# No creo que las chicas merecieran sus castigos



## blakenberry

Hi,

I am struggling to work out if this tense even exists.

For example, I want to say: "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment"

Is this a correct translation: "No creo que las chicas mereciaran sus castigos"

Thank you in advance


----------



## murkilator

I believe the translation should be: "No creo que las chicas merezcan sus castigos"

Now if you put it in the past, then the imperfect subjunctive would be used.

"I didn't think the girls deserved their punishment"

"No creía que las chicas mereciaran sus castigos"

I think this is right but wait for a native speaker.


----------



## murciana

"No creo que las chicas mereci*e*ran el castigo"


----------



## blakenberry

Many thanks to you both!!


----------



## cclementea

Totalmente de acuerdo con blakenberry. " No creo que las chicas merecieran el castigo".

En español no utilizamos tanto los posesivos, ni los plurales como en inglés


----------



## blakenberry

Muchas gracias


----------



## chileno

blakenberry said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am struggling to work out if this tense even exists.
> 
> For example, I want to say: "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment"
> 
> Is this a correct translation: "No creo que las chicas merecieran sus castigos"
> 
> Thank you in advance



Although it could *also *be translated as: "merecían" depending of context or style.


----------



## any5302003

Actually, but I'm not 100% sure that

"I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" is grammatically in correctly in standard English.

The two verbs (do & deserved) cannot appear in the same sentence.
But you can say:
1. I do not think the girls deserve their punishment
2. I did not think the girls deserved their punishment
3. I do not think the girls have deserved their punishment. ( Pretty weird)


----------



## BrethSant

Hi,
It is very important in Spanish to keep the agreement between tenses. so if the main verb is a present tense, the second one should be: present, present perfect or future but not more. so the correct sentence is: "No creo que las chicas *hayan merecido* ese  castigo" of course this is a good Spanish, otherwise you can add any tense you want to.


----------



## any5302003

BrethSant said:


> Hi,
> It is very important in Spanish to keep the agreement between tenses. so if the main verb is a present tense, the second one should be: present, present perfect or future but not more. so the correct sentence is: "No creo que las chicas *hayan merecido* ese  castigo" of course this is a good Spanish, otherwise you can add any tense you want to.



Same in English


----------



## OhPorDios

murkilator said:


> I believe the translation should be: "No creo que las chicas merezcan sus castigos"
> 
> Now if you put it in the past, then the imperfect subjunctive would be used.
> 
> "I didn't think the girls deserved their punishment"
> 
> "No creía que las chicas mereciaran sus castigos"
> 
> I think this is right but wait for a native speaker.




There're two tenses:

No creo (now) que las chicas merecieran ese castigo (castigo impuesto en el pasado)




BrethSant said:


> Hi,
> It is very important in Spanish to keep the agreement between tenses. so  if the main verb is a present tense, the second one should be: present,  present perfect or future but not more. so the correct sentence is: "No  creo que las chicas *hayan merecido* ese  castigo" of course this  is a good Spanish, otherwise you can add any tense you want to.



But isn't "hayan merecido" some kind of past too?

Both "hayan merecido" and "merecieran" sound good to me.


----------



## k-in-sc

any5302003 said:


> Actually, but I'm not 100% sure that
> 
> "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" is grammatically in correctly in standard English.
> 
> The two verbs (do & deserved) cannot appear in the same sentence.
> But you can say:
> 1. I do not think the girls deserve their punishment
> 2. I did not think the girls deserved their punishment
> 3. I do not think the girls have deserved their punishment. ( Pretty weird)



Um, what?
"I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" is perfectly fine.


----------



## any5302003

k-in-sc said:


> Um, what?
> "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" is perfectly fine.



For spoken English, it's 100% perfect, and everyone says that.

But for Standard Written English, it is incorrect as the two verbs are not consistent in tenses. (present/past)

It might sound weird, but I am pretty positive that it is true.

As BrethSant has also stated.

If the first verb is in simple present tense, then the second verb must also be present (either simple present, present perfect, simple future in English)

Again, Standard Written English, not Spoken.


----------



## iskndarbey

any5302003 said:


> For spoken English, it's 100% perfect, and everyone says that.
> 
> But for Standard Written English, it is incorrect as the two verbs are not consistent in tenses. (present/past)
> 
> It might sound weird, but I am pretty positive that it is true.
> 
> As BrethSant has also stated.
> 
> If the first verb is in simple present tense, then the second verb must also be present (either simple present, present perfect, simple future in English)
> 
> Again, Standard Written English, not Spoken.



That's absurd. The sentence is perfect.

(I'm reminded of the time a 'native English speaker' on here counseled that 'goes' is plural, since it has an s, and therefore we should say 'The boys goes to school' and 'The boy go to school', but everybody mixes it up in spoken English because they weren't taught properly.)


----------



## k-in-sc

any5302003 said:


> If the first verb is in simple present tense, then the second verb must also be present (either simple present, present perfect, simple future in English)


So you can't say "I don't think he went to the movies"?
Come on, that makes no sense at all!


----------



## any5302003

k-in-sc said:


> So you can't say "I don't think he went to the movies"?
> Come on, that makes no sense at all!



LOL, you *can* SAY, but not *write*... Again, standard English

But, actually, you won't write something in an article like that.

Sorry if it doesn't make sense to you, it didn't actually make sense to me at first XD

There are also a lot of stupid things in Standard English.

Like, when you speak on phone, you say " It's me!"

But actually, it should be "It's *I*." 

I was like, " What???" when I first knew this


----------



## iskndarbey

any5302003 said:


> LOL, you *can* SAY, but not *write*... Again, standard English
> 
> But, actually, you won't write something in an article like that.
> 
> Sorry if it doesn't make sense to you, it didn't actually make sense to me at first XD
> 
> There are also a lot of stupid things in Standard English.
> 
> Like, when you speak on phone, you say " It's me!"
> 
> But actually, it should be "It's *I*."
> 
> I was like, " What???" when I first knew this



You're wrong. Spectacularly, flamboyantly wrong. It really doesn't get any simpler than that.


----------



## k-in-sc

Gee, iskndarbey, to think that all this time we've been using substandard English. 
_I'm like, " What???" when I first know this ... _


----------



## any5302003

iskndarbey said:


> You're wrong. Spectacularly, flamboyantly wrong. It really doesn't get any simpler than that.



 Your perseverance is profoundly comprehended, though the righteousness of my interpretation is yet to be verified.

Who cares? No one's talking in complete standard grammar...

How are you doing? 
I'm doing *good*. Everyone knows that, though tons of people speak "good".

"I did *better* than you did." It should be " I did* more well* than you did" (very weird)

I always hear people say " Me and XXX..."

He told me that he *has* finished his homework. has--> had

Again, who cares?


----------



## mhp

BrethSant said:


> Hi,
> It is very important in Spanish to keep the agreement between tenses. so  if the main verb is a present tense, the second one should be: present,  present perfect or future but not more. so the correct sentence is: "No  creo que las chicas *hayan merecido* ese  castigo" of course this  is a good Spanish, otherwise you can add any tense you want to.



I  have seen some Latin Americans who follow this rule. This is generally  not true in Peninsular Spanish. Of course, it is absurd to say that this  rule applies to English.


----------



## any5302003

I finally got what actually happened.

There's actually a great argument on it..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_of_tenses

There's Natural Sequence and Attracted Sequence ...

Natural Sequence- doesn't matter on the tense of the clause

Attracted Sequence- the two should agree

Makes sense now..  We're all right!


----------



## k-in-sc

any5302003 said:


> I finally got what actually happened.
> 
> There's actually a great argument on it..
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_of_tenses
> 
> There's Natural Sequence and Attracted Sequence ...
> 
> Natural Sequence- doesn't matter on the tense of the clause
> 
> Attracted Sequence- the two should agree
> 
> Makes sense now..  We're all right!



No, and if you read the Wikipedia article carefully, maybe you can figure out why not.


----------



## Salita

OhPorDios said:


> There're two tenses:
> 
> No creo (now) que las chicas merecieran ese castigo (castigo impuesto en el pasado)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But isn't "hayan merecido" some kind of past too?
> 
> Both "hayan merecido" and "merecieran" sound good to me.




I am trying to understand this discussion. Is this the correct english translation? Thanks. 

No creo que las chicas merecieran ese castigo.
_I do not think the girls were deserving this punishment._

No creo que las chicas hayan merecido ese castigo.
_I do not think the girls have deserved this punishment._

*No creí* que las chicas merecieran ese castigo.
_I did not think the girls would be deserving this punishment._


----------



## mhp

There is no reason to make it so complicated. 

 1) No creo que las chicas merecieran ese castigo.
 2) No creo que las chicas hayan merecido ese castigo.

 (1) is used if the punishment and its effects are in the past. (2) is  used if the speaker sees himself in the same time frame as the  administration or the effects of the punishment. This is how this is  used in  Spain. Some Latin Americans use (2) in both senses.


----------



## blakenberry

mhp said:


> There is no reason to make it so complicated.
> 
> 1) No creo que las chicas merecieran ese castigo.
> 2) No creo que las chicas hayan merecido ese castigo.
> 
> (1) is used if the punishment and its effects are in the past. (2) is  used if the speaker sees himself in the same time frame as the  administration or the effects of the punishment. This is how this is  used in  Spain. Some Latin Americans use (2) in both senses.



Cheers mate, you certainly managed to simplify it!!


----------



## mhp

I hope you didn't mean oversimplified, which it probably is to some extent.


----------



## blakenberry

mhp said:


> I hope you didn't mean oversimplified, which it probably is to some extent.



Haha, don't worry, there's no chance of oversimplifying things for me. No, I really do appreciate it. Cheers


----------



## horsewishr

iskndarbey said:


> You're wrong. Spectacularly, flamboyantly wrong. It really doesn't get any simpler than that.



I would have been more diplomatic, but I agree.  any5302003 is wrong here.


----------



## BrethSant

OhPorDios said:


> There're two tenses:
> 
> No creo (now) que las chicas merecieran ese castigo (castigo impuesto en el pasado)
> 
> 
> 
> But isn't "hayan merecido" some kind of past too?
> 
> Both "hayan merecido" and "merecieran" sound good to me.




You are right, that´s why I said "hayan merecido" is a good Spanish,  actually you cannot use past tense with present verbs in grammar, despite the fact that present perfect is named *pasado perfecto*  in Spanish this is related to the present tense, but in spoken Spanish we're accustomed to using present with past and sometimes past with future, but grammar is grammar and this is not possible, sorry.


----------



## murciana

blakenberry said:


> Cheers mate, you certainly managed to simplify it!!


 


I would only like to add a word to the sentence in Spanish so that it sounds more natural:

"No creo que las chicas *se* merecieran ese castigo"


----------



## BrethSant

mhp said:


> I have seen some Latin Americans who follow this rule. This is generally not true in Peninsular Spanish. Of course, it is absurd to say that this rule applies to English.


 

Not at all, English grammar rules the same but the way people speak is different, Are you sure in Spain you don`t have the agreement between tenses?


----------



## polyglotguy

any5302003 said:


> Actually, but I'm not 100% sure that
> 
> "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" is grammatically in correctly in standard English.



Actually it is correct in standard, written English, and I will explain why. 

This is the main clause: "I do not think"
This is the subordinate clause: "[that] the girls  deserved their punishment"

Generally, as long as the main clause verb is not past tense or or past perfect tense, then the subordinate clause verb can be in any tense. And in this case, since the main clause verb is in present tense, the subordinate clause verb can be in any tense you want to put it in and still be correct.


----------



## weeshus

blakenberry said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am struggling to work out if this tense even exists.
> 
> For example, I want to say: "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" I think *that* this sentence to be correct should read "I think *that* the girls deserved their punishment"


 


any5302003 said:


> Actually, but I'm not 100% sure that
> "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment" *is grammatically in correctly* in standard English. Not sure whether you mean that it is incorrect Grammar or Correct Grammar? In any case please see above
> 
> The two verbs (do & deserved) cannot appear in the same sentence. They can as in "I do not think that Hannibal deserved to cross the Alps" - Try to convey that without mixing two tenses!


 


any5302003 said:


> But for Standard Written English, it is incorrect as the two verbs are not consistent in tenses. (present/past) see above
> 
> As BrethSant has also stated.
> 
> If the first verb is in simple present tense, then the second verb must also be present
> 
> Again, Standard Written English, not Spoken.


 
What does any5302003 mean by Standard English and where is it defined?

Also my notes above are for discussion and are just my thoughts - I think I am right but I am not Omniscient. In that context - ***** one has to be 100% sure that one is correct!

By the way - Is the following sentence incorrect Standard English? 
_"Having read the Holy Bible I am convinced that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem."_

regards
Weeshus

**** Moderation note*: it has been removed an offensive comment. Let's keep it civil, please.


----------



## blakenberry

weeshus said:


> What does any5302003 mean by Standard English and where is it defined?
> 
> Also my notes above are for discussion and are just my thoughts - I think I am right but I am not Omniscient. In that context - if one is going to be a pedant then one has to be 100% sure that one is correct!
> 
> By the way - Is the following sentence incorrect Standard English?
> _"Having read the Holy Bible I am convinced that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem."_
> 
> regards
> Weeshus



That english sentence makes perfect sense


----------



## any5302003

OK, you guys *are* right.


----------



## Juan Nadie

blakenberry said:


> "I do not think the girls deserved their punishment"
> "No creo que las chicas merecieran sus castigos"


There is a question about temporal frame which is important (to me), did the event take place a long time ago or just not? This would lead to the use of "merecieran" or "hayan merecido".
Then we have the problem with the possessive, because you can have:
-su castigo: this can make reference to the person who imposed the punishment (very formal context), but also can refer to the girls (normal context). It is fine anyway, but be careful with it
-sus castigos: similar to previous, but in plural.
-el castigo: one punishment.
-los castigos: several punishments.

Something more natural would be: ...ser castigadas.



BrethSant said:


> So if the main verb is a present tense, the second one should be: present, present perfect or future but not more.


Just to set it clear, this is not true. At least not when talking about good Spanish or grammar. The obvious example is given by weeshus in English:"I do not think that Hannibal deserved to cross the Alps" - Try to convey that without mixing two tenses! (the same goes for Spanish). "No creo que Aníbal mereciese cruzar los Alpes" - Other tenses would hardly convey the same sense.


----------



## BrethSant

Juan Nadie said:


> There is a question about temporal frame which is important (to me), did the event take place a long time ago or just not? This would lead to the use of "merecieran" or "hayan merecido".
> Then we have the problem with the possessive, because you can have:
> -su castigo: this can make reference to the person who imposed the punishment (very formal context), but also can refer to the girls (normal context). It is fine anyway, but be careful with it
> -sus castigos: similar to previous, but in plural.
> -el castigo: one punishment.
> -los castigos: several punishments.
> 
> Something more natural would be: ...ser castigadas.
> 
> 
> Just to set it clear, this is not true. At least not when talking about good Spanish or grammar. The obvious example is given by weeshus in English:"I do not think that Hannibal deserved to cross the Alps" - Try to convey that without mixing two tenses! (the same goes for Spanish). "No creo que Aníbal mereciese cruzar los Alpes" - Other tenses would hardly convey the same sense.



It is hard to argue  something so complicated in a forum, the relation of time depends on the point of view of  the speaker, but the grammar is one, so it is not  possible to link past and present unless there is a tacit link there. But if you have found different information about it, be so kind to give me the source of information for updating my knowledge

 regards


----------



## Juan Nadie

BrethSant said:


> It is hard to argue  something so complicated in a forum, the relation of time depends on the point of view of  the speaker, but the grammar is one, so it is not  possible to link past and present *unless* there is a tacit link there. But if you have found different information about it, be so kind to give me the source of information for updating my knowledge
> 
> regards


Well, if common sense is not a valid source, you can also check for it in a grammar, and for those who don't have it, just check it in some web page (concordancia verbal, or something like that) where the subject is treated. But you applied common sense (in bold now), where you admit that it can be possible.
Anyway, can you provide us any (valid) source where it is stated your restrictive point? It will be kindly observed.


----------



## BrethSant

Juan Nadie said:


> Well, if common sense is not a valid source, you can also check for it in a grammar, and for those who don't have it, just check it in some web page (concordancia verbal, or something like that) where the subject is treated. But you applied common sense (in bold now), where you admit that it can be possible.
> Anyway, can you provide us any (valid) source where it is stated your restrictive point? It will be kindly observed.



sometimes  common sense is not enough, I really thought there  was another theory about the use of "tenses" which I studied about ten years ago. but  thanks anyway


----------



## Peterdg

El "Esbozo de una nueva gramática de la lengua española" de la RAE, no realmente conocida por sus opiniones vanguardistas, dice:



> *3.19.6* Concordancia de los tiempos.
> ...
> _2° Verbo subordinado en subjuntivo._
> 
> a) con verbos de voluntad
> ...
> b) Con los demás verbos que rigen subjuntivo: Si el subordinante está en presente o en futuro, el subordinado puede hallarse en *cualquier tiempo*; _no creen_ _QUE HAYA HABIDO, QUE HAYA, QUE HABRÁ, QUE HUBIERA, QUE HUBIERA HABIDO tales caballeros en el mundo_
> _..._


----------



## weeshus

*3.19.6* Concordancia de los tiempos.
...
_2° Verbo subordinado en subjuntivo._

a) con verbos de voluntad
...
b) Con los demás verbos que rigen subjuntivo: Si el subordinante está en  presente o en futuro, el subordinado puede hallarse en *cualquier  tiempo*; _no creen_ _QUE HAYA HABIDO, QUE HAYA, QUE HABRÁ, QUE  HUBIERA, QUE HUBIERA HABIDO tales caballeros en el mundo_
_..._
Works for me

I don't think that there have ever been such horsemen in the world.

I don't think that there will ever be such horsemen in the world

I thought that there would never be such horsemen in the world

They never thought they would have such horsemen in the world

etc etc - creo que en ingles es igual

Weeshus


----------

