# Futuro tense, Condicional tense (probability)



## vengavenga

Hi, I'm having a very hard time understanding when to use the futuro and condicional form. 

I wrote five sentences which I thought were supposed to be written in both futuro and condicional, however it appears as though I've made mistakes. That is according to someone whose Spanish level isn't too good. Anyways, I really need help from fluent Spanish speakers. Have I used the tenses correctly?

Habríamos visitado mi abuelo, además_ me ponía (Also, is this correct?) _enferma - We would have visited my grandfather, however I became sick

_
Llegará en las doce_ - She will probably arrive at 12 0'clock
_No sé si Juan viene, sino estariá allí._ - I don't know if Juan is coming, however he is probably there.
_Sería siempre así? -_ Is it always like this? (I thought I'd use the conditional in this sentence as I'm expressing wonder.)
_Hablaría con Juan, además no le me gusta._ - I would probably speak to Juan, however I don't like him.


All help is appreciated!


----------



## Peterdg

Welcome to the forums!


There's  something wrong with your "little words".

Habríamos visitado a mi abuelo, pero me ponía/puse enferma - I'd use "puse" here.

Llegará a las doce

No sé si Juan viene; pero (supongo que) estará allí.

¿Siempre será así?/¿Siempre es así?

Probablemente hablaré/hable con Juan aunque no me guste.


----------



## autrex2811

vengavenga said:


> Hi, I'm having a very hard time understanding when to use the futuro and condicional form.
> 
> I wrote five sentences which I thought were supposed to be written in both futuro and condicional, however it appears as though I've made mistakes. That is according to someone whose Spanish level isn't too good. Anyways, I really need help from fluent Spanish speakers. Have I used the tenses correctly?
> 
> *Habríamos / hubiéramos* visitado *a *mi abuelo,* pero / no obstante*_ me ponía *enfermé */  *puse enferma*_ - We would have visited my grandfather, however I became sick
> 
> _
> Llegará__ *Quizá llegue *en *a* las doce_ - She will probably arrive at 12 0'clock
> _No sé si Juan venga,* pero a lo mejor (ya) ha de estar allí / pero quizá esté (ya) allí *sino estariá._ - I don't know if Juan is coming, however he is probably there.
> _¿Sería *Ha de ser* siempre así? -_ Is it always like this? (I thought I'd use the conditional in this sentence as I'm expressing wonder.)
> _Hablaría con Juan,* pero no me cae bien* además no le me gusta._ - I would probably speak to Juan, however I don't like him.
> 
> 
> All help is appreciated!



*Saludos.
Allí están las correcciones. Hubo unas que sí cambiaron radical.*


----------



## gengo

vengavenga said:


> Habríamos visitado a mi abuelo, pero_ me __puse_enferma - We would have visited my grandfather, however I became sick
> _A lo mejor__ llegará __a__ las doce_ - She will probably arrive at 12 0'clock
> _No sé si Juan __va (a ir)__, __pero __es probable que ya esté__._ - I don't know if Juan is coming, however he is probably there.
> _Siempre __es__ así? -_ Is it always like this?
> _Hablaría con Juan, __pero__ no __me__ gusta __/ no me cae bien__._ - I would probably speak to Juan, however I don't like him.



Además means furthermore, not however.  (And you are using the word however somewhat incorrectly in English.)  Sino means but in the sense of rather:  No es estadounidense, sino mexicano.  He isn't American, but Mexican.

You can use the futuro to express "probably" in some cases, as in "Será Juan a la puerta" (That's probably Juan at the door.)

Although we can use "to come" to refer to a remote location, you can't do that with venir.  Since you are referring to a place where you are not located at the present, you have to use ir.


----------



## wuerra

vengavenga said:


> Hi, I'm having a very hard time understanding when to use the futuro and condicional form.
> 
> _Hablaría con Juan, además no le me gusta._ - I would probably speak to Juan, however I don't like him.




Yo añadiría:

_aunque él me caiga mal. _

_gustar_ used with people means to be attracted to, so if you are trying to say you don't get along with him, it's better to use _caer a_.


----------



## autrex2811

gengo said:


> Además means furthermore, not however.  (And you are using the word however somewhat incorrectly in English.)  Sino means but in the sense of rather:  No es estadounidense, sino mexicano.  He isn't American, but Mexican.
> 
> You can use the futuro to express "probably" in some cases, as in "Ha de ser Juan el que toca / Quizá sea Juan el que toca / A lo mejor es Juan el que toca" (That's probably Juan at the door.)
> 
> Although we can use "to come" to refer to a remote location, you can't do that with venir.  Since you are referring to a place where you are not located at the present, you have to use ir.


----------



## vengavenga

gengo said:


> Además means furthermore, not however.  (And you are using the word however somewhat incorrectly in English.)  Sino means but in the sense of rather:  No es estadounidense, sino mexicano.  He isn't American, but Mexican.
> 
> You can use the futuro to express "probably" in some cases, as in "Será Juan a la puerta" (That's probably Juan at the door.)
> 
> Although we can use "to come" to refer to a remote location, you can't do that with venir.  Since you are referring to a place where you are not located at the present, you have to use ir.


I don't know why I started to think that ''además'' means ''however''. I'm glad you pointed that out to me. I have one question; if you look at the post above yours, the user made changes to tenses that you didn't make. Is he wrong or is it that there are many ways to say one thing, in Spanish? Thanks for your help!


wuerra said:


> Yo añadiría:
> 
> _aunque él me caiga mal. _
> 
> _gustar_ used with people means to be attracted to, so if you are trying to say you don't get along with him, it's better to use _caer a_.


 Noted! Good to know 



Peterdg said:


> Welcome to the forums!
> 
> 
> There's  something wrong with your "little words".
> 
> Habríamos visitado a mi abuelo, pero me ponía/puse enferma - I'd use "puse" here.
> 
> Llegará a las doce
> 
> No sé si Juan viene; pero (supongo que) estará allí.
> 
> ¿Siempre será así?/¿Siempre es así?
> 
> Probablemente hablaré/hable con Juan aunque no me guste.



¡Gracias! I do struggle getting my ''little words'' correct.


----------



## autrex2811

vengavenga said:


> I don't know why I started to think that ''además'' means ''however''. I'm glad you pointed that out to me. I have one question; if you look at the post above yours, the user made changes to tenses that you didn't make. Is he wrong or is it that there are many ways to say one thing, in Spanish? Thanks for your help!
> Noted! Good to know
> 
> ¡Gracias! I do struggle getting my ''little words'' correct.



Hay que analizar esa oración de "Será Juan a la puerta", me es confusa. No sé qué quiera decir, si va a tocar, es quien toca o sólo está parado allí en la puerta.


----------



## gengo

vengavenga said:


> I have one question; if you look at the post above yours, the user made changes to tenses that you didn't make. Is he wrong or is it that there are many ways to say one thing, in Spanish?



There are many paths to the same destination, in any language.



autrex2811 said:


> Hay que analizar esa oración de "Será Juan a la puerta", me es confusa. No sé qué quiera decir, si va a tocar, es quien toca o sólo está parado allí en la puerta.



-¿Quién toca la puerta?  Who is knocking at the door?
-Será Juan.  It's probably Juan.


----------



## vengavenga

gengo said:


> There are many paths to the same destination, in any language.



Ok, thanks again.


----------



## inib

Autrex, if the original poster poses the question in English and admits to having difficulties in Spanish, I think it would be kinder/more useful to answer giving the explanations in English, along with examples in Spanish. Also, I don't know what you mean by your post #6. Was it just a slip of the finger?
Vengavenga, because of the repetition of "probably" in your examples, I wonder if you are trying to understand "the future/conditional of probablity" specifically, or the general use of these tenses. (And, sorry, I also had a "slip of the finger" and sent this before I'd finished!)


----------



## gengo

inib said:


> Also, I don't know what you mean by your post #6. Was it just a slip of the finger?



No, s/he made changes to my post (in the quote), but didn't highlight them, so it's very difficult to see them.


----------



## autrex2811

gengo said:


> No, s/he made changes to my post (in the quote), but didn't highlight them, so it's very difficult to see them.




Lo que quiero saber es eso de "*Será Juan a la puerta*". Explícamelo en castellano porque me causa confusión.


----------



## Peterdg

autrex2811 said:


> Hay que analizar esa oración de "Será Juan a la puerta", me es confusa. No sé qué quiera decir, si va a tocar, es quien toca o sólo está parado allí en la puerta.



A mí me resulta clarísimo lo que quiere decir: será Juan a la puerta = supongo que es Juan a la puerta


----------



## autrex2811

Peterdg said:


> A mí me resulta clarísimo lo que quiere decir: será Juan a la puerta = supongo que es Juan a la puerta



¿El que toca (o que llama a la puerta) o el que está allí parado sólo en la puerta? La verdad me confunde eso de "a la puerta"


----------



## gengo

autrex2811 said:


> ¿El que toca (o que llama a la puerta) o el que está allí parado sólo en la puerta?



¿No son la misma cosa?  Sólo sabemos que está alguien porque hemos oído el tocado, y suponemos que el que tocó se queda parado fuera de la puerta (sin marcharse).

Si no te gusta la frase como la he escrito, ¿cómo la escribirías tú?


----------



## autrex2811

gengo said:


> ¿No son la misma cosa?  Sólo sabemos que está alguien porque hemos oído el tocado, y suponemos que el que tocó se queda parado fuera de la puerta (sin marcharse).
> 
> Si no te gusta la frase como la he escrito, ¿cómo la escribirías tú?



No es que no me guste, ni siquiera lo mencioné. Dije que me causaba confusión.

Será Juan el que toca / llama a la puerta
Será Juan el que está en / a la puerta (pero no precisamente porque haya tocado, quizá se detuvo allí por casualidad, sólo está parado. Pude haberlo visto cuando yo llegaba)
Son usos diferentes, pero nunca dije que estuviera mal, sólo que yo lo entiendo diferente.


----------



## vengavenga

inib said:


> Autrex, if the original poster poses the question in English and admits to having difficulties in Spanish, I think it would be kinder/more useful to answer giving the explanations in English, along with examples in Spanish. Also, I don't know what you mean by your post #6. Was it just a slip of the finger?
> Vengavenga, because of the repetition of "probably" in your examples, I wonder if you are trying to understand "the future/conditional of probablity" specifically, or the general use of these tenses. (And, sorry, I also had a "slip of the finger" and sent this before I'd finished!)



I'm trying to understand the general use of the future and conditional. The reason why I used the scenario of probability in my examples is because I read that these tenses can express probability. I would post the source, but I'm not allowed as I'm a new member. Here is an excerpt: 

Frequently, the conditional is used to express probability, possibility, wonder or conjecture, and is usually translated as would, could, must have or probably.

The future tense is also used to express wonder or probability in the present state.


----------



## autrex2811

vengavenga said:


> I'm trying to understand the general use of the future and conditional. The reason why I used the scenario of probability in my examples is because I read that these tenses can express probability. I would post the source, but I'm not allowed as I'm a new member. Here is an excerpt:
> 
> Frequently, the conditional is used to express probability, possibility, wonder or conjecture, and is usually translated as would, could, must have or probably.
> 
> The future tense is also used to express wonder or probability in the present state.



I'm so sorry! It was just a doubt about a usage in Spanish, just in order to try to explain you, but it just side-tracked. I've read very acceptable explanations they've given you. Just focus on them.

Good luck!
Cheers.


----------



## gengo

Yes, as I said above, the futuro and the condicional can be used for that purpose.

-¿Qué hora es?
-Serán las cinco.  It's probably / about five.

¿Dónde estarán?  I wonder where they are.

-¿Dónde estaba Juan? 
-No sé, estaría en el bar.  I don't know.  Maybe he was in the bar.

-¿Cuándo llegó tu mamá?
-Llegaría / Habría llegado ayer.  She probably got here yesterday.


----------



## Peterdg

Actually, it's not so much different from how the future in English is used to express supposition.

Suppose your telephone rings at 10PM; Your wife says "Who would that be at this hour" and you say "It* will be *Bill; I already expected a call from him". In Spanish, it would be just the same.

Also look at the examples that gengo has give in his last post; but just a remark:


gengo said:


> -¿Dónde estaba Juan?
> -No sé, estaría en el bar. I don't know. Maybe he was in the bar.
> 
> -¿Cuándo llegó tu mamá?
> -Llegaría / Habría llegado ayer. She probably got here yesterday.


This is correct but you have to realize that the conditional in this case can only refer to suppositions in the past. In English, you could also use the conditional to refer to suppositions in the present; although you can see it used every now and then in the press, it's not considered to be correct in Spanish.


----------



## inib

I'm going to make some sweeping statements here, vengavenga, and no doubt fault will be found with them, and many exceptions, but in "general use" of really expressing future actions and hypothetic/conditional actions, you shouldn't have too much difficulty in finding the correspondence between the tenses in English and Spanish.
However, when it comes to "probability", these tenses are more widely used in Spanish than in English. Imagine that you've been ringing someone's home doorbell for 5 minutes to no avail. The Spanish sentence could be "Estará en el trabajo". Your conclusion in English could be "He's *probably* at work", "He must be at work" (you're pretty convinced here), or even *"*He'*ll *be at work" (= Future of probability).
If we shift all that to the past, we get the "conditional of probability" -> Supposing that *yesterday* he didn't open the door when you rang the bell, you now come to the conclusion that "Estaría en el trabajo". That means that "He was *probably* at work"/"He must have been at work"/or rarely, "He*'d* be at work".
Hope it helps.
EDIT: Sorry I was too slow. The above posters said it better.


----------



## Peterdg

inib said:


> I'm going to make some sweeping statements here, vengavenga, and no doubt fault will be found with them, and many exceptions, but in "general use" of really expressing future actions and hypothetic/conditional actions, you shouldn't have too much difficulty in finding the correspondence between the tenses in English and Spanish.
> However, when it comes to "probability", these tenses are more widely used in Spanish than in English. Imagine that you've been ringing someone's home doorbell for 5 minutes to no avail. The Spanish sentence could be "Estará en el trabajo". Your conclusion in English could be "He's *probably* at work", "He must be at work" (you're pretty convinced here), or even *"*He'*ll *be at work" (= Future of probability).
> If we shift all that to the past, we get the "conditional of probability" -> Supposing that *yesterday* he didn't open the door when you rang the bell, you now come to the conclusion that "Estaría en el trabajo". That means that "He was *probably* at work"/"He must have been at work"/or rarely, "He*'d* be at work".
> Hope it helps.
> EDIT: Sorry I was too slow. The above posters said it better.


No, for Pete's sake; you were not too slow! Very true what you are saying!!


----------



## gengo

Yes, inib's post was very helpful, since it analyzes the situation nicely.

My take on this is that such probabilistic usage (of the future tense and conditional mood) in American English sounds rather archaic (or just British), but it is quite common and current in Spanish.


----------



## vengavenga

inib said:


> I'm going to make some sweeping statements here, vengavenga, and no doubt fault will be found with them, and many exceptions, but in "general use" of really expressing future actions and hypothetic/conditional actions, you shouldn't have too much difficulty in finding the correspondence between the tenses in English and Spanish.
> However, when it comes to "probability", these tenses are more widely used in Spanish than in English. Imagine that you've been ringing someone's home doorbell for 5 minutes to no avail. The Spanish sentence could be "Estará en el trabajo". Your conclusion in English could be "He's *probably* at work", "He must be at work" (you're pretty convinced here), or even *"*He'*ll *be at work" (= Future of probability).
> If we shift all that to the past, we get the "conditional of probability" -> Supposing that *yesterday* he didn't open the door when you rang the bell, you now come to the conclusion that "Estaría en el trabajo". That means that "He was *probably* at work"/"He must have been at work"/or rarely, "He*'d* be at work".
> Hope it helps.
> EDIT: Sorry I was too slow. The above posters said it better.


Thank you for the help. You were not too slow and I feel as though I'm starting to understand the use of these tenses much better.*

May I ask if it is necessary to use the conditional and future tense? In my Spanish book it states that you can either use ir+a+inf./future tense and ir(imperfecto)+a+inf. /condicional.*


----------



## Peterdg

vengavenga said:


> *
> May I ask if it is necessary to use the conditional and future tense? In my Spanish book it states that you can either use ir+a+inf./future tense and ir(imperfecto)+a+inf. /condicional.*


There is a tendency to avoid the indicative future in certain parts of Latin America: they will use" ir a + infinitive" to express the future. To a certain extent, this can also be done for the conditional (with "iba a + infinitive") to express the future in the past but the conditional is still very vivid in conditional sentences like: Si tuviera dinero, me compraría un coche.


----------



## gengo

Peterdg said:


> There is a tendency to avoid the indicative future in certain parts of Latin America



One of my teachers in Mexico told me years ago that there are people, usually of lower education, who go their whole lives without using the future tense in Spanish.  They use other forms to express the future, as Peterdg says.  However, the use of the futuro and condicional for probability is quite common in Spanish, so it behooves us to learn this usage so we can talk more like natives, rather than constantly saying "probablemente" and so forth.



> *you can either use ir+a+inf./future tense and ir (imperfecto)+a+inf. /condicional.*



The first part of that is true, but I disagree with the second part.

Iré a la fiesta = Voy a ir a la fiesta  
Iba a ir a la fiesta = Iría a la fiesta 

"[Yo] iba a ir a la fiesta" means "I was going to go to the party (but changed my mind, etc.)," while "Iría a la fiesta" means "I would go to the party (if some condition were met)."

The simple present is also often used to express a future concept, as in "Voy a la fiesta (mañana)."


----------



## inib

gengo said:


> The first part of that is true, but I disagree with the second part.
> 
> Iré a la fiesta = Voy a ir a la fiesta
> Iba a ir a la fiesta = Iría a la fiesta
> 
> "[Yo] iba a ir a la fiesta" means "I was going to go to the party (but changed my mind, etc.)," while "Iría a la fiesta" means "I would go to the party (if some condition were met)."
> 
> "


I agree with that in general, gengo, but if the "second part" were a reported speech version of the "first part", I wouldn't see an awful lot of difference in the message conveyed:
DIRECT SPEECH - Gengo: Iré a la fiesta = Voy a ir a la fiesta 
REPORTED SPEECH - Gengo dijo que iría a la fiesta = Gengo dijo que iba (a ir) a la fiesta
What do you think?
Vengavenga, We are covering lots of different usages of these tenses in the end. What is true of one usage may not be so of another, and that's why I was scared to make those "sweeping statements". I hope we aren't muddling you.


----------



## gengo

inib said:


> I agree with that in general, gengo, but if the "second part" were a reported speech version of the "first part", I wouldn't see an awful lot of difference in the message conveyed:



Certainly.  I wasn't thinking about reported speech, but direct speech.


----------



## inib

gengo said:


> One of my teachers in Mexico told me years ago that there are people, usually of lower education, who go their whole lives without using the future tense in Spanish. "


I read something vaguely similar right here on WR once, and it moved me to start this thread a long time ago: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1998865 (Sorry, Vengavenga, some of it is in Spanish.)


----------

