no le habisan
 

Anyone know what this girl is trying to say? any errors in her writing?

"he estado muy nostalgica por que no le habisan de nada a mi mama y no veo cercana la posibilidad de tenerlos aqui ya"
"i've been very nostalgic because _______ nothing of my mother and i don't see a close possibllity that they have it here now.

He estado muy nostálgica porque no le avisan de nada a mi mamá y no veo ni cercana la posibilidad de tenerlos aquí ya.
= I've been very nostalgic because they don't tell my mother anything and I don't see even a close possibility of having them here now.

see thats what i mean about spanish. people don't use the words that they should use.

instead of saying "of having them here now", why couldn't she have simply said "no veo ninguna posibilidad que estarán aqui ya."

it doesn't help that she can't even spell well. she appears to be writing it like she is talking it.

thanks Rusty. did she make any errors?

Translations aren't always given word-for-word (I take some liberties), and there is more than one way to say things.
You'll encounter a lot of people who don't spell very well. That's just a fact of life. Spelling errors (accent omission included) were the only errors.
I added the word ni, but it doesn't really need to be there.

Rusty let me ask you something, could she have used my alternative? or would my alternative be saying something different?

Your alternative makes the chance (opportunity) even more remote.
I wouldn't use the future tense in your alternative. That also changes the sentence.
Instead, I would use the subjunctive mood (since the statement is saying something contrary to fact). Use either the present or the imperfect subjunctive - estén or estuvieran.
The preposition de needs to follow posibilidad.

may i ask why you suggest using the imperfect in my alternative? none of this is about something that ocurred in the distant past? and i think the fact that my alternative making the possibility more remote falls right in line w/ her not seeing any possibility of her mother being there. no?


in fact i think the word that i should have used was estuvieren.

I am sorry for interrupting. I just want to say, like Rusty already mentioned, that there are many way to say the *same* thing in Spanish and *English*.

Estuvieran, estuviesen o estuvieren todas serían correctas. Estuvieran, es la mas común ahora.

I've mentioned on several occasions lately that the future subjunctive isn't used in normal conversation by anyone. Do not use it.

Estuvieran and estuviesen are identical in meaning. There are two ways to use the imperfect subjunctive. The latter is used more in Spain and in literary works.

I didn't suggest that you use the imperfect subjunctive. I said that either the present or the imperfect subjunctive could be used. What I didn't say, because I assumed you may already know it, was that it depends on perceived time. If you're thinking the action is in the present or the future, use the present subjunctive estén.

Here is a very informative link about the subjunctive.

I beg to differ .

I live in Las Vegas, and lived also for about 12 years in Los Angeles. There are many Mexicans, Central Americans and South Americans that still use those forms. I concur with you it should not be used, but everyone needs to know of those because they are still in use, by large amount of people.

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?

I doubt he eats his shoe.
= Dudo que él coma su zapato.
I doubt he'll eat his shoe.
= Dudo que él coma su zapato.
I doubt he ate his shoe.
= Dudo que él comiera su zapato.

You use the present subjunctive in the first and second cases, and the imperfect subjunctive in the third case.

Ah, gracias. La [pagina Web?] estoy usando no dices sobre "imerfect subjunctive".

Hmm.. sencence structure... Is it okay to insert the "estoy usando" as a ... "Phrase that describes the subject" (Did I mention my knowlege of gramar terms is lacking? ;)). Or should it be ordered like "I am using a website that ..." ?

Anyway, thanks. Either the study site I'm at doesn't talk about that tense/mood, or it's under a header called something else and I've yet to find it. Is it conjugated the same way as the imperfect tense?

Speaking of past subjunctive;

Penso que yo comé mayonesa mal con mi almuerzo. Ugh. :(

You can see its conjugation here, or I can point you in the right direction in your studies (provide me details via PM if you'd like). To find the conjugation here, look in the upper left-hand corner of this page. Under the Tomísimo logo is a text box that contains 'Search...'. If you type in a verb and select 'Conjugations' in the pull-down menu to the right of the input box, the verb conjugation page will appear. Look for block number 7 (Imperfecto de Subjuntivo). Notice there are two different ways to conjugate that tense.

Nifty. So...
Is that correct? Or (per the other thread) correcter? :)

The subjunctive is not needed in this sentence (there is no reason to use the subjunctive mood).
You should use creer instead of pensar (whose 1st-person construction is pienso, by the way).

You can say "Creo haber comido mayonesa mala ...," (I think (believe) I've eaten bad mayonnaise ...) or you can say "Creo que comí mayonesa mala ..." (I think (believe) I ate bad mayonnaise ...).

It looks like you found the imperfect subjunctive (comiese/comiera) just fine. If you want to see it in action, negate the verb to create doubt:
No creo que él comiera/comiese mayonesa mala ...
(This is what your doctor says to the nurse after they send you home from the emergency room when you're feeling better.)

Ah, so since there's not doubt that I did the action (rather, doubt that the action is the culprit) then I don't need the subjunctive.

¿Que es la diferencia entré 'Pensar' y 'Creer'? Yo conozco que 'Pensar' es 'Think' y 'Creer' es 'Believe', pero no están los mismos?

When you're thinking (doing the reasoning, planning), you use pensar. You use creer when you're expressing an opinion.

The subjunctive is used in a number of different circumstances, doubt being one of them.