# de que - subjunctive / indicative



## pomme_pomme

Hola a todos
I ran a search in here of "de que". It yielded several results, however I didn't understand any of them because I'm hardly fluent in Spanish. My grammar books are useless in that they only list "de que" as part of subordinate constructions within sentences in the subjunctive, but do not explain anything more about its usage. I've seen it used within constructions in the indicative, and many instances with the verb alegrar, yet cannot find explanations for these. Can someone explain, and give examples?
Muchas gracias!


----------



## Outsider

I'm not sure I understand your question. If it is whether verbs which follow _que_ and _de que_ are necessarily put in the subjunctive, the answer is no.


----------



## Argónida

I'm not a grammar expert, but I think Pomme pomme is right: "de que" is always with subjunctive tenses.

Antes de que venga, en caso de que fuéramos, después de que pase un rato...

I can't find any example with indicative.


----------



## pomme_pomme

Hi Outsider, 
what I meant was I simply don't understand the usage of "de que"  because the only explanation I have of it is within subjunctive constructions such as the ones noted by Argonida. I'm sure I've seen it in other types of constructions, both subjunctive and indicative, but I don't understand them or how "de que" differs from just "que".


----------



## lazarus1907

Argónida said:


> I can't find any example with indicative.


Estoy seguro *de que* hay muchos ejemplos en indicativo. De hecho, espero convencerte *de que* esta construcción no precisa el subjuntivo, ya que me ha dado la impersión *de que* estás equivocado, y a pesar *de que* lo dices con la mejor de las intenciones, parece que no te has enterado *de que* el subjuntivo depende de varios factores, y no solo de una simple combinación de palabras; sobre todo, cuando se trata de dos conectores sin contenido semántico específico. Probablemente tienes la impresión *de que* el subjuntivo sigue a esta combinación formada por una preposición y una conjunción porque no se te ha ocurrido ningún ejemplo, has llegado a la conclusión *de que* es una regla fija. 

Well... I can go on for hours giving examples of "de que" with indicative and subjunctive, and you'll never find any pattern, because there is none. These two words are used to connect parts in a sentence, but they can be used for many different reasons; they are not a special pattern worth studying on its own, but two words that happen to appear together every now and then.

Indicative is used to declare things; subjunctive is used when you don't want to specifically make any declaration. That's the best rule I can give you. I suggest you read a few threads about this before you ask these sort of general questions, because I have explained this in detail god knows how many times.

Regards,


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> but I don't understand them or how "de que" differs from just "que".


They differ in that one has a preposition ("de") and the other one hasn't. What is the differece in English between "which" and "of which"? A difference pretty similar of that between "que" and "de que": One has two words, and the other only one.

The preposition "de" is used for many things. Namely, after some verbs:_Me alegro de *eso*. I am happy about *that*.
_​You need the preposition to link words, pretty much like you need "about" in English; you just don't say "I am happy that". Now, if you want to use a subordinate clause, in Spanish you must use "que", like English uses "that". The difference is that in English you drop the preposition (about), and you can even omit "that":Me alegro de *que estés bien*. I am happy (*that*) *you're Ok*.​In Spaish you can't drop either. What we're doing is to replace "eso" (that) for a subordinate with "que" (that). Literally:_I am happy about that you are Ok.
_​This is the way it works.

But then, this has nothing to do with subjunctive.


----------



## Argónida

lazarus1907 said:


> Estoy seguro *de que* hay muchos ejemplos en indicativo. De hecho, espero convencerte *de que* esta construcción no precisa el subjuntivo, ya que me ha dado la impersión *de que* estás equivocado, y a pesar *de que* lo dices con la mejor de las intenciones, parece que no te has enterado *de que* el subjuntivo depende de varios factores, y no solo de una simple combinación de palabras; sobre todo, cuando se trata de dos conectores sin contenido semántico específico. Probablemente tienes la impresión *de que* el subjuntivo sigue a esta combinación formada por una preposición y una conjunción porque no se te ha ocurrido ningún ejemplo, has llegado a la conclusión *de que* es una regla fija.


 
 No comment...


----------



## pomme_pomme

Lazarus and Argonida, you're both being a little harsh on someone who has only just started the language, and you misunderstood what I said. Not once did I say I believed that "de que" is used ONLY with the subjunctive. In fact, I said quite the opposite, but that I just couldn't find any examples. If you dislike questions that YOU perceive to be ignorant then simply don't answer them, instead of trying to make fun of the poster.


----------



## Argónida

pomme_pomme said:


> Lazarus and Argonida, you're both being a little harsh on someone who has only just started the language, and you misunderstood what I said. Not once did I say I believed that "de que" is used ONLY with the subjunctive. In fact, I said quite the opposite, but that I just couldn't find any examples. If you dislike questions that YOU perceive to be ignorant then simply don't answer them, instead of trying to make fun of the poster.


 
But Pomme-pomme, no one here has made fun of you!

Lazarus has made fun *of me* because I've been a bit pretentious saying that "de que" is used always with subjunctive and giving examples, when that is false. He's tried to prove me with a funny example that I was wrong. I've been ignorant and pretentious in this thread, I've made a mistake, not you! Believe me, you've misunderstood everything! 

 Regards!


----------



## pomme_pomme

OK. Thanks Argondia 

Lazarus, thanks for the info. 

I might as well give some examples, but unfortunately the only ones I could find in my grammar books are used within sentences in the subjunctive (and only one in the indicative).  

_1. el deseo *que* lo haga
2. siento *que* no puedas venir
3. te pido *que* tengas cuidado
4. dice *que* viene
5. el argumento *que* defiende es absurdo

_but

_1. me alegro* de que* puedas ayudar_
_2. la necesidad* de que *salgamos ahora
3. la esperanza *de que* lea el libro
4. la duda *de que* lo sepa
5. la posibilidad *de que* no haya agua
6. la incertitumbre *de que* apruebe el examen
7. la idea *de que* viene
8. el argumento* de que* la luna esta hecha de queso es absurdo
9. se queja de *que no* la dejan dormir
__10. ¿Hay alguna duda de que estoy cansado?_

How do you know when to say, in Lazarus' words, "about that", rather than simply "that"?


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

pomme_pomme said:


> Hola a todos
> I ran a search in here of "de que". It yielded several results, however I didn't understand any of them because I'm hardly fluent in Spanish. My grammar books are useless in that they only list "de que" as part of subordinate constructions within sentences in the subjunctive, but do not explain anything more about its usage. I've seen it used within constructions in the indicative, and many instances with the verb alegrar, yet cannot find explanations for these. Can someone explain, and give examples?
> Muchas gracias!



_De que_ is simply a relative pronoun. It links clauses together. The essence of the main clause determines if the subjunctive is evoked in the subordinate clause, not _de que_ in and of itself. The reason that you have seen the subjunctive evoked with _alegrar de que _is because of _alegrar_. It's a verb of emotion and evokes the subjunctive.


----------



## pomme_pomme

Thanks Bilbo. However, it's not the subjunctive I'm finding challenging,  just whether to use "que" or "de que"!!


----------



## david13

pomme_pomme said:


> Thanks Bilbo. However, it's not the subjunctive I'm finding challenging,  just whether to use "que" or "de que"!!



hi pomme_pomme:  Thanks for asking a great question! A "great question", of course, is one that I have asked often but still cannot answer! 

A previous thread on "el queísmo" versus "el deqeísmo" led to this article. 

Excuse me while I go read it and find out when (and in which countries) to use que and de que!

Saludos,

_*David*_


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> Thanks Bilbo. However, it's not the subjunctive I'm finding challenging,  just whether to use "que" or "de que"!!


"Que" introduces a subordinate clause. You use "de" when the verbs requires this preposition, or you need to link parts of the sentence.


pomme_pomme said:


> _1. el deseo *que* lo haga
> 2. siento *que* no puedas venir_ = Siento eso_
> 3. te pido *que* tengas cuidado _= Te pido eso_
> 4. dice *que* viene _= Dice eso_
> 5. el argumento *que* defiende es absurdo  _= El argumento ese es absurdo
> but
> 
> _1. me alegro* de que* puedas ayudar_= Me alegro de eso
> _2. la necesidad* de que *salgamos ahora  _= La necesidad de eso
> _ 3. la esperanza *de que* lea el libro_= La esperanza de eso
> _ 4. la duda *de que* lo sepa  _= La duda de eso
> _ 5. la posibilidad *de que* no haya agua_= La posibilidad de eso
> _ 6. la incertitumbre *de que* apruebe el examen = La incertidumbre de eso_
> _ 7. la idea *de que* viene__= La idea de eso_
> _ 8. el argumento* de que* la luna esta hecha de queso es absurdo__ = El argumento de ese es absurdo_
> _ 9. se queja de *que no* la dejan dormir_= Se queja de eso


Examples 2-4 are all transitive verbs, and the objects don't use the preposition "de". Example No. 5 is a relative one.

In the second block, the verbs "alegrarse" and "quejarse" requires alway "de". In all the others, you're linking two nouns (e.g. necesidad and eso), which is something you do with "de". Of course, your examples don't have "eso", but you have a subordinate with "que" which has exactly the same function:

La explicación de su comportamiento es...
La explicación de que se comporte así es...

Trying to differenciate "de" and "de que" would be like a Spaniard trying to differenciate between "the" and "in the" while learning English; you use "in" when the sentence requires it, and you have to learn those rules, which have nothing to do with the difference between "the" and "in the".


----------



## pomme_pomme

lazarus, just a quick question before I digest the rest: why is the first example wrong? In the book it was translated as "the desire that he do it".


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> lazarus, just a quick question before I digest the rest: why is the first example wrong? In the book it was translated as "the desire that he do it".


Like most examples on the second block, the nouns must be joined by "de":

El deseo de que lo haga.


----------



## pomme_pomme

Lazarus, thanks for making the effort to try to explain, but I'm still lost (and feeling very inadequate). I've read your posts over and over and they make sense, but I don't understand them.


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> Lazarus, thanks for making the effort to try to explain, but I'm still lost (and feeling very inadequate). I've read your posts over and over and they make sense, but I don't understand them.


Ok, forget about the difference between "de" and "de que", and just try to learn when to use "de".

With certain verbs (list to be memorized)
acordarse de
reírse de
olvidarse de
...

To express posession, etc.
casa *de* madera (lit. house *of* wood)
el cuarto *de* Juan (lit. the room *of* Juan)
la razón *de* su sufrimiento (lit. the reason of his suffering)
la posibilidad *de* un accidente (lit. the possibility *of* an accident)
...


----------



## pomme_pomme

I'm past that stage with regards to the second set of examples. Not so with verbs and prepositions though. 

But the point is I would really like my question answered by someone, somehow. Every other question I've had has been answered in one way or another, so there has to be a way to explain this one.

OK let's try again:

Is it the case that a concept (for want of proper grammatical term) such as "el idea", "la necesidad", "la duda" must be joined to the rest of the sentence by "de que" and not simply "que"?


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> Is it the case that a concept (for want of proper grammatical term) such as "el idea", "la necesidad", "la duda" must be joined to the rest of the sentence by "de que" and not simply "que"?


"Que" can introduce a clause (among other things), i.e. a phrase that does EXACTLY the same as a noun. Those nouns (necesidad,...) must be joined to other nouns -or nominal clauses- by "*de*":

With nouns:

La necesidad de los *hombres*.
La duda de mi *vida*.

With nominal clauses:

La necesidad de que le cuiden.
La duda de que te quedes sin amigos.

Yo use "que" when you introduce a subordinate, regardless of the presence of "de". You use "de" to join these parts of the sentence, regardless of the presence of "que". And the subjunctive has nothing to do with them neither.

What's your question this time?


----------



## pomme_pomme

Ah OK I think I get it now.... so it's actually *nominal clauses* that I've been having trouble understanding, it seems. 

Anyway are these correct? (what sort of a clause is this? A verbal clause?) If so, then I think I've finally got the idea.

la razón *de* su sufrimiento > la razón *de* que sufres
la posibilidad *de* un accidente >  la posibilidad *de que *hay accidente


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> la razón *de* su sufrimiento > la razón *de* que sufres
> la posibilidad *de* un accidente >  la posibilidad *de que *hay accidente


That's right! Now you need to learn another thing: those two sentences require subjunctive (sufras, haya). We are back to square one.


----------



## pomme_pomme

Well, can't be right all the time!
I can tell you're a teacher, lazarus


----------



## matthews028

Likewise, "tienes miedo de elefantes"... so "tienes miedo de que yo salga".

But you don't say "yo dudo DE mi hermano", so you wouldn't say "yo dudo de que mi hermano salga".

Does that make sense?


----------



## lazarus1907

matthews028 said:


> Likewise, "tienes miedo de *los* elefantes"... so "tienes miedo de que yo salga".
> 
> But you don't say "yo dudo DE mi hermano", so you wouldn't say "yo dudo de que mi hermano salga".


Unfortunate example the last one, because "dudar de mi hermano" is correct.


----------



## pomme_pomme

OK just clearing this one up, so for quickness' sake let's say that "de que" is a proper grammatical construction. Please excuse my lack of proper stress marks and any other grammatical errors (copying and pasting them takes too long and I don't have time right now) and tell me if I'm correct in the following over-simplified examples:

*"de que" in noun phrases*
A noun is joined to the rest of the sentence, be it a verb or a noun, by "de", and then a subordinate clause introduced by "que". 
*1. La idea de que viene *
this is a noun phrase because it begins with a noun, so requires "de" to join it to the rest of the sentence. The subordinate clause is joined to the noun clause by "que".
*2. Dice que viene*
this is not a noun phrase because it begins with a verb, so no need for "de". However, "de que" is not used with transitive verbs (such as "decir" and "pensar"), so even if this was a noun phrase, "de" wouldn't be used.(is "hablar" a transitive verb? If so, would it be impossible to say "la cosa de que habla"?)
*3. El argumento de que la luna esta hecha de queso es absurd*
this begins with a noun. It does not matter whether what follows the noun is another noun or a verb; it must be joined to the rest of the sentence and it is done so with "de", and then "que" attaches the subordinate clause.
*4. El argumento que ella defiende es absurdo*
the clause introduced by "que" is a a relative clause and not a subordinate clause because..??


*"de que" in prepositional phrases
*One way to explain this is using a three step approach:
*1. estoy seguro de tu amor* means *estoy seguro de eso* which can then be converted to *estoy seguro de que me quieres*. (or should this be subjunctive?)
*2. estas convencido de mi dedicacion* means* estas convencido de eso* which can then become *estas convencido de que estoy entregada*. (or should this be subjunctive?)

phew...are we there yet?


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> *"de que" in noun phrases*
> A noun is joined to the rest of the sentence, be it a verb or a noun, by "de", and then a subordinate clause introduced by "que".
> *1. La idea de que viene *
> this is a noun phrase because it begins with a noun, so requires "de" to join it to the rest of the sentence. The subordinate clause (which would be there anyway) is joined to the noun clause by "que".
> *2. Dice que viene*
> this is not a noun phrase because it begins with a verb *(It is a noun phrase)*, so no need for "de" . However, "de que" is not used with transitive verbs (such as "decir" and "pensar"), so even if this was a noun phrase, "de" wouldn't be used. (is "hablar" a transitive verb? If so, would it be impossible to say "la cosa de que habla"?) *Hablar can be used as intransitive with "de": Hablar de política.*
> *3. El argumento de que la luna esta hecha de queso es absurd*
> this begins with a noun. It does not matter whether what follows the noun is another noun or a verb; it must be joined to the rest of the sentence and it is done so with "de", and then "que" attaches the subordinate clause.
> *4. El argumento que ella defiende es absurdo*
> the clause introduced by "que" is a a relative clause and not a subordinate clause because..?? *Relative clauses are subordinate ones.*
> 
> 
> *"de que" in prepositional phrases
> *One way to explain this is using a three step approach:
> *1. estoy seguro de tu amor* means *estoy seguro de eso* which can then be converted to *estoy seguro de que me quieres*. (or should this be subjunctive? *No, it's right*)
> *2. estas convencido de mi dedicacion* means* estas convencido de eso* which can then become *estas convencido de que estoy entregada*. (or should this be subjunctive?*No, it's right*)


I am not sure, though, what do you mean by noun phrases and prepositional phrases. To me, they are all the same, except for the relative ones, which are adjetival phrases.


----------



## pomme_pomme

Thanks lazarus. But 1) how is *dice que viene* a noun phrase if it contains no nouns? and 2)you already said that relative clauses and subordinate clauses were different (see post #14). If they're the same then I'm still completely lost as to why* el argumento de que la luna esta hecha de queso es absurd* and*el argumento que ella defiende es absurdo *use different constructions. 

Thought I had it there


----------



## lazarus1907

pomme_pomme said:


> Thanks lazarus. But 1) how is *dice que viene* a noun phrase if it contains no nouns?


We're probably using a diferent nomenclature, and that can make understanding very difficult. In Spanish grammar (and I'm almost translating literally all the terminology into English), a noun phrase is a phrase that has the same function as a noun. If you say "Dice algo" instead of "dice que viene", both "algo" and "que viene" have exactly the same function, so if "algo" is a noun, "que viene" is a noun phrase.





pomme_pomme said:


> If they're the same then I'm still completely lost as to why* el argumento de que la luna esta hecha de queso es absurd* and *el argumento que ella defiende es absurdo *use different constructions.


They are different constructions:

El argumento de tu madre (madre is a noun joined to the noun argumento by a preposition)
El argumento de que la luna... (the phrase is a noun one, like above)

El argumento defendido es absurdo (defendido is an adjective; adjectives don't require prepositions to be attached to nouns)
El argumento que ella defiende es absurdo ("que ella defiende" is an adjectival phrase)

Does it make sense?


----------



## pomme_pomme

lazarus1907 said:


> We're probably using a diferent nomenclature, and that can make understanding very difficult. In Spanish grammar (and I'm almost translating literally all the terminology into English), a noun phrase is a phrase that has the same function as a noun. If you say "Dice algo" instead of "dice que viene", both "algo" and "que viene" have exactly the same function, so if "algo" is a noun, "que viene" is a noun phrase.



OK got it! 



lazarus1907 said:


> They are different constructions:
> 
> El argumento de tu madre (madre is a noun joined to the noun argumento by a preposition)
> El argumento de que la luna... (the phrase is a noun one, like above)
> 
> El argumento defendido es absurdo (defendido is an adjective; adjectives don't require prepositions to be attached to nouns)
> El argumento que ella defiende es absurdo ("que ella defiende" is an adjectival phrase)
> 
> Does it make sense?



At this present moment yes, but don't hold me to it forever, as my genius has to take a well earned break sometimes!


----------



## david13

pomme_pomme said:


> OK let's try again:
> 
> Is it the case that a concept (for want of proper grammatical term) such as "el idea", "la necesidad", "la duda" must be joined to the rest of the sentence by "de que" and not simply "que"?



pomme_pomme, I can only imagine how frustrating this must be for you.

I am beginning to believe, though, that this entire issue of "de que" / "que"  is much less difficult than we've been thinking. Lazarus (or anyone else, of course), if what I am about to say is incorrect, please tell me.

In English, we can say, "I am annoyed with the constant rain" or "I am annoyed that it keeps raining."  The phrases "of the constant rain" and "that it keeps raining" are not grammatically the same -- the first being a prepositional phrase and the second being a subordinate clause -- 
but both modify or add information to the principal clause "I am annoyed".

In Spanish we can say, "Estoy cansado de la lluvia constante."  = I am sick of/tired of/annoyed with the constant rain. 

Please note, though, that the expression is "estar cansado de" not "estar cansado". Consequently, if we use a subordinate clause, it follows "estoy cansado de": "Estoy cansado de que siga lloviendo." It would make as little sense to say in Spanish, "Estoy cansado que siga lloviendo" as it would in English to say "I'm annoyed with that it keeps on raining." 

The same holds true for Spanish verbs that require a following "de" such as alegrarse de, tratar de and others, some of which are listed in Lazarus' message. So, the question whether to use "de que" or simply "que" is one of memorizing which verbs require "de" and _asunto concluido_. 

Or am I being too simplistic here?

Saludos,

_*David*_


----------



## pomme_pomme

don't worry David, I think I understand it now, but thanks for the input .


----------



## david13

pomme_pomme said:


> don't worry David, I think I understand it now, but thanks for the input .



You're welcome!  Thank you as well. I learned alot from this thread as well!


----------



## NewdestinyX

This thread was amazing. Even a guy like me who's been studying and analyzing for years (and speaking too) had pretty much learned 'de que' and 'que' just by listening and reading. But it's good to learn a little more about the grammar of it. Pomme, sometimes the natives can get bored by things that are so simple to them and so hard for us -- but I appreciate how you got over being offended so quickly and asked the 'exact probing questions' of Lazarus to get the 'pearl of wisdom' we got. Lazarus is one of the most knowledgable people here at the forum and yet we have to ask the right probing questions of any teacher to get our answers. 

The forum rules do ask us not to ask general questions and to tell newbies about that. But this thread got around to 'specifics' very quickly and really opened my eyes. Nominative clauses -- who'da thunk it? That does explain the majority of 'de que' over 'que' and the rest are explained by verbs that require the preposition 'de'. 

Thanks everyone. I've learned a lot tonight.

Grant


----------



## david13

NewdestinyX said:


> This thread was amazing.... Lazarus is one of the most knowledgable people here at the forum ....
> 
> ....Nominative clauses -- who'da thunk it? That does explain the majority of 'de que' over 'que' and the rest are explained by verbs that require the preposition 'de'.
> 
> Thanks everyone. I've learned a lot tonight.
> 
> Grant



Grant, I learned a lot also, although in my oversimplification I omitted reference to nominative clauses. I agree that Lazarus is one of the most knowledgeable people here, but more: Sometimes for native speakers things can seem to them so obvious as not to need explanation. This can lead to miscommunication and frustration on the part of all involved. I should add, though, that this does not often seem to happen with Lazarus, who is a fine teacher in addition to being a wealth of knowledge.  

Now, I have a question:

"Tengo la idea *de*         que triunfarás." Supongo que significa "I have the idea that you will triumph" (si puedo traducirla literalmente y sin matiz). También he visto la oración "Tengo la idea *con* que triunfarás." ¿Significa simplemente "I have the idea with which you will triumph?"

Gracias a todos por un hilo estupendo.

David


----------



## NewdestinyX

lazarus1907 said:


> Indicative is used to declare things; subjunctive is used when you don't want to specifically make any declaration. That's the best rule I can give you.



As you well know of me, and not to take the thread a different way -- but I always find that explanation oversimplified and failing in too many cases where subjunctive is called for. That definition needs a whole host of 'qualifications' to fit every case. There is no way you can say that in -- "No me suena que sea un...." there isn't a declaration.  Or "Es bueno que.." or "El hecho de que" or "De ahí que.." all which need subjunctive and are making clear declarations. But we've done many threads about that topic, haven't we? 

Great input on the nominatives.

Thanks,
Grant


----------



## NewdestinyX

david13 said:


> Now, I have a question:
> 
> "Tengo la idea *de*         que triunfarás." Supongo que significa "I have the idea that you will triumph" (si puedo traducirla literalmente y sin matiz). También he visto la oración "Tengo la idea *con* que triunfarás." ¿Significa simplemente "I have the idea with which you will triumph?"
> 
> Gracias a todos por un hilo estupendo.
> 
> David



There's a pretty big difference between them, David. In the one with 'de que' -- you're saying you have 'the feeling that', the inkling that. You could also use SPanish's idiomatic "Dale a alguien que" there. "Me da que triunfarás"

In the one with 'con' you are saying that you have 'an' or 'the' idea about how he could triumph if he were to apply your idea.

Your English sentences are perfect and correct translations.

Chao,
Grant


----------



## sudest

Woooovvvv.Just a beginner of Spanish I have learned many important things here especially in this thread.Thank you very much all of you.


----------

