# The time had she



## BlackInk

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had *she *chosen to save it.

I can't understand by no means what is doing that "she" there in the middle 

Could someone explain it or try to translate the sentence into Spanish?

Thank you!


----------



## chileno

"...hubiera ella elegido guardarlo/a"


----------



## BlackInk

chileno said:


> "...hubiera ella elegido guardarlo/a"



But that sounds so rare... Is it common in English? I mean, how does it sound?


----------



## chileno

Yes, it is somewhat common.

*Had you *been here, you would've been able to see all this with your own eyes.


----------



## BlackInk

chileno said:


> Yes, it is somewhat common.
> 
> *Had you *been here, you would've been able to see all this with your own eyes.



Con el ejemplo lo veo más claro, gracias, pero sigo sin entender algo.

La traducción entonces sería algo así cómo:

Aunque tuvo dinero suficiente entonces, hubiera elegido guardarlo. 

¿No es un poco contradictorio?


----------



## Suzie166

I believe it's an example of the subjunctive tense, as we use it in English. It's fairly uncommon in comparison to the use of the subjunctive in Spanish.

Does that help?


----------



## BlackInk

Suzie166 said:


> I believe it's an example of the subjunctive tense, as we use it in English. It's fairly uncommon in comparison to the use of the subjunctive in Spanish.
> 
> Does that help?



Yes, I think that with the example given I understood the tense of the sentence, but even like this, I'm still wondering the meaning of it.


----------



## Suzie166

It expresses a hypothetical situation; an action that could have occurred. If you consider the example using the phrase 'if only', perhaps that would help you to understand;

'....though she had enough money at the time, *if only she had* chosen to save it.'

This sentence means almost exactly the same thing (dependent on the wider context).
Sorry, I'm not explaining this very clearly - it's been a very long day!

Have a look at this thread where there's another example of understanding a subjunctive construction:

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1933466


----------



## chileno

BlackInk said:


> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had *she *chosen to save it.





BlackInk said:


> Yes, I think that with the example given I understood the tense of the sentence, but even like this, I'm still wondering the meaning of it.



Ella hizo muchas cosas malas cuando era joven a pesar de que tenía suficiente dinero en ese tiempo hubiera elegido ahorrar(lo).


----------



## BlackInk

Muchas gracias a los dos por las aportaciones. I'll give it a second thought


----------



## Agró

_She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had *she *chosen to save it._

A esta frase le pasa algo. ¿Estás seguro de que es así?

Si, como parece, "...had she chosen to save it" es una condicional, con inversión, en lugar de "...if she had chosen to save it", entonces "she had money" está incompleto y debería ser "she *would have* had money".

Por otro lado, si "enough" modifica a "money" debería estar delante: "enough money". Si "enough" va con "at the time", entonces la puntuación está mal y debería haber una coma detrás de "money":

_She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she *would have* had money*,* enough at the time had *she *chosen to save it._

Si la frase fuese así, entonces el sentido sería:

Hizo un montón de cosas malas cuando andaba por los veinte, aunque habría tenido dinero, suficiente en esa época, si hubiese optado por ahorrarlo.

Si la frase es como la has transcrito, no le veo ningún sentido.


----------



## Jcpas

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had she chosen to save it.

It simply means "if she had chosen to save it."  

Any "if" in an "if-clause" may be replaced by reversing the order of the the verb and subject.  

If I had known, I would've tried to help.
Had I known, I would've tried to help.   

Reversing the order sounds a little more formal, a little more poetic, a little nicer to the ear. 
 I don't know if others feel this way, but I would also say that the reversing the order sounds perhaps a little more emphatic, focusing more on the condition (in this case the infulfilled one) that would've lead to the next course of action.  Whereas using "if" explicitly just sounds matter-of-fact.


----------



## SevenDays

Yes, it's the English subjunctive in action (contrary to fact: she didn't save it)
"More poetic" is exactly right. The sentence, however, needs a comma, a pause, for a more dramatic effect:
_though she had enough money at the time*, *had she chosen to save it_ (which is what Suzie touched upon with "if only.")

Cheers


----------



## Suzie166

Agró said:


> Por otro lado, si "enough" modifica a "money" debería estar delante: "enough money". Si "enough" va con "at the time", entonces la puntuación está mal y debería haber una coma detrás de "money":



In this case, 'enough' is referring to 'money'. The order is reversed here purely because it is more poetic and gives the sentence a nicer flow.
This doesn't often happen in conversational English, but you will see it written in prose, and the punctuation is usually your clue if you're not sure about the construction.


----------



## cbrena

Agró said:


> [I
> 
> Si, como parece, "...had she chosen to save it" es una condicional, con inversión, en lugar de "...if she had chosen to save it", entonces "she had money" está incompleto y debería ser "she *would have* had money".


Entendí la explicacion de "money enough" en vez de "enough money" y la explicación de la puntuación.

Pero nadie respondió a la duda de Agró sobre el "would have had". Que también es mi duda.

¿Podría alguien explicar por qué la frase no es así?

_She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she would have had money enough at the time, had she  chosen to save it._

Gracias por adelantado.


----------



## gringomejicano

cbrena said:


> Pero nadie respondió a la duda de Agró sobre el "would have had". Que también es mi duda.
> 
> ¿Podría alguien explicar por qué la frase no es así?
> 
> _She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she would have had money enough at the time, had she  chosen to save it._
> 
> Gracias por adelantado.



Yes, it makes more sense with "would have had".  I would argue that the original wrong as written, but I think the sentence (in its entirety) is very awkward given how it mixes two ideas that don't seem to go together.  It's also odd because whether she "had money enough" is somewhat confusing given that in one sense she did have enough money (because she _did_ have the money at some point) and in another she didn't (because she spent it).

If you wanted to use "had", you could finish the sentence like this: "She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, she chose to squander it."


----------



## cbrena

That's the way I see it.

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she would have had money enough at the time, had she chosen to save it.
She didn't really have the money.

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, she chose to squander it.
First she had the money and then she squandered it.

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had she chosen to save it.
You don't really know whether she eventually had the money or not.


Thank you *gringomejicano*. You explained it to me perfectly. It wasn't only me who could tell that the original sentence was illogical.

Regards


----------



## SevenDays

cbrena said:


> That's the way I see it.
> 
> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she would have had money enough at the time, had she chosen to save it.
> She didn't really have the money.
> 
> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, she chose to squander it.
> First she had the money and then she squandered it.
> 
> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time had she chosen to save it.
> You don't really know whether she eventually had the money or not.
> 
> 
> Thank you *gringomejicano*. Your explain it to me perfectly. It wasn't only me who could tell the original sentence illogical.
> 
> Regards


 
_Had she chosen to save it_ means "she didn't save it;" in other words, she had _enough money_, then she didn't have enough (I'm not sure _money enough_ fits here). That much we can logically infer. The sentence does seem flawed ~ it starts talking about "bad things," then switches to "money" ~ but it is an isolated sentence; we are missing a broader context, in which the sentence flow might make perfect sense.
Cheers


----------



## duvija

... and it's missing some 'but', grande como una casa.


----------



## Niiin

I have a question, is correct to write: "he has  always been interested by computers" or is more correct to write: "he has always been interesting by computers" I don't know.

Pliiis heelp!


----------



## duvija

Creo que es 'he has always been interested on/in computers'
Bueno, es 'interested' seguro. La preposición on/in, esperemos a un nativo.


----------



## Agró

...interested *in* computers... (pero esto ¿qué tiene que ver con el hilo?)


----------



## cbrena

duvija said:


> ... and it's missing some 'but', grande como una casa.



Duvija, el BUT grande como una casa lo incluirías sólo en el segundo ejemplo del post que precedía a éste tuyo, y quitando el THOUGH. Supongo.

She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, but she chose to squander it.

Pero no en las otras dos, supongo. Yo al menos no encuentro dónde ponerle el 'but' con el 'had she chosen...'


----------



## duvija

cbrena said:


> Duvija, el BUT grande como una casa lo incluirías sólo en el segundo ejemplo del post que precedía a éste tuyo, y quitando el THOUGH. Supongo.
> 
> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, but she chose to squander it.
> 
> Pero no en las otras dos, supongo. Yo al menos no encuentro dónde ponerle el 'but' con el 'had she chosen...'


 

Sí, exactamente, me refería al ejemplo que pusiste agregando el 'but' antes de 'she chose'. Me parecía que las cláusulas quedaban como desmigajadas sin eso.

(No tengo idea de qué hace ese mensaje mío ahí, cuando era para otro thread...)


----------



## gringomejicano

cbrena said:


> Duvija, el BUT grande como una casa lo incluirías sólo en el segundo ejemplo del post que precedía a éste tuyo, y quitando el THOUGH. Supongo.
> 
> She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties, though she had money enough at the time, but she chose to squander it.



Le hace falta un punto o un punto y coma porque contiene dos cláusulas independientes.  Prefiero el punto porque la primera cláusula no tiene nada que ver con la segunda.

"She did a lot of bad things when she was in her twenties.  Though she had money enough at the time, she chose to squander it."


----------



## westhartford

had I known you were coming, I'd have made a nicer dinner = de haber sabido que venías...


----------



## Dr. Funkenstein

Niiin said:


> I have a question, is correct to write: "he has  always been interested by computers" or is more correct to write: "he has always been interesting by computers" I don't know.
> 
> Pliiis heelp!



interested= interesado
interesting= interesante


----------

