Return to Question

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

 

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

 

• Inscribase Gratis: -some url- y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here and the same text I found online in a few places here.

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment.

Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules.

So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement (how excellent that you may have won) or past conditional (you could have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like:

Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado.

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

• Inscribase Gratis: -some url- y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here and the same text I found online in a few places here.

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment.

Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules.

So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement (how excellent that you may have won) or past conditional (you could have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like:

Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado.

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

Inscribase Gratis: -some url- y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part:

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here and the same text I found online a few places here.

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment.

Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules.

So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement or past conditional (you could have won / how excellent that you may have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like:

Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado.

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

• Inscribase Gratis: -some url- y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here and the same text I found online in a few places here.

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment.

Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules.

So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement (how excellent that you may have won) or past conditional (you could have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like:

Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado.

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

• Inscribase Gratis: www.veaclub.com.pe y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here

  and

The same text I found online a few places here

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment. Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules. So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement or past conditional (you could have won / how excellent that you may have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like: "Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado".

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?

I have a receipt from a national grocery store chain in Peru which says:

Estimado cliente:

Ud. hubiese ganado 1 opcion(es) para los fabulosos Sorteos de VEACLUB

Inscribase Gratis: -some url- y dicte su DNI en caja cada vez que compre en plazaVea.

I am interested in the "Ud. hubiese ganado" part.

A crumpled photo of the relevant part:

A crumpled photo of the relevant part here and the same text I found online a few places here.

The key thing for me is the lack of an explicit 'si' or any other conditional or subjunctive inducing fragment. 

Native speakers do not seem to think it is incorrect, but I am unable to justify it with my understanding of the rules. 

So I am wondering if its very use signifies an implicit excitement or past conditional (you could have won / how excellent that you may have won). To me, it does sound nicer than something more concrete like:

Ud. puede/podría/pudiera haber ganado.

As written, is this a valid way of saying that I may have / could have won something or does it just kind of sound nice and give that idea without actually being grammatically correct?