Hot answers tagged conditional
This bears a direct correspondence to the classic confusion between subjuntive and conditional, for hypothetical situations: Si pidieras ayuda, tus cosas marcharían mejor. (If you asked for help, things would go better) (Present Unreal Conditional) This is the correct form for the present case (subjuntive/conditional). It would be clearly wrong to ...
A good general pattern that you'd probably want to use, might be: Sería bueno si pudieras Y. => It would be great, if you could Y. ...where Y is the requested action. (Note: In some cases, the Sería bueno could come after the si clause, but both are equivalent.) Examples: Sería bueno si pudieras ir a la tienda despues del trabajo. => If you ...
They are different. Podría ser is could be, whereas sería is would be: Si fuera rico, podría comer ostras a diario = If I were rich, I could eat oysters every day. Si fuera rico, comería ostras a diario = If I were rich, I would eat oysters every day.
Si (yo/él/usted) hubiera sido rico, hubiera/habría comprado un carro. This means that if you would have been rich at that time you would have bought the car. This can imply that the situation might have changed. For example you may no longer interested in buying the car. But if at that time the condition would have been true you would have done it. The ...
El problema es el subjuntivo. Por lo general, la respuesta correcta es tal y como señala Alenanno: "habría". Y lo correcto (por lo general) es "habría" pues debemos tener en cuenta que una frase con todos los verbos en modo subjuntivo es una frase incompleta (a menos que se pueda completar tácitamente por el contexto) que deja al interlocutor esperando que ...
The question "Who built Stonehenge?" refers to something that is fixed in the past. If we stick to that fact, in spanish the same question would be "¿Quién construyó Stonehenge?" (singular) or "¿Quiénes construyeron Stonehenge?" (plural). Simple past. Now if you're debating about alternative outcomes of events that would have caused Stonehenge to not being ...
I would translate the expression to Si (petición), sería grandioso. or Si (petición), sería fantástico.
I'd say: Si lo hubieran anotado, después no les habría costado tanto recordarlo. But, although it seems weird to me, according to my Spanish grammar book, in the second one you can use: condicional simple, pretérito imperfecto, condicional compuesto (indicativo) and pluscuamperfecto.
No. Ambas significan lo mismo. Y ambas frases son correctas. Otra opción, igualmente válida, es Me sorprendería que mis padres dijesen que no. o bien Me sorprendería si mis padres dijesen que no.
In spanish the first tends to be used when the speaker you are reffering is decided to do it, while the second one is conditioned and he/she won't do it due to something. Maybe with the verb comprar in this example we cannot apply the general rule from Presente to Pretérito Imperfecto del indicativo except if we specify when because the verb itself only ...
First things first: By "pero" you mean "perro" , am i right?. :-) 1) Means he was doing that while talking. Sound to me like: Dijo que estaba comprando... (He/she said he was buying the dog). At the same moment of talking. 2) Means that he/she would buy the dog in the future from the moment of the conversation, but... we still don't know if he really did ...
The difference is quite subtle. In the first case, you are pretty confident that the person will do as she said, while in the second case you are not so confident. The conditional always expresses a possibility and not a certainty. María dijo que compraba el perro --> María said that she was buying the dog and you have no reason to believe that she did not ...
Neither of them is correct. For this construction you need the subjunctive in its present form: Cuando estas facturas estén pagadas, llámame. Cuando estas facturas se paguen, llámame.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible