# debes de leer...



## zeppo

My first thought is that this would translate to:

you must have read...  

being a supposition or a deduction.

But in that case, it makes me wonder, would you ever use "Debes haber leido..."?

What would be the distinction between the two, if at all?

Oh and one final thing:

Googling around, I found this heading on a youtube post:

     "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."

Now why wouldn't it simply be "50 libros que debes leer antes de morir." ?


----------



## Cal inhibes

Debes *de* leer significa una suposición: Debes de leer mucho para ser tan instruído. Supongo que lees mucho. I suppose you´ve read a lot of books.
Debes leer significa algo obligatorio: Debes leer este libro para aprender inglés. You must read this book.
5o libros que debes de leer antes de morir es incorrecto, porque se trata de un requisito, una obligación.
Lo correcto: 50 libros que debes leer antes de morir.
Nota: *Debes de *se usa cada vez menos en el español de América. Se usa *debes, *sin la preposición, para ambos casos. La duda se resuelve por el contexto.
Saludos


----------



## zeppo

Thanks for the reply.  Your explanation confirms my own understanding of the usage (from my studies.)  When you search for this sentence on youtube or google, you will find the post from where it came, which is a video by Suna Jung.  I see now that she is from Korea, but is living in Costa Rica.  So perhaps   Spanish is a second language for her and explains the error of using "deber de".  It finally occurred to me to google the phrase without the "de" and I see many more results that confirm what you say and what I had understood to be correct.

Thanks, again!


----------



## Amapolas

zeppo said:


> Thanks for the reply.  Your explanation confirms my own understanding of the usage (from my studies.)  When you search for this sentence on youtube or google, you will find the post from where it came, which is a video by Suna Jung.  I see now that she is from Korea, but is living in Costa Rica.  So perhaps   Spanish is a second language for her and explains the error of using "deber de".  It finally occurred to me to google the phrase without the "de" and I see many more results that confirm what you say and what I had understood to be correct.
> 
> Thanks, again!


The error does not stem, I think, from the fact that Spanish is a second language for her. In some countries, people use 'deber de' all the time and in both senses (Mexico, if I'm not mistaken is one of these?) In other countries (mine, for example) the preposition is hardly ever used in either of the senses. I usually make the distinction, but I'm in a minority.


----------



## dexterciyo

Amapolas said:


> The error does not stem, I think, from the fact that Spanish is a second language for her. In some countries, people use 'deber de' all the time and in both senses (Mexico, if I'm not mistaken is one of these?) In other countries (mine, for example) the preposition is hardly ever used in either of the senses. I usually make the distinction, but I'm in a minority.



According to RAE, you can use still "deber", without the preposition, to mean both obligation and assumption.

http://lema.rae.es/dpd/srv/search?key=deber


----------



## Amapolas

dexterciyo said:


> According to RAE, you can use still "deber", without the preposition, to mean both obligation and assumption.
> 
> http://lema.rae.es/dpd/srv/search?key=deber


I can't believe it, man! After all the effort I put into getting used to making the distinction.


----------



## ilya

Also in Spain, "Debes de hacerlo" meaning "You must do it" is commonly used, but it is considered a mistake, not an acceptable form. When proofreading texts I always encircle it with a fat red line. And then I add: "Debes de haber olvidado que no debes olvidar las normas"


----------



## zeppo

Amapolas said:


> I can't believe it, man! After all the effort I put into getting used to making the distinction.



I'm still going to make the distinction myself because you are more likely to be understood whereever you are.  But I suppose the trick would be in understanding what others mean when they use it, given the different regional tendencies.


----------



## inib

Cal inhibes said:


> Debes *de* leer significa una suposición: Debes de leer mucho para ser tan instruído. Supongo que lees mucho. I suppose you*´ve* read a lot of books.


We don't have the whole of the original sentence so it's hard to guess whether the writer meant to express obligation or supposition and around here "debes de..." is, indeed, a common mistake when expressing obligation. 
That aside, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the use of the "normal" infinitive and the perfect infinitive coincide in Spanish and English so: _Debes de leer = You must read = I suppose you read_ and _Debes de haber leído = You must have read = I suppose you *have* read._


----------



## dexterciyo

inib said:


> We don't have the whole of the original sentence so it's hard to guess whether the writer meant to express obligation or supposition and around here "debes de..." is, indeed, a common mistake when expressing obligation.
> That aside, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the use of the "normal" infinitive and the perfect infinitive coincide in Spanish and English so: _Debes de leer = You must read  = I suppose you read _ and _Debes de haber leído  = You must have read  = I suppose you *have* read ._



No, Inib. "Debes de" is always supposition not matter what comes next.


----------



## inib

dexterciyo said:


> No, Inib. "Debes de" is always supposition not matter what comes next.


Yes, I agree that that should be the case in Spanish (at least according to the DPD).  But don't mark my "_must_"'s as wrong  because they can just as well indicate supposition/deduction/conclusion or whatever you want to call it, in English.

Zeppo, in the original, what comes after/before "Debes de leer"?


----------



## dexterciyo

inib said:


> Yes, I agree that that should be the case in Spanish (at least according to the DPD).  But don't mark my "_must_"'s as wrong  because they can just as well indicate supposition/deduction/conclusion or whatever you want to call it, in English.



What I marked as wrong was your translation, as it didn't match the Spanish.


----------



## inib

I'm sorry , Dexterciyo, maybe I'm misreading  quotes or mixing them up but I stand my ground in saying that "Debes de estar muy cansado" (puesto que llevas 20 horas sin dormir) can mean and be translated as "You must be very tired". 
_Must_ does *not only* denote obligation in English and we don't have the equivalent of _de _to make the distinction.


----------



## zeppo

inib said:


> Yes, I agree that that should be the case in Spanish (at least according to the DPD).  But don't mark my "_must_"'s as wrong  because they can just as well indicate supposition/deduction/conclusion or whatever you want to call it, in English.
> 
> Zeppo, in the original, what comes after/before "Debes de leer"?



This is in my original post that started the thread and the source is in my second post in the thread.

"50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."

When you write "_Debes de leer = You must read", _the reason it was marked wrong is because it should be "You must have read" (which is how a supposition translates).  "You must read" indicates an obligation.  

That said, as another post indicates, the RAE acknowledges other usage.  So basically you can take your choice I guess.  I'm just going to stick with the primary usage given in RAE.


----------



## James2000

zeppo said:


> When you write "_Debes de leer = You must read", _the reason it was marked wrong is because it should be "You must have read" (which is how a supposition translates).  "You must read" indicates an obligation.



I think inib had moved beyond your original quote to the general case, which is where the confusion comes in.  In the context of the original quote I agree with you.

But in the more general case it could well imply supposition:

_You must read a lot (considering how fast you read)._
_You must read Harry Potter books (given what you know about magic)._


----------



## inib

So sorry, Zeppo, I thought the "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir" was an additional example, not the origin of the query. As I suspected, I misread.
My apologies again.


----------



## zeppo

James2000 said:


> I think inib had moved beyond your original quote to the general case, which is where the confusion comes in.  In the context of the original quote I agree with you.
> 
> But in the more general case it could well imply supposition:
> 
> _You must read a lot (considering how fast you read)._
> _You must read Harry Potter books (given what you know about magic)._



Okay, I see.  I thought he was trying to indicate that deber de could indicate both an obligation or a supposition, which is what Dexterciyo apparently thought as well, and so marked it wrong (or to explain, in his opinion, what he thought was wrong.)  

The first sentence you provide are interesting, because I have only seen examples myself of where deber de + infinitive is translating to an assumption about something that already *has* happened, as would be expressed in the past tense.  To say that they can also translate to something that is current.  Interesting wrinkle.

The second one is more understandable because they the "you must read" essentially imparts the meaning of "you must have read".


----------



## zeppo

inib said:


> So sorry, Zeppo, I thought the "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir" was an additional example, not the origin of the query. As I suspected, I misread.
> My apologies again.



No apologies, necessary.  It still leads to an interesting question.


----------



## eno2

What's the conclusion though?

I used deber de in suppositions or suggestions. 

I used deber in obligations. 

Her I read I can use deber for all cases? And forget about deber de?


----------



## zeppo

My conclusion is that I intend to use it the way you have been using it.  

However, as was pointed out the RAE cites the way you do it as the primary accepted usage, but accepts that you may see it used both ways for both with and without the "de".    So if you want to justify not worrying about the distinction, strictly speaking you can use the RAE I suppose.

The trick is as I have said, that even though you and I may use it the way you describe, it doesn't mean we won't come across native speakers that do not use it this way, and so we would just have to hope that context will indicate their meaning.  But from what I have read, this is not as common in most places.


----------



## dexterciyo

inib said:


> I'm sorry , Dexterciyo, maybe I'm misreading  quotes or mixing them up but I stand my ground in saying that "Debes de estar muy cansado" (puesto que llevas 20 horas sin dormir) can mean and be translated as "You must be very tired".
> _Must_ does *not only* denote obligation in English and we don't have the equivalent of _de _to make the distinction.



True, I get your point now. I thought you were stating obligation, too, as you put both _must_ and _suppose_, and got confusing for me.



eno2 said:


> What's the conclusion though?
> 
> I used deber de in suppositions or suggestions.
> 
> I used deber in obligations.
> 
> Her I read I can use deber for all cases? And forget about deber de?



"Deber" = obligation (supposition is also acceptable)
"Deber de" = only supposition

http://lema.rae.es/dpd/srv/search?key=deber

Saludos.


----------



## eno2

Ok Zeppo, that's sufficiently clear to me then. 

@ Dexter: Debo dejar de fumar" es un propósito  y no una obligación.


----------



## ilya

About the interesting wrinkle Zeppo underlined, of using "deber de" in present tense, this is not uncommon. 

"Estás musculosa. Debes de hacer mucho deporte".  Of course, if you did exercise only in the past, your body wouldn't keep fit. 
"Encontraste trabajo. Debes de estar contenta".  It's a supposition about how you feel right now. And it's not the same as saying: "Encontraste trabajo, y debes estar contenta", which would mean: You really should try to be happy now, and not keep behaving as somebody unlucky. 

Therefore I would recommend to keep always the distinction deber / deber de, even if the RAE allows otherwise.


----------



## eno2

There's also the difference deber/tener


> Tener que + infinitivo: expresa obligación _(tienes que marcharte; cuando cruces, tienes que mirar a ambos lados de la calle)_ o necesidad (_ tienes que creerme; es peligroso, tenemos que ir con precaución)_
> *Deber + infinitivo: expresa también una obligación, *pero se da entender que la persona que la expresa es el origen de lo dicho, mientras que con tener que se da a entender que es una obligación motivada por la situación; es decir, tener que es más enérgico que deber :
> _Mira, creo que debes ponerte a trabajar cuanto antes. Yo a tu edad ya lo hacía._
> _Mira, no tenemos mucho dinero y por eso tienes que ponerte a trabajar ya y traer un sueldo más a casa. _
> _(Gramática de la lengua española)
> Deber - Tener que_


_Naturalmente, sabemos que Deber (de) + infinitivo no es solamente una obligación. _


----------



## Amapolas

zeppo said:


> However, as was pointed out the RAE cites the way you do it as the primary accepted usage, but accepts that you may see it used both ways for both with and without the "de".


This is true, and we must bear it in mind when attempting to translate your original phrase.



zeppo said:


> "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."
> Now why wouldn't it simply be "50 libros que debes leer antes de morir." ?


Yes, it's the more usual way to express the idea in most regions. However, ass we have noted above, in some Spanish-speaking regions 'debes+de' is used for obligation or recommendation. Using your common sense, you deduced this is one of such titles as '50 lugares que debes visitar... 50 óperas que debes ver... etc.'



zeppo said:


> When you write "_Debes de leer = You must read", _the reason it was marked wrong is because it should be "You must have read" (which is how a supposition translates). "You must read" indicates an obligation.


'You must have read' doesn't work for your original example '50 libros que debes leer antes de morir' because of the verb tense. It is the translation for 'debes de haber leído'.


----------



## Amapolas

eno2 said:


> There's also the difference deber/tener
> 
> _Tener que + infinitivo: expresa obligación (tienes que marcharte; cuando cruces, tienes que mirar a ambos lados de la calle) o necesidad ( tienes que creerme; es peligroso, tenemos que ir con precaución)
> *Deber + infinitivo: expresa también una obligación, *pero se da entender que la persona que la expresa es el origen de lo dicho, mientras que con tener que se da a entender que es una obligación motivada por la situación; es decir, tener que es más enérgico que deber :
> Mira, creo que debes ponerte a trabajar cuanto antes. Yo a tu edad ya lo hacía.
> Mira, no tenemos mucho dinero y por eso tienes que ponerte a trabajar ya y traer un sueldo más a casa.
> (Gramática de la lengua española)_


We should be aware, though, that the boundaries between 'deber' and 'tener que' are pretty blurred, and many people don't make that distinction in their idiolect.


----------



## eno2

With a moral obligation, I always try to use deber.


----------



## zeppo

Amapolas said:


> This is true, and we must bear it in mind when attempting to translate your original phrase.
> 
> 
> Yes, it's the more usual way to express the idea in most regions. However, ass we have noted above, in some Spanish-speaking regions 'debes+de' is used for obligation or recommendation. Using your common sense, you deduced this is one of such titles as '50 lugares que debes visitar... 50 óperas que debes ver... etc.'
> 
> 
> 'You must have read' doesn't work for your original example '50 libros que debes leer antes de morir' because of the verb tense. It is the translation for 'debes de haber leído'.



This is not my original example.  The original I discussed is "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."  As I said, it struck me as wrong, because to me it would translate as "You must have read", thus the reason for posting.  Edit:  Error here as pointed out later in thread by Inib.  I should have put "... it would translate as 'you must be reading',.."


----------



## eno2

eno2 said:


> What's the conclusion though?
> 
> I used deber de in suppositions or suggestions.
> 
> I used deber in obligations.
> 
> Her I read I can use deber for all cases? And forget about deber de?





dexterciyo said:


> "Deber" = obligation (supposition is also acceptable)
> "Deber de" = only supposition
> 
> http://lema.rae.es/dpd/srv/search?key=deber
> 
> Saludos.



I don't see much difference between your quote and mine.  

Just this one: I used deber de in suggestions also, not only in suppositions. 

So to me the original sentence of Zeppo  ""50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir." looks correct, being  a suggestion.


----------



## zeppo

eno2 said:


> I don't see much difference between your quote and mine.
> 
> Just this one: I used deber de in suggestions also, not only in suppositions.
> 
> So to me the original sentence of Zeppo  ""50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir." looks correct, being  a suggestion.



I overlooked that point.  I didn't notice you had said you use it with suggestions.   My understanding of it would disagree with that.  As I have learned it, I would leave out the "de" for suggestion, translating it as "50 books that you should/must read before you die."  But keep in mind with this usage I do not consider "must" a command, but indeed, consider it a suggestion, with the same meaning as "should" . But if I felt I needed to soften it, I would use "deberías leer".  But of course, I am not a native speaker, I just come to this conclusion from what I have studied and from the feedback I have gathered so far.

All my disclaimers to the above are in my prior posts, so I won't go into that again.


----------



## inib

zeppo said:


> This is not my original example.  The original I discussed is "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."  As I said, it struck me as wrong, because to me it would translate as "You must *have* read", thus the reason for posting.


I still don't understand where you are all getting the "have" from.


----------



## zeppo

inib said:


> I still don't understand where you are all getting the "have" from.



Yes, I believe you are making your point about how you distinguish between "must read" in a supposition, such as "you must read a lot", and "must have read".  It is a good point that I want to look into.  But as I have learned it, which may be wrong, "debes de leer" indicates a present tense "must" supposition paired with a past tense "have read", and I couldn't begin to say why.   I'll have to review the resources I have used to study this.    It may have something to do with Spanish infinitives having that flexibility with which the context ultimately determines their "tense".  But I may be totally off there.  I could be as far off as the moon.  I don't know.

   But I think your point is that even as a supposition, using the "de", you would have to say "debes de haber leido."  (in the case of the 50 books sentence, even though I'm aware that as a supposition it makes no sense, which is why I think she should leave out the "de", as she doesn't intend it as a supposition.)

EDIT:  To anyone reading this post, don't get confused by a mistake I have made in it.  See the next post I made


----------



## eno2

Well for my purpose (to clear my own ideas about this "controverse"), it has been very instructive. I'll cling to that...


----------



## ilya

You are right, Zeppo, although in English, the "must" might be used for both, in Spanish there is no possible confusion. Of course the author tried to "force" the reader ("You really must read this!" not a supposition but an obligation), and of course it's just plain wrong grammar. (Although a very common mistake). There is nothing more to it.


----------



## inib

zeppo said:


> But I think your point is that even as a supposition, using the "de", you would have to say "debes de haber leido."  (in the case of the 50 books sentence, even though I'm aware that as a supposition it makes no sense, which is why I think she should leave out the "de", as she doesn't intend it as a supposition.)


Right.  That's what I was getting at (if the translation is to be "you must *have* read"). And forgive me for repeating myself and what you've just said, but in a long thread ideas get lost: there's no doubt in my mind that in your 50 books example, the "de" is wrong and we are not talking about a supposition.


----------



## Amapolas

zeppo said:


> This is not my original example.  The original I discussed is "50 libros que debes de leer antes de morir."  As I said, it struck me as wrong, because to me it would translate as "You must have read", thus the reason for posting.


Perhaps you mis-read my post. I was discussing exactly that phrase. Or maybe I was confusing?
Let's see it the other way around: 'you must have read' translates as 'debes de haber leído'. This turns it into the past tense, the books you supposedly have already read. I hope this makes it clearer.


----------



## ilya

So let's just sum it up for those who got lost or may drop by later in this thread and get in danger of being lost:

*Preferred use* (only use accepted by the D.R.A.E, the official dictionnary of the Real Academia):

- Debes hacer mucho deporte = You really should do a lot of exercises, it would be good for you.
- Debes de hacer mucho deporte = You probably do a lot of exercises, I guess.

*Accepted use* by the DPD (Diccionario Panhispánico de Dudas, which also shows official standard, albeit giving more leeway to Latin American use which might be frowned upon in Spain and might not occur in the D.R.A.E, as in this case):

- Debes hacer mucho deporte = You really should do a lot of exercises, it would be good for you.
- Debes hacer mucho deporte = You probably do a lot of exercises, I guess. (dropping the "de").

*Not accepted* in any circumstance:

- Debes de hacer mucho deporte = You should do a lot of exercises  (wrong)

Same goes for past tense, be it Pretérito or composed (Debiste hacerlo / Debiste de leer mucho / Has debido de sufrir mucho /...), or future tense: (Deberás hacerlo), wherever applicable. No difference in any way.


----------



## zeppo

inib said:


> Right.  That's what I was getting at (if the translation is to be "you must *have* read"). And forgive me for repeating myself and what you've just said, but in a long thread ideas get lost: there's no doubt in my mind that in your 50 books example, the "de" is wrong and we are not talking about a supposition.




Ok, I went through my notes and I am in agreement with you, Inib.  In a confusing attempt at translating something that i see as the wrong usage (yeah, I know RAE may accept it), I got my pseudo translation twisted.  After looking over my notes about this verb what I should have put  for my translation of my original post, which has the included "de", is " 50 books you must be reading before you die"  instead of " 50 books you must have read before you die."  Of course, I don't believe either of these is the intended meaning of the author of the youtube video, thus my confusion that led to my original question.  The first translation is funny to me if you imagine someone entering a room and finding a very, very sick looking person reading with 50 books stack on a table.  "Oh, sorry to disturb you.  You must be reading these 50 books before you die."


----------



## zeppo

ilya said:


> So let's just sum it up for those who got lost or may drop by later in this thread and get in danger of being lost:
> 
> *Preferred use* (only use accepted by the D.R.A.E, the official dictionnary of the Real Academia):
> 
> - Debes hacer mucho deporte = You really should do a lot of exercises, it would be good for you.
> - Debes de hacer mucho deporte = You probably do a lot of exercises, I guess.
> 
> *Accepted use* by the DPD (Diccionario Panhispánico de Dudas, which also shows official standard, albeit giving more leeway to Latin American use which might be frowned upon in Spain and might not occur in the D.R.A.E, as in this case):
> 
> - Debes hacer mucho deporte = You really should do a lot of exercises, it would be good for you.
> - Debes hacer mucho deporte = You probably do a lot of exercises, I guess. (dropping the "de").
> 
> *Not accepted* in any circumstance:
> 
> - Debes de hacer mucho deporte = You should do a lot of exercises  (wrong)
> 
> Same goes for past tense, be it Pretérito or composed (Debiste hacerlo / Debiste de leer mucho / Has debido de sufrir mucho /...), or future tense: (Deberás hacerlo), wherever applicable. No difference in any way.



I think the thread and your summary has done well at addressing my original confusion about the usage of "deber de" for "obligations/suggestions" vs suppositions .

--------
Your last sentence brings to my mind some new questions, though, which might be better in a new thread.  But here goes.

My attempts at translation... (I'm not sure about the placement of "lo"):


Lo debías haber hecho.  >  You should have done it     (missed opportunity)

Debías hacer.  >   not proper grammar, though as I understand, used quite a bit anyway, in some areas in place of  "Deberías hacerlo".

Lo debiste haber hecho.  >  You should have done it.   (stressing the missed opportunity, with a touch of "I told you so", as we might say in English)

Debiste hacerlo.   >  You should have done it.    (Stressing more the duty and obligation the person had to do it.)


Debiste de hacer mucho >  You must have been doing it a lot.

Debiste de haber hecho mucho.  >  You must have done it a lot.

Has debido de sufrir mucho > ?  

Lo hubieras hecho.    >  You should have done it.   (softening the "should"-- less likely to cause offense I guess.)


----------



## zeppo

inib said:


> Right.  That's what I was getting at (if the translation is to be "you must *have* read"). And forgive me for repeating myself and what you've just said, but in a long thread ideas get lost: there's no doubt in my mind that in your 50 books example, the "de" is wrong and we are not talking about a supposition.



Well, I actually found the source about suppositions in Spanish with and without using haber :


_No debiste de firmar nada._ >  You must not have signed anything.
This is at spanish.about.com

I  pulled the sentence from this article when I created the flashcard that I use to test my knowledge of this verb.  I just remembered where I had noted my sources .  The other things I was reminded of was that I had asked this question before on Word Reference, and a spanish speaker (named "welder") confirmed that :

   No debes de haber firmado nada. = No debiste de firmar nada  > You must not have signed anything. (as a supposition)

But I had made the mistake of using "debes de leer" instead of "debiste de leer" -- my error that got me off track.  Sorry about the confusion on that point.


----------



## inib

I see your confusion, Zeppo. In Spanish, a reference to the past can be expressed by putting "deber" in the past (= debiste) or by using the perfect infinitive (=haber leído), but we don't have the first option in English, seeing as_ must _has no past.
And just to show how difficult it is to get a translation to reflect the intended meaning, I, personally, would not say "You must not have signed anything" as a supposition. I would say "You can't have signed anything", but from what I've read here on WR this usage varies.


----------



## ChemaSaltasebes

If any doubt, *follow the examples of ilya in #37*.

If you do so,


zeppo said:


> _No debiste de firmar nada._ > You must not have signed anything.


you will understand the previous sentence as "(I believe) *you did probably not sign anything* (even if you do not remember!)". The use of "must" as translation, although correct, might be facilitating some confusion here.
Without "de", "No debiste firmar nada", means you shouldn't have signed anything (you did sign but you should not have done it).
With "de" it is a supposition. Even if you use "must", you must understand this as "probably", "I guess"... *you did probably not sign anything.*

The same here,


zeppo said:


> Has debido de sufrir mucho > ?


Correct grammar, meaning "you have probably suffered a lot".
*"Debes sufrir" = you must suffer (I want you to suffer / I think you deserve to suffer).
"Debes de sufrir" = you must be suffering (you are probably suffering).*



zeppo said:


> Debías hacer. >  not proper grammar


Again, this one is *correct*. Check ilya's #37 out once more.
Por ejemplo, "Debías hacer tu tarea pero no la hiciste"; you had to do your task but you did not do it.
Ed.Add:
"Debías *de* hacer" can also be correct, as in "Debías de hacer mucho por ella", meaning "you were probably doing a lot for her" ("you did probably help her a lot").


----------



## zeppo

ChemaSaltasebes said:


> Again, this one is *correct*. Check ilya's #37 out once more.
> Por ejemplo, "Debías hacer tu tarea pero no la hiciste"; you had to do your task but you did not do it.



It is the use of the imperfect tense of deber + infinitive which I have read is improper grammar (while the use of the preterite of deber + infinitive is ok).


inib said:


> I see your confusion, Zeppo. In Spanish, a reference to the past can be expressed by putting "deber" in the past (= debiste) or by using the perfect infinitive (=haber leído), but we don't have the first option in English, seeing as_ must _has no past.
> And just to show how difficult it is to get a translation to reflect the intended meaning, I, personally, would not say "You must not have signed anything" as a supposition. I would say "You can't have signed anything", but from what I've read here on WR this usage varies.



"can't have signed anything" in the supposition use you describe is a British English way of speaking that would be seldom used in America (where we would use "must" to mean the same thing).  To us, we would understand it as a supposition, but to our ears "cant have signed" would sound British.


----------



## ChemaSaltasebes

zeppo said:


> It is the use of the imperfect tense of deber + infinitive which I have read is improper grammar (while the use of the preterite of deber + infinitive is ok).


I understand. 
Debías + infinitive does sound correct though, but I may be missing some rule against it. It is true anyhow that it does sound more natural to say "Deberías haber hecho tu tarea" than "Debías hacer tu tarea", both with almost the same meaning (the use of "deberías" is somehow more polite). But it definitely sounds correct anyway. Wish you could find a reference to that rule. It is never late to learn something new!


----------



## Amapolas

zeppo said:


> It is the use of the imperfect tense of deber + infinitive which I have read is improper grammar (while the use of the preterite of deber + infinitive is ok).


But there's a distinction here. 
The imperfect + infinitive is wrong if it is used to replace the conditional + infinitive. In other words, many people say 'Debías comer más; estás muy delgada'  for 'Deberías comer más'. 

However, look again at the example Chema provided: 'Debías hacer tu tarea pero no la hiciste.'  In this case, the meaning is that you were supposed to, you had to, you had teh obligation.


----------



## ChemaSaltasebes

Amapolas said:


> In other words, many people say 'Debías comer más; estás muy delgada'  for 'Deberías comer más'.


Good point! It is most probably that improper use of "debías" plus infinitive what zeppo is thinking about!


----------



## zeppo

ChemaSaltasebes said:


> Again, this one is *correct*. Check ilya's #37 out once more.
> Por ejemplo, "Debías hacer tu tarea pero no la hiciste"; you had to do your task but you did not do it.



It is the use of the imperfect tense of deber + infinitive which I had read is not used, and I may have misinterpreted it to mean that it is improper grammar.  Perhaps what was meant is that it is just uncommon .   The source I used is a book called "Breaking Out Of Beginning Spanish" by Joseph J Keenan, page 160.  He discusses the use of past tense with deber.  As an example, he discusses ways of saying "You should have gone", first with "Debías haber ido", "Debiste haber ido", and "Debiste ir ".  Then he says:

     "The fourth combination-- imperfect plus infinitive, or debías ir -- is not used, so forget about it."

What do you think?


----------



## Amapolas

'Debías ir' might be used in the sense of 'Tenías que ir' (as in, Debías ir y te olvidaste.).
It wouldn't be my first choice, but I wouldn't rule it out as wrong. Let's see what the others have to say.


----------



## ChemaSaltasebes

zeppo said:


> What do you think?





zeppo said:


> he discusses ways of saying "You should have gone"


Exactly what Amapolas did say...


Amapolas said:


> In other words, many people say 'Debías comer más; estás muy delgada'  for 'Deberías comer más'.



Ed.Add: In this case, "debías ir"  when meaning "deberías haber ido" 



Amapolas said:


> Debías ir'  might be used in the sense of 'Tenías que ir' (as in, Debías ir y te olvidaste ).


----------

