plaidchuck Diglot Groupie United States facebook.com/plaidchRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5304 days ago 71 posts - 93 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish
| Message 1 of 5 27 June 2010 at 12:45am | IP Logged |
Hello all,
I posted this question on Wordreference and received semi-helpful answers, but I thought I'd appeal to the native/very fluent Spanish speakers here.
I am having trouble with understanding some of the slight nuances with certain subjunctive clauses and I haven't been able to find material that could explain them to me. For example, what would be the difference between:
"No diría que la comida hubiera estado deliciosa" and "No diría que la comida estuviera deliciosa"
Could they both be understood as "I wouldn't say the food was delicious"? Or would the use of haber in the first phrase imply it hadn't been delicious up to that point in the past, then something about it changed? (note: The first sentence was taken from Assimil's Using Spanish which is based off Spanish from Spain so I think in this case they are using the haber form as simply the preterit tense which they tend to do in Spain)
Also these two phrases for example:
"Le prohibieron al niño que coma helado" and "Le prohibieron al niño que hablara" Certain grammars oversimplify things and say the subjunctive clause must be in the imperfect if the main clause is in the preterit/imperfect/conditional but I know there is no such rule set in stone.
In this case does the first phrase imply they didn't allow him to eat ice cream, and that fact continues into the present? The second sentence seems to follow the usual formula, implying that the child wasn't permitted to speak at a certain time in the past.
Thanks to all in advance.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5429 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish
| Message 2 of 5 27 June 2010 at 6:59am | IP Logged |
If I may hazard an interpretation, I think the "...hubiera estado deliciosa" would be more properly translated as "had been delicious".
For the second set of phrases, I think your interpretation is essentially correct. The "...coma helado" is looking to the future. I've seen this quite often. The "...que hablara" refers to a past event.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
plaidchuck Diglot Groupie United States facebook.com/plaidchRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5304 days ago 71 posts - 93 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish
| Message 3 of 5 27 June 2010 at 7:15am | IP Logged |
s_allard wrote:
If I may hazard an interpretation, I think the "...hubiera estado deliciosa" would be more properly translated as "had been delicious".
For the second set of phrases, I think your interpretation is essentially correct. The "...coma helado" is looking to the future. I've seen this quite often. The "...que hablara" refers to a past event. |
|
|
These are generally the same conclusions as mine. As a further note, I went back through my materials and Unit 49 of the FSI Basic covered this subject in some detail.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
daristani Senior Member United States Joined 7143 days ago 752 posts - 1661 votes Studies: Uzbek
| Message 4 of 5 28 June 2010 at 4:29am | IP Logged |
Whether it would meet your needs I can't say, but you might take a look at this publication, with exercises and attached key, on the Spanish subjunctive:
"A Comprehensive Guide to the Subjunctive in Spanish"
which can be downloaded at
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED357602.pdf
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
rasputin Triglot Newbie United StatesRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5966 days ago 21 posts - 24 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, French Studies: German, Italian, Zulu
| Message 5 of 5 28 June 2010 at 6:50am | IP Logged |
My two cents:
"Hubiera" in the first sentence, does indeed imply, as you intuit, that the food had (always, used to have) been good, but then something changed.
Edited by rasputin on 28 June 2010 at 6:51am
1 person has voted this message useful
|