Oh, really? I was certain that you had written it like that on purpose. ("habÃ*as escrito" o "hubiste escrito"....)

Is hubiese escrito:)

Did you want to mean that?

When you are studying verbs, you're studying "conjugación verbal", all the forms a verb is able to show depending on some categories (tiempo, persona, número, modo, aspecto, etc.). Verbal compound forms belong to that "conjugación", and they are formed with "haber".

"PerÃ*frasis verbales" are two verbs together working as a unity. One of the verbs is conjugated, the other is a non-personal form (infinitivo, gerundio o participio), with a link (preposition, conjunction) or not. For instance: tener que hacer (tengo que hacer, tienes que hacer, etc.), deber salir (debo salir, debes salir, etc.), estar + haciendo (estoy haciendo, estás haciendo, etc.). Verbal compound forms are also "perÃ*frasis verbales" (he comido, has hecho, etc.). But when you study those "perÃ*frasis" you have already studied conjugation, so you will learn that verbal compound forms are a kind of perÃ*frasis and you don't need to learn them, because you already know them. There are a large quantity of "perÃ*frasis" divided into some types, but you can use many verbs in a non-personal form, while the conjugated ones are not so many (estar, haber, tener que, ir a, andar, seguir, dejar, ser, etc.).

Similary, passive voice is also a "perÃ*frasis verbal", but you won't study passive voice with "perÃ*frasis", since it deserves a separate lesson (like verbal compound forms). When you study "perÃ*frasis", you'll be told that passive voice is a special kind of perÃ*frasis, but you'll already know it. ;)

In English I have studied continuous forms of verbs while I was studying another tenses, but I have never done that when studying Spanish. I guess the reason is that we don't have a "presente continuo" or a "pasado continuo" (and when I hear those terms, I'm sure that they are anglicisms), we use that sort of "perÃ*frasis" instead. Well, they are grammar matters. :)

Irma:

I think this explanation will satisfy Lou Ann's mathematical mind perfectly.

Sure? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Okay, you two, sometimes it scares me when people I've never met know me so well. LOL!! Thanks for that in depth explanation, Irma. I still don't like it ... but can live with it. :)

I'm sure you'll be able to understand it. I've been told that I have a logical mind, too logical even. But grammar and the way of learning it is not a problem for me. ;) :D

Oh, I KNOW you have a logical mind. That is why I'm always SO glad when you jump in with answers to my nit picky grammar questions. In fact, I typically ask them with you in mind. :) It's not that I don't understand. I just don't like it. I think I need to go work on some Algebra.... ;)

Why don't you like it? It's beautiful like a bright white flower in a green field (algebra is not like this, by the way). :D

My dislike is just because I don't see such a huge difference between "estar + gerundio" and "haber + participio".

Given that I DO understand ALL of these explanations, and that I CAN accept them, I will choose to live with my "dislike" of this one tiny point, because I KNOW that it will NOT hamper my ability to learn to speak Spanish. :) Thanks for all of your contributions!!