Are you talking about the future subjunctive, or about the two forms of the imperfect subjunctive? I use the two forms of the imperfect subjunctive, but have never heard anyone use the future subjunctive. I'm aware of it only because I read old literature.

The link I posted says the future subjunctive is dead in modern Spanish.
I googled "Spanish future subjunctive." I read what the first twenty web sites had to say about it. As far as the spoken form, they described it as nearly obsolete, infrequently used, dead, all but dead and rarely used. The written form appears in legal language, classical literature, poetry and some idiomatic expressions.

You can also google "futuro de subjuntivo" and read what the web sites say. All speak of its desuso. Its demise is evidenced by a blog entitled Salvemos el Futuro de Subjuntivo.
Said one of the respondants of the blog:
"El futuro de subjuntivo por mucho que pese a algunos ya no existe en nuestro idioma, es una pérdida de tiempo intentar defender lo que en la actualidad no tiene ningún uso práctico. Y si, en este post hay veces en que aún por encima está mal utilizado, cosa que es lógica porque como ya no se usa, la gente no sabe usarlo."

Are we speaking about the same thing? :)

I am not sure.

Now, you remember I have stated, several times, that I do not know grammar. So, what I am talking about and what I perceive to be of non usage from your knowledge and comments is:

Si fuera a Santiago seria muy feliz.

Si fuese a Santiago seria muy feliz.

Si fuere a Santiago seria muy feliz.

Que yo fuese a Santiago seria una utopia.

Que yo fuere a Santiago seria una utopia

Que yo fuera a Santiago seria una utopia.


I am aware I am using sería :-)

layman terms is best at this time. At least for me.

Do we have a forum for jokes? (clean)

The two in green are used all the time, and mean exactly the same thing. These are the two ways to write/speak the imperfective subjunctive. The one in violet is the future subjunctive. You'll find it in written form, but you won't hear it much in a normal conversation.

And what I have been saying is that I have encountered many people from Latin American countries stating stuff in violet color. (still)

I guess nobody informed them. :-)

My only guess is that they come from villages and old towns where even some written form of Castelian is still preserved, as they haven't had the "opportunity to advance" much in that aspect. :-)

Written form examples would be:

In chile and most "modern" hispanic world, although I do not know about Spain, the female name spelled here in the US, as seen in California, Ynez, it is spelled Ines.

Hernan.

I can certainly agree with you and echo the fact that what works in one place doesn't necessarily work in another! Adaptation is key.

Are we agreeing????? :eek:


Hernan :dancingman:


:lol:

Yes, future subjunctive is deemed "dead." However, there are some modern phrases that still use the form. For example, "sea como fuere" (Be that as it may).:thumbsup:

Yes, I mentioned that it still survives in classic literature, poetry, and idiomatic phrases. My concession with Chileno was a double play:
A donde fueres, haz lo que vieres.

Pero , yo soy muy tonto y ni me percaté. :whistling:

Ah, the subjenctive mood. Such a fun topic.
So, with subjunctive, you eliminate the need for words like "will" in phrases like "I doubt he will eat his shoe.", correct? And you're saying that, except for particular cases, you tend to not see the future tense with subjective moods either.

¡Yo dudo que el coma su zapato!
What seperates "I doubt he will eat his shoe." and "I doubt he ate his shoe."? Should you also include a phrase or word like ayer.? Or do I still have this subjunctive thing totally wrong?