# Deber - indicative, conditional



## Tate_Harmann

Hi again,
I found a few threads in reference to this, but I still have some doubts on deber.  What is the difference between the present and conditional forms?  For example:

Yo debo hacerlo
Yo debería hacerlo

Or do they mean the same?  The reason I ask is that in books and other courses, they seem to use the present tense to mean "should".  But I have never heard it in speaking, I always hear people use the conditional in speaking.  Does one mean like "must" and the other "should"?

thank you for the help!


----------



## mhp

Here is the way I see it, and if I’m not right, I hope someone will correct me

Debo hacerlo: This is in present tense and says that you have an obligation to do it now at the present time. (and you would almost certainly do it). For this in English we usually say “I must do it”

  Debería hacerlo: This is conditional. It is really about what you would probably do in the future. There is no guarantee that you’ll do it. (I should do it).

  For example, let’s say you have homework to do for tomorrow and a friend asks you to go to the movies. You can say

  Debo hacer mis deberes. No puedo ir.
  Debería hacer mis deberes. Pero no voy a hacerlos. Vamos al cine

  The problem is that in English we often use “must do” and “should do” the same way. In Spanish you can’t do that.


----------



## Tate_Harmann

Hey, that makes more sense!

I just had a mental block trying to think of deber in the conditional,

thanks


----------



## GB2004

Excellent!  This old thread broke a major mental block for me.

However...I have this one question:

At another site (spanish.about.com) it says that this verb has different meanings in the preterite and in the imperfect.

The examples:
_
Luis debío salir.
Luis should have left.

Luis debía salir.
Luis should leave.  
_

Thats not right, is it?


----------



## mhp

why do you think it is not right? 
It sounds like a very reasonable translation


----------



## GB2004

Because according to the wordreference conjugator debía is the imperfect...thus it should be rendered:  _Luis should *have* left_.  If you want it in the present tense then you'd use _"debe" or "debería"_.


Where am I going wrong at?


----------



## Ivy29

Tate_Harmann said:


> Hi again,
> I found a few threads in reference to this, but I still have some doubts on deber. What is the difference between the present and conditional forms? For example:
> 
> *Yo debo hacerlo I must do it ( obligation personal or IMPOSED by some one else. I am telling to myself.*
> *Yo debería hacerlo ( I should do it)  but less stronger that MUST. IMPLIES responsibility or advisability or advice. *
> 
> Ivy294


----------



## mhp

GB2004 said:


> Because according to the wordreference conjugator debía is the imperfect...thus it should be rendered:  _Luis should *have* left_.  If you want it in the present tense then you'd use _"debe" or "debería"_.
> 
> 
> Where am I going wrong at?


Both debía and debería can be used for things that you should do in future. Why? I’ll tell you why if you can answer this question: "_Should" _is the past tense of _shall_. Why do we use a past tense (should) to refer to future in English?

  You really don’t have to answer that question. 
  I really don’t have a better answer than: It is just used that way.

  Debió on the other hand refers to past.


----------



## papa majada

I hear a lot of these structures used interchangeably in Spanish.
"Debió salir" could mean "he should have left" as in he was overstaying his welcome and should have left sooner than he did. But it also could be a deduction in the past, like "debió salir sobre las once" (he must have left around eleven). Hope this helps...


----------



## Ms Missy

Reebo hacerlo: This is in present tense and says that you have an obligation to do it now at the present time. (and you would almost certainly do it). For this in English we usually say “I must do it”

Or: "I have to do it."


----------



## Mafe Dongo

GB2004 said:


> Excellent! This old thread broke a major mental block for me.
> 
> However...I have this one question:
> 
> At another site (spanish.about.com) it says that this verb has different meanings in the preterite and in the imperfect.
> 
> The examples:
> 
> _Luis debío salir._
> _Luis should have left._
> 
> _Luis debería salir._
> _Luis should leave. _
> 
> 
> Thats not right, is it?


----------



## mhp

Ms Missy said:


> Reebo hacerlo: This is in present tense and says that you have an obligation to do it now at the present time. (and you would almost certainly do it). For this in English we usually say “I must do it”
> 
> Or: "I have to do it."



 It is fine to translate it as “I have to do it” but be careful about negative sentences: No debo hacerlo never means “I don’t have to do it” it means “I shouldn’t (or must not) do it”. For “I don’t have to do it” use “no tengo que hacerlo”


----------



## Ivy29

Ms Missy said:


> Reebo hacerlo: This is in present tense and says that you have an obligation to do it now at the present time. (and you would almost certainly do it). For this in English we usually say “I must do it”
> 
> Or: "I have to do it."


 
That's true, but BRITISH usually says that HAVE(got) TO is chosen when is an external pressure of LAW, INSTRUCTIONS, obligations, etc.
MUST also could be used as a LOGICAL CONCLUSION, and  into the past is MUST HAVE+pp. THe past tense of MUST as OBLIGATION is HAD TO.

Ivy294


----------



## JackInMadrid

What is the difference in meaning between the following

debió salir
debería haber salido
debía haber salido

It seems to me that they all mean -> He/she should have left

Jack


----------



## mhp

JackInMadrid said:


> What is the difference in meaning between the following
> 
> debió salir
> debería haber salido
> debía haber salido
> 
> It seems to me that they all mean -> He/she should have left
> 
> Jack



 You are right in English we use “should have” in all three cases. In Spanish, there is a small difference between the first one and the other two that in English we can only conclude from the context. 

  Debí liberarme de ti cuando todavía estaba tiempo (irrealidad)
  Debería haberme librado de ti (desiderativo)
  Debía haberme liberado de ti (desiderativo)


----------



## Ivy29

mhp said:


> You are right in English we use “should have” in all three cases. In Spanish, there is a small difference between the first one and the other two that in English we can only conclude from the context.
> 
> Debí liberarme de ti cuando todavía estaba *a* tiempo (irrealidad)
> Debería haberme librado de ti (desiderativo) ( *Postpreterite of Bello*) *possibility towards the future)*
> Debía haberme liberado de ti (desiderativo) *Unreal IMPERFECT of INDICATIVE*
> 
> 
> Ivy294


----------



## JackInMadrid

so...

debí haberlo hecho = I should have done it (but didn't, end of story)
debería haberlo hecho = I should have done it (but didn't, so may be I might do it in the future)
debía haberlo hecho = I should have done it (??)

Jack


----------



## Ivy29

JackInMadrid said:


> so...
> 
> debí haberlo hecho = I should have done it (but didn't, end of story)
> debería haberlo hecho = I should have done it (but didn't, so may be I might do it in the future)
> debía haberlo hecho = I should have done it (??) *this should is more related with the UNREAL Imperfect preterite (debía).*
> *Debiera haberlo hecho ( I should have done it) subjuntive, unreal as well.*
> 
> Ivy294


----------



## JackInMadrid

Thanks for the input Ivy.
My problem is that in this context I don't understand what *UNREAL Imperfect preterite *means, I know what it is but I can't understand the meaning behind it. Could you describe the meaning for me? 

thanks
Jack


----------



## Ivy29

JackInMadrid said:


> Thanks for the input Ivy.
> My problem is that in this context I don't understand what *UNREAL Imperfect preterite *means, I know what it is but I can't understand the meaning behind it. Could you describe the meaning for me?
> 
> thanks
> Jack


 
If I say DEBÍAN MATARLO, deberían matarlo, debieran matarlo is just a remote wish to kill somebody, it is no real, though debía is into the past and INDICATIVE : is an UNREAL situation.
The same PUDE hacerlo y no lo hice. It is simple past INDICATIVE and is an UNREAL situation.

Ivy294


----------



## heidita

JackInMadrid said:


> What is the difference in meaning between the following
> 
> debió salir two possiblities: He might have gone out, I don't know../he should have left...
> debería haber salido He shoud have left
> debía haber salido he should have left
> It seems to me that they all mean -> He/she should have left
> 
> Jack


Personally I thik you are right, they can all be traslated with "he should have..."
Some kind of "matiz" but ...


----------



## JackInMadrid

In English, "should have +verb" can express
A past obligation that wasn't carried out
A desire that something that wasn't done, was done
So, let's see if I'm getting the gist of it:
Debí haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing a past obligation that I didn't do)_
Debía haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I didn't do)_
Debiera haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I didn't do __(the same meaning as 2))_
Debería haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I did't do, but insinuating that I may do it in the future)_
Is that correct?

Jack 

ps I'm not talking about "deber de + verb" meaning a suposition, that's a whole other post


----------



## heidita

mhp said:


> .
> 
> Debí liberarme de ti cuando todavía estaba tiempo (irrealidad)
> Debería haberme librado de ti (desiderativo)
> Debía haberme liberado de ti (desiderativo)


 
mhp, I don't understand your reasoning here. All of them are unreal. None of the facts described were actually_ done_.


----------



## mhp

heidita said:


> mhp, I don't understand your reasoning here. All of them are unreal. None of the facts described were actually_ done_.


 I agree. All three mean “should have done” which means that, in fact, it was not done and hence all three are “unreal”. However, can you always exchange “debí hacer” with “debía/debería haber hecho”?

  My grammar book says, and I agree, that the last two have a desiderative value which the first one lacks. It gives the example:

  Debías/deberías habérselo dicho

  And explains that the intention is close, but not identical, to:

  Hubiera sido mejor que se lo dijeras
  (¡Ojalá se lo hubieras dicho!)

  A value that is essentially lacking in: 

  Debimos hacer otro tipo de contrato

  Which only expresses “irrealidad”:

  Hubiéramos debido hacer otro tipo de contrato.

I didn’t want to stress this because the difference is so subtle that there may not be a consensus among native speakers. However, if you have to find a difference between the compound form and the simple form, I think the explanation is reasonable.


----------



## JackInMadrid

Could anyone critique what I wrote in post #22?

Jack


----------



## Mafe Dongo

Volviendo al post original...



Tate_Harmann said:


> Hi again,
> What is the difference between the present and conditional forms? For example:
> 
> Yo _debo_ hacerlo. (Presente Simple) *I must do it*. *I have to do it. *Obligación
> Yo _debería_ hacerlo. (Condicional Simple) *I should do it. *
> Yo _debiera/debiese_ hacerlo. Pospretérito _subjuntivo. _Acción futura en relación con el pasado. *I ought to do it.*


----------



## heidita

JackInMadrid said:


> In English, "should have +verb" can express
> 
> A past obligation that wasn't carried out
> A desire that something that wasn't done, was done
> So, let's see if I'm getting the gist of it:
> 
> Debí haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing a past obligation that I didn't do)_
> Debía haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I didn't do)_
> Debiera haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I didn't do __(the same meaning as 2))_
> Debería haberlo hecho = I should have done it _(describing my desire to have done something that I did't do, but insinuating that I may do it in the future)_
> Is that correct?
> 
> Jack
> 
> ps I'm not talking about "deber de + verb" meaning a suposition, that's a whole other post


 
I think that's perfect.


----------



## Ivy29

Mafe Dongo said:


> Volviendo al post original...


 

Un saludo para ti.
<<Yo _debiera/debiese_ hacerlo. Pospretérito _subjuntivo. _Acción futura en relación con el pasado. *I ought to do it.>>>*
*Una pequeña corrección : Imperfecto de subjuntivo o pretérito de BELLO. **El pospretérito es el condicional simple de Bello. La acción futura desde el pasado es el condicional o pospretérito no el subjuntivo.*

*Saludos*

*Ivy294*


----------



## Mafe Dongo

Ivy29 said:


> Un saludo para ti.
> <<Yo _debiera/debiese_ hacerlo. Pospretérito _subjuntivo. _Acción futura en relación con el pasado. *I ought to do it.>>>*
> *Una pequeña corrección : Imperfecto de subjuntivo o pretérito de BELLO. **El pospretérito es el condicional simple de Bello. La acción futura desde el pasado es el condicional o pospretérito no el subjuntivo.*
> 
> *Saludos*
> 
> *Ivy294*


 
Gracias Ivy por la correción, si es que estás correcta. La verdad, con todo lo que he leído en este hilo estoy más perdida que nunca!


----------



## Jellby

Mafe Dongo said:


> Yo debiera/debiese hacerlo



Creo que aquí no es correcto usar "debiese". El subjuntivo aquí está sustituyendo al condicional, que sería el tiempo más apropiado. Se admite usar el subjuntivo en lugar del condicional en ciertas circunstancias, pero sólo la forma "-ra", nunca la "-se".


----------



## Mafe Dongo

Jellby said:


> Creo que aquí no es correcto usar "debiese". El subjuntivo aquí está sustituyendo al condicional, que sería el tiempo más apropiado. Se admite usar el subjuntivo en lugar del condicional en ciertas circunstancias, pero sólo la forma "-ra", nunca la "-se".


 
Gracias por la dádiva. Ahora tengo mis ideas más claras.


----------



## Ivy29

Mafe Dongo said:


> Gracias Ivy por la correción, si es que estás correcta. La verdad, con todo lo que he leído en este hilo estoy más perdida que nunca!


 
La *terminología* de los tiempos es exacta, y no debe ser motivo para que te confundas.

Saludos
Ivy294


----------

