _Both cases you use present perfect with its original sense: future of the past. Need/needed and didn't/don't depends on the moment you consider. I think that we all agree there's no problem in English._
> 
> And what about this one in English and Spanish?
> 
> _"I really put my foot in my mouth / (I've really put my foot...). I shouldn't have said what I said." Better I really put ..., in English._
> 
> _"Metí la pata. No debí decir / no debí haber dicho. It happend time ago, and it doesn't standt to now. No debí decir y no debí haber dicho express both very similar ways of describing the time of the action. _
> _He metido la pata. No debí decir / no debí haber dicho. It's happening now, for example at the moment you are apologizing for having put your foot in your mouth._
> _(just a question, if somebody is putting his foot in his mouth and you want him to stop doing that, is it correct to say "Please, take your foot out of your mouth?)_
> 
> _The third one "no debería haber dicho lo que dije" stands for a different situation: you are stating something that is always true. (you thought and you think that you should not have said what you said)_
> 
> _lo que dije/(lo que he dicho)._
> _For most of the spanish-speaking people it makes no diference._
> _For those rare-strange ones like me who make real diference with dije/he dicho, he dicho means that it has just happened, except if you are generalizing about all the things you might have said up to now._
> _Don Bill, I really don't envy you your work on debí/debería/debiera/debiese/hacerlo/haberlo hecho. Hope to have contributed usefully to your task. _
> 
> 
> I must add that I find it incredible to enjoy this thread the way I'm doing ( not very original but very truthful).
> Congratulations for all of you, the other "threaders" .
> 
> 
> ¿comentarios?


----------



## chileno

donbill said:


> Pues, más vale tarde que nunca, ¿no?
> 
> I actually have some more in mind. This will be somewhat repetitive, but it may be help. I hope I'm not beating this point to death or boring everyone to tears.
> 
> Here' some English context that makes the temporal situation clearer, I think.
> 
> _a. "I left my money at home. I shouldn't have done that. Now I can't buy what I need(ed) to buy."
> (Yo Dejé mi/el dinero en la casa. (Yo) No debiera/debería/debí haber hecho eso. Ahora no puedo comprar lo que (yo) necesitaba.
> 
> b. " I didn't leave my money at home. I should have. I bought things I didn't (don't) need."_
> (Yo) No dejé mi/el dinero en la casa. Debiera/debería/debí haberlo hecho. (Yo) compré cosas que (yo) no necesitaba.
> 
> And what about this one in English and Spanish?
> 
> _"I really put my foot in my mouth / (I've really put my foot...). I shouldn't have said what I said."
> 
> "Metí la pata / (He metido la pata). No debí decirlo / no debí haberlo dicho / no debería haber dicho lo que dije / (_lo que he dicho_). The last one should read "...what I have said" in English.
> 
> _¿comentarios?



No entiendo por qué capitas tarjó (He metido la pata)


----------



## capitas

chileno said:


> No entiendo por qué capitas tarjó (He metido la pata)


¿que quieres decir con "tarjó (he metido la pata)"
Perdón, chileno ahora ya sé que tarjar significa tachar.
Lo tacho para clarificar un poco el enrevesado mensaje; primero explico lo que yo entiendo con Metí la pata ( por eso tacho/tarjo "he metido la pata", y luego quito "metí la pata" para explicar "he metido la pata".


----------



## donbill

capitas,

Thanks for the minute analysis and examples!

And to answer your question: If someone has just put his foot in his mouth, you could say, "Do you want to take your foot out now?" I've heard that expression and more like it.

We don't have anything that I know of that corresponds to _"he metido la pata hasta el corvejón."_ I'll have to do some serious research to see if I can find it. 

un saludo


----------



## chileno

capitas said:


> ¿que quieres decir con "tarjó (he metido la pata)"
> Perdón, chileno ahora ya sé que tarjar significa tachar.
> Lo tacho para clarificar un poco el enrevesado mensaje; primero explico lo que yo entiendo con Metí la pata ( por eso tacho/tarjo "he metido la pata", y luego quito "metí la pata" para explicar "he metido la pata".





Ya lo ví.


----------



## donbill

Okay, foreros, here's the last post I'll send about _debí, debiste, debió_, etc. + inf. (I'm sure I'll hear distant sighs of relief, mainly from the Iberian Peninsula.)

The quote below is from _La ciudad y los perros_, Mario Vargas Llosa's novel (Santillana Ediciones Generales, S.L. 2006), p. 162. I won't go into details of context.

"Pero no debió quemarlo y pisotearlo, no debió dejar las casa para correr tras de las putas,no debió abandonar a mi madre, no debimos dejar la gran casa con jardines de Diego Ferré, no debí conocer el barrio ni a Helena, no debió consignar al Rulos dos semanas, no debí comenzar nunca a escribir novelitas, no debí salir de Miraflores, no debí conocer a Teresa ni amarla."


----------



## capitas

Ahhh!  (sigh). You shouldn't have done that, stranger! 
It's now so mournful!.
Come on, Threaders!! .We'll revive with next threads! Ahhh!!!


----------



## donbill

capitas said:


> Ahhh!  (sigh). You shouldn't have done that, stranger!



I just couldn't help it, capitas.

(Y estoy pensando en otras cosas. Get ready!)


----------

