Past tense of "deber" Spanish speakers seem to habitually use the imperfect tense for "deber" where English speakers would use the past tense, e.g.,
"Paul owed her his life" => "Pablo le debía la vida" instead of "Pablo le debió la vida"
"You guys must've figured something out" => "Debíais haber descubierto algo" instead of "Debisteis haber haber descubierto algo"
... and sometimes where English speakers would use the present tense, e.g., "But the Lord said he must go to Ninevah" => "Pero el Señor insistió en que debía ir a Nínive" instead of "Pero el Señor insistió en que debe ir a Nínive."
They also use the imperfect in situations that seem to call for a past-tense conditional ("should have"):
Si querías baile, debías haber recurrido a mí => If you wanted dancing, you should have come to me
I would have expected "Si querías baile, deberías haber recurrido a mí" (should have). Sometimes I do see "deberías haber" for "should have", and I can't see any pattern to why one is chosen instead of the other.
In some cases, the imperfect is used where the present-tense conditional seems clearly called for, e.g., "debias esperar hasta que llamara" for "you should wait until he calls." There's nothing past-tense-ish about that sentence.
"deberían" ('they should") in particular is used interchangeably with "debían" (literally "in the past they must"), and neither is used for past-tense "they should have".
Can someone explain how Spanish speakers conceptualize these tenses of "deber"? Does the choice of tense work the same way for "deber" as "owe" and "deber" as "must", or are they treated differently?
Hi,
I have just completed a test which included the above.
I answered: Oyes tu (sorry, can't get accents to work), which was marked wrong.
Another question was: ¿..................... la chimenea? Two answers were given: Enciendes and Enciendes tu. This was marked nearly right.
Are the answers with 'tu' (or any other personal pronoun) not acceptable in Spanish? Is the only way to ask a question in Spanish to raise the tone at the end?
Look forward to your reply.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Colin
Hola Inma,
Would "ocurrió" be an acceptable alternative here?
Saludos
John
This is very poorly worded. Oír means to hear, NOT can hear NOR is able to hear, so why have you asked can hear in the question?
Now I don't know whether to use poder (conjugated) + oír or oír because I don't know whether you are asking me can hear or hear.
In Kwiziq, there's a lesson on -ito etc and a lesson on -illo etc. I'm living in Ecuador and have traveled around Central and South America a bit, and I've heard both groups of suffixes used in what seems to be the exact same way. I guess I'm looking for a little clarity on whether they are 100% interchangeable.
Am I correct that team -ito and team -illo mean the same thing - they make a word diminutive, softer, affectionate - and that the real difference is just in local usage? I can use either group of suffixes, and not be wrong, but one group is just more common in certain areas than the other?
My apologies if you've answered this elsewhere. I reviewed the other questions, and I did not find an answer that makes me confident that my understanding is correct.
And thanks, in advance for your help.
Sending love, prayers and positive thoughts to all in Kwiziq land.
To all the teachers- thank you for continuing to be there for us on our language journeys. I hope you're all healthy and safe.
Clara :)
There seem be so many ways to say this in Spanish: "fuimos a dar un paseo" is one I hear a lot. "Hemos paseado" (or "hemos caminado") translates as "we have walked" rather than "went for,.". It's very confusing!
Spanish speakers seem to habitually use the imperfect tense for "deber" where English speakers would use the past tense, e.g.,
"Paul owed her his life" => "Pablo le debía la vida" instead of "Pablo le debió la vida"
"You guys must've figured something out" => "Debíais haber descubierto algo" instead of "Debisteis haber haber descubierto algo"
... and sometimes where English speakers would use the present tense, e.g., "But the Lord said he must go to Ninevah" => "Pero el Señor insistió en que debía ir a Nínive" instead of "Pero el Señor insistió en que debe ir a Nínive."
They also use the imperfect in situations that seem to call for a past-tense conditional ("should have"):
Si querías baile, debías haber recurrido a mí => If you wanted dancing, you should have come to me
I would have expected "Si querías baile, deberías haber recurrido a mí" (should have). Sometimes I do see "deberías haber" for "should have", and I can't see any pattern to why one is chosen instead of the other.
In some cases, the imperfect is used where the present-tense conditional seems clearly called for, e.g., "debias esperar hasta que llamara" for "you should wait until he calls." There's nothing past-tense-ish about that sentence.
"deberían" ('they should") in particular is used interchangeably with "debían" (literally "in the past they must"), and neither is used for past-tense "they should have".
Can someone explain how Spanish speakers conceptualize these tenses of "deber"? Does the choice of tense work the same way for "deber" as "owe" and "deber" as "must", or are they treated differently?
Hola,
Can we use these nuances as statements
Quisimos - 'we tried'
No Quise - 'I refused'
... with no further construction, embellishment added?
etc.
Gracias,
Shouldn't it be Quema calorías limpiando, not limpiado?
Hello!
When using phrases like, "The boy is still little." or "The girl is not little any more.", would one use a form of estar, or would a form or ser be used? Thank you for your help.
Susan
Find your Spanish level for FREE
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard
Find your Spanish level