# que ya hayan discutido



## LimeNode

Ojalá que alguien me pueda ayudar con esta oracion; es lo que he leido en mi tarea...

"No se pueden usar películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase"

... tenemos que escoger una pelicula para hacer presentaciónes (en grupos... a nuestros compañeros) sobre las temas de que trata la pelicula. 

Por que la profesora utilizó el subjuntivo en lugar de decir "que hemos discutido en clase"? Me parece 
bien utilizar el indicativo, porque hemos discutido las películas en realidad  Si lo fuera algo más dudoso, o incierto, 
se utilizaría el subjuntivo - yo lo entiendo. Hasta ahora mis amigos del departemento de español (en mi universidad) no han 
podido ayudarme...

¡Gracias de antemano!


----------



## i heart queso

I'm not a native speaker, but here I think the nuance is more "you may not use any movie that we may have talked about in class" - that is, she might not be able to give you a list of them off the top of her head, even though that list does exist.


----------



## INFOJACK

You can't use any of the movies that We discussed in class.


----------



## Peterdg

The reason for the subjunctive is that the relative clause imposes an explicit restriction/limitation/condition on the antecedent "películas".

That's the basic rule number one by excellence for the use of the subjunctive in relative clauses.


----------



## donbill

Peterdg said:


> The reason for the subjunctive is that the relative clause imposes an explicit restriction/limitation/condition on the antecedent "películas".
> 
> That's the basic rule number one by excellence for the use of the subjunctive in relative clauses.



Distinguido forero,

I get your point, but I would like to know if we can say it a different way. If I say, for example, "Vamos a usar las películas que ya hemos comentado en clase," am I not imposing a restriction/limitation/condition on the antecedent "películas?" The relative clause modifies (limits) the películas that we can use, doesn't it?

Saludos


----------



## SevenDays

LimeNode said:


> Ojalá que alguien me pueda ayudar con esta oracion; es lo que he leido en mi tarea...
> 
> "No se pueden usar películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase"
> 
> ... tenemos que escoger una pelicula para hacer presentaciónes (en grupos... a nuestros compañeros) sobre las temas de que trata la pelicula.
> 
> Por que la profesora utilizó el subjuntivo en lugar de decir "que hemos discutido en clase"? Me parece
> bien utilizar el indicativo, porque hemos discutido las películas en realidad  Si lo fuera algo más dudoso, o incierto,
> se utilizaría el subjuntivo - yo lo entiendo. Hasta ahora mis amigos del departemento de español (en mi universidad) no han
> podido ayudarme...
> 
> ¡Gracias de antemano!



También puedes considera lo siguiente. El uso del modo es simplemente una cuestión de *perspectiva.* El indicativo "que ya hemos discutido" presenta la frase desde un punto de vista *objetivo*, pues, como bien dices, uds. *ya han visto las películas.* El indicativo refleja la realidad. El subjuntivo "que ya hayamos discutido" presenta la frase desde el punto de vista de la profesora; su perspectiva es personal y por lo tanto siempre es *subjetiva.* El subjuntivo refleja la manera en que la profesora *percibe* la realidad (y no la realidad misma, de la manera que lo hace el indicativo). Ésto es la teoría. En la práctica, no hay diferencia entre "la realidad objetiva" y lo que percibimos subjetivamente como "real;" por ende, podemos usar ambos modos sin alterar el significado de la frase.    
Saludos


----------



## LimeNode

donbill said:


> Distinguido forero,
> 
> I get your point, but I would like to know if we can say it a different way. If I say, for example, "Vamos a usar las películas que ya hemos comentado en clase," am I not imposing a restriction/limitation/condition on the antecedent "películas?" The relative clause modifies (limits) the películas that we can use, doesn't it?
> 
> Saludos



I agree- I was thinking the same thing. While a limit, for instance, may have been imposed, aren't we still all well-aware of the movies we've discussed / seen in class? 
Who knows; maybe I just don't *quite* get this aspect of the subjunctive mood


----------



## LimeNode

i heart queso said:


> I'm not a native speaker, but here I think the nuance is more "you may not use any movie that we may have talked about in class" - that is, she might not be able to give you a list of them off the top of her head, even though that list does exist.



Thanks for the reply  I was thinking that that is where the doubt / uncertainty lies, though I found it weird because she knows quite well the movies we've discussed and can select for the presentation. That's what made me extra-curious!


----------



## LimeNode

SevenDays said:


> Ésto es la teoría. En la práctica, no hay diferencia entre "la realidad objetiva" y lo que percibimos subjetivamente como "real;" por ende, podemos usar ambos modos sin alterar el significado de la frase.
> Saludos



Ahh muchas gracias! Es lo que yo pensaba... especialmente la ultima cosa que usted dijo. Porque a mí, me parece lo mismo (en este caso) decir "movies that we may have discussed in class" y "movies that we have discussed in class." Yo entiendo que hay una diferencia, pero acqui la diferencia es tan pequeña que parece que nadie pensaría de esa... pero quizás no tengo razon haha


----------



## donbill

LimeNode said:


> I agree- I was thinking the same thing. While a limit, for instance, may have been imposed, aren't we still all well-aware of the movies we've discussed / seen in class?
> Who knows; maybe I just don't *quite* get this aspect of the subjunctive mood



I think the subjunctive in relative clauses is the most difficult use for us gringos to master. 

The sentence of your original post is somewhat like the negative-antecedent use of the subjunctive in relative clauses. The teacher might have said, using a somewhat convoluted structure: 'No hay ninguna película ya comentada en clase que pueda incluirse en el proyecto'.


----------



## flyingcabbage

I could be wrong here, but is it possible that the subjunctive gives the sense of "_You can not use *any* film that we (may) have studied in class_"?

(as in "any film" rather than "the films")


----------



## donbill

flyingcabbage said:


> I could be wrong here, but is it possible that the subjunctive gives the sense of "_You can not use *any* film that we (may) have studied in class_"?
> 
> (as in "any film" rather than "the films")



We must have posted simultaneously, flyingcabbage. It seems that you and I have come to essentially the same conclusion.


----------



## _SantiWR_

donbill said:


> Distinguido forero,
> 
> I get your point, but I would like to know if we can say it a different way. If I say, for example, "Vamos a usar las películas que ya hemos comentado en clase," am I not imposing a restriction/limitation/condition on the antecedent "películas?" The relative clause modifies (limits) the películas that we can use, doesn't it?
> 
> Saludos



I can't see any restriction in your sentence, at least not the kind of restriction of the original one. You are just stating what films we are going to use, it's a set number and they are all known films. On the other hand, if you say "_vamos a usar las películas que ya hayamos comentado en clase_", then you're thinking more of a condition or restriction than a known set of films. There may not even be such a set number if we are talking about something we are going to do next month and there are still films to see, or the person uttering the sentence may not know right now which exactly are the films that we've seen in class.


----------



## Istriano

Well, this is just an example of ''_Buscamos una persona que hable_ _y escriba francés para el puesto de vendedora_.''-type of constructions. 
(_Buscamos personas que hablen francés_ vs _ Buscamos a las personas que hablan francés_).

But you can avoid the subjunctive, if you wish:
_
"No se pueden usar películas ya discutidas en clase"


See the difference:_
"No se pueden usar *películas// que ya hayamos discutido* en clase" (any movies that we might have already discussed)  [_*que ya hayamos discutido *_is the semantic group here]
''No se pueden usar*// las películas que ya hemos discutido *en clase'' (the [specific] ones we've seen and discussed already) [_*las películas que ya hemos discutido*_ is the semantic group here]


----------



## donbill

_SantiWR_ said:


> I can't see any restriction in your sentence, at least not the kind of restriction of the original one. You are just stating what films we are going to use, it's a set number and they are all known films. On the other hand, if you say "_vamos a usar las películas que ya hayamos comentado en clase_", then you're thinking more of a condition or restriction than a known set of films. There may not even be such a set number if we are talking about something we are going to do next month and there are still films to see, or the person uttering the sentence may not know right now which exactly are the films that we've seen in class.



The restriction is that we are going to use the films that we have discussed, those films and no others. And you're right: it is probably not a restriction that corresponds to that of the original sentence. My point of departure may be English, rather than Spanish. In the English sentence, "We are going to use the films that we have discussed in class," '_that we have discussed in class,' _is, in fact, a restrictive clause. I would say that the same is true for my Spanish sentence that you commented on. I will concede, however, that the ideas of 'restriction' are different. (You may want to see what I said in post #10.)

My point is not to disagree with the sentence in the original post or with your point of view. It is to probe a bit more deeply this troublesome issue--at least for angloparlantes--concerning subjunctive use.

Saludos


----------



## _SantiWR_

The names are not really that important, the difference is that "las películas que hemos visto" is a list of one or more films, where zero is not a possibility, whereas "las películas que hayamos visto" may not include any film in the moment you utter the sentence, or maybe ever, it's just a rule for how you could possibly form such a list. That's to me the sense of what Peter said.


----------



## donbill

_SantiWR_ said:


> The names are not really that important, the difference is that "las películas que hemos visto" is a list of one or more films, where zero is not a possibility, whereas "las películas que hayamos visto" may not include any film in the moment you utter the sentence, or maybe ever, it's just a rule for how you could possibly form such a list. That's to me the sense of what Peter said.



Good point! That's the clarification I was asking of Peter when I responded to his post.


----------



## chileno

"No se pueden usar películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase" ( whether you were present in all of the discussions or not)

Would that mean anything?


----------



## flyingcabbage

donbill said:


> We must have posted simultaneously, flyingcabbage. It seems that you and I have come to essentially the same conclusion.



Yes, I think so, I hadn't seen your editted post before I replied.



_SantiWR_ said:


> The names are not really that important, the difference is that "las películas que hemos visto" is a list of one or more films, where zero is not a possibility, whereas "las películas que hayamos visto" may not include any film in the moment you utter the sentence, or maybe ever, it's just a rule for how you could possibly form such a list. That's to me the sense of what Peter said.



I think that was what I was trying to say. 
It could be a general rule for that school/department that applies to every class/every year, no matter what particular films they have studied. 

Maybe we could translate it as a passive sentence - "*Any film studied in class may not be used*" or "*Films studied in class may not be used*" - to convey this. 
So if one class has studied films A, B, and C and another has studied B, C and D:
Class 1 cannot write about film A, Class 2 cannot write about film D and no-one can write about B or C.

(Am I even making sense now? )


----------



## LimeNode

flyingcabbage said:


> I think that was what I was trying to say.
> It could be a general rule for that school/department that applies to every class/every year, no matter what particular films they have studied.
> 
> Maybe we could translate it as a passive sentence - "*Any film studied in class may not be used*" or "*Films studied in class may not be used*" - to convey this.
> So if one class has studied films A, B, and C and another has studied B, C and D:
> Class 1 cannot write about film A, Class 2 cannot write about film D and no-one can write about B or C.
> 
> (Am I even making sense now? )




Brilliant. Though things get convoluted and hazy at times with the subjunctive, I still understand it rather well


----------



## LimeNode

chileno said:


> "No se pueden usar películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase" ( whether you were present in all of the discussions or not)
> 
> Would that mean anything?



Exactly my thought! She *does* know all the movies we have discussed, but she does not necessarily know if everyone in the class had been present for
these discussions (and I know a few people that for sure were absent). However, does this also mean that any time there is even a slight uncertainty, even if you're speaking to your friend, you should always use the subjunctive? If I were talking to my best friend and said, "Nah, si la hayas visto, deberíamos ver una otra película..." that would be much more proper than "has visto?"


----------



## donbill

LimeNode said:


> Exactly my thought! She *does* know all the movies we have discussed, but she does not necessarily know if everyone in the class had been present for
> these discussions (and I know a few people that for sure were absent). However, does this also mean that any time there is even a slight uncertainty, even if you're speaking to your friend, you should always use the subjunctive? If I were talking to my best friend and said, "Nah, si la hayas visto, deberíamos ver una otra película..." that would be much more proper than "has visto?"



You've confused the issue. One rarely (just about never) uses present subjunctive after 'si'.


----------



## LimeNode

donbill said:


> You've confused the issue. One rarely (just about never) uses present subjunctive after 'si'.



Ah, yes... I'm thinking back to "si" clauses. Imperfect subjunctive paired with conditional and so forth. How would you then convey the message of uncertainty in the sentence I used? "If you've seen the movie, we should watch another one..." (I'm not 100% sure if my friend has seen the movie)


----------



## donbill

LimeNode said:


> Ah, yes... I'm thinking back to "si" clauses. Imperfect subjunctive paired with conditional and so forth. How would you then convey the message of uncertainty in the sentence I used? "If you've seen the movie, we should watch another one..." (I'm not 100% sure if my friend has seen the movie)



Si has visto la película....
Even with the addition of 'tal vez' or 'quizás', I'd still use 'si has visto'. The nativos may add a touch.

saludos


----------



## chileno

LimeNode said:


> Exactly my thought! She *does* know all the movies we have discussed, but she does not necessarily know*/recall* *that *everyone in the class had been present for these discussions ."



There. The rest is confusing the issue, at least to me.


----------



## _SantiWR_

LimeNode said:


> Exactly my thought! She *does* know all the movies we have discussed, but she does not necessarily know if everyone in the class had been present for
> these discussions (and I know a few people that for sure were absent). However, does this also mean that any time there is even a slight uncertainty, even if you're speaking to your friend, you should always use the subjunctive? If I were talking to my best friend and said, "Nah, si la hayas visto, deberíamos ver una otra película..." that would be much more proper than "has visto?"



LimeNode, notice that no one apart from you is talking about certainty/uncertainty. Perhaps you should abandon that notion and embrace some of the ideas that came up in this thread. You're teacher can be absolutely sure of what films she's talking about and still may prefer the subjunctive. To sum up, there can be a number of reasons and neither of them has to do with certainty: perspective of the speaker, formulation as a general rule, I can also add wanting to highlight the new fact (indicative) over the background formed by the old, already known facts (subjunctive). But in this particular case Peter gave you the answer very early in the thread: it's just about syntactical constraints. In the way the sentence is written (without the article that donbill introduced later) it must go in subjunctive to convey the meaning your teacher wanted it to. To see that, let's put the sentence in indicative:

_No se pueden usar películas que ya hemos discutido en clase._

Now it sounds like you're teacher's talking about a particular film that someone is actually trying to use, which is an instance of the rule being applied, not the rule itself that goes in subjunctive.


----------



## Peterdg

For some reason, I only just saw now that this thread was active. 

I fully agree with what SantiWR says.

I just would like to add some more theory to comment on donbills question about 


> "Vamos a usar las películas que ya hemos comentado en clase,"


.
In order to be able to use a subjunctive in relative clauses, you need an inducer ("inductor": that's how the RAE calls it; I' rather prefer something like "facilitator").

This inducer opens up the possibility to use the subjunctive. It's a syntactical or semantical element that opens up the possibility to impose a condition to an antecedent and hence allows for the subjunctive. Note that I say "the possibility", not the "obligation" (that's why I'm not particularly fond of the term "inductor" that could lead to the conclusion that it imposes the subjunctive). There are only a limited number of cases where the subjunctive is mandatory in relative clauses (or where the use of the indicative would at least sound "strange").

There are a lot of possible inducers. Some of them "undefine" the antecedent (and hence make it possible to impose a condition), some of them sort of "beg" for a condition but it is very rare to find a subjunctive in a relative clause when there is no inducer.

One possible inducer is the use of a command: "traígame un poco de agua que no esté demasiado fría".

The original sentence says "No se pueden usar películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase", which is kind of a command and we can rephrase it as "No utilicen películas que ya hayamos discutido en clase". 

In some contexts, the condition(subjunctive)/description (indicative) opposition is more obvious than in others.

In "Vamos a usar las películas que ya hemos comentado en clase", it is just a plain statement. I think that in this case the subjunctive is also e possible ("vamos a usar" refers to a future action, which is also an inducer, so theoretically it's possible).

But just for the sake of the discussion: let's rephrase the sentence to clarify the concept of the inducer:

"Usamos películas que ya hemos comentado en clase". Here, the subjunctive is out of the question; there is no inducer around. (The films are known, as you are using them NOW)

Let's add an inducer:

"Sólo usamos películas que ya hemos/hayamos comentado en clase".

With the indicative we say that we happen to use only films that we have already discussed in class; it's an observation. If another film had turned up, it would also have been OK, but it just didn't happen.  It was not a selection criterion.

With the subjunctive we say that we only use films that we have already discussed and other films are out of the question. "That we have already discussed" is a determinative condition for the film to be eligible. This is a selection criterion.

I hope this helps.


----------



## donbill

Thanks, Peter!


----------



## Irma2011

SevenDays said:


> También puedes considera lo siguiente. El uso del modo es simplemente una cuestión de *perspectiva.* El indicativo "que ya hemos discutido" presenta la frase desde un punto de vista *objetivo*, pues, como bien dices, uds. *ya han visto las películas.* El indicativo refleja la realidad. El subjuntivo "que ya hayamos discutido" presenta la frase desde el punto de vista de la profesora; su perspectiva es personal y por lo tanto siempre es *subjetiva.* El subjuntivo refleja la manera en que la profesora *percibe* la realidad (y no la realidad misma, de la manera que lo hace el indicativo). Ésto es la teoría. En la práctica, no hay diferencia entre "la realidad objetiva" y lo que percibimos subjetivamente como "real;" por ende, podemos usar ambos modos sin alterar el significado de la frase.
> Saludos


----------



## flyingcabbage

LimeNode, _SantiWR_ is right. You should try not to focus so much on certainty/incertainty with regard to the subjunctive. That's just a very generalized rule-of-thumb that some teachers use when they first introduce the subjunctive (because many English speakers won't have any idea what it is otherwise).

As for this sentence, consider it to be a *general obligation that always applies to this class* (like a law). Basically, she's saying "_If anyone wanted to use any film we've studied in class, they could not_". If it had the indicative, it would imply that _someone has tried to use a particular film studied in class and she's telling them they can't.

_I think you're getting confused with the unknown antecedent - because you know that she knows what films you've studied. But you can view it from another angle: she doesn't know a) if someone wanted to use these films or b) what film they would have used if it was allowed.

But, as I said in my previous posts, I would take it to be a law or rule that's applicable to everyone in the class, no matter what films they've studied, whether they sat the class in 2012 or 2009 or 2014. "Any films studied in class may not be used". It's the way it's phrased that calls for the subjunctive, not the fact that she's uncertain about what films you've watched.

I hope this helps somewhat!


----------



## LimeNode

Thanks to all for the detailed responses! I naturally focused on the certainty/uncertainty of the element because, as flyingcabbage said, that's how it has been taught- even in my advanced-level grammar courses. These more subtle triggers (or at least there are some that *can* be more subtle) will take a little bit longer to solidify in my head. Seeing other perspectives has been a very helpful supplement to what I've learned in college.


----------

