Quote:
Originally Posted by LearningSpanish
Would it be true to say that the conditional tense may also sometimes be replaced by the past subjuntive, and can often be translated as 'would'?
Or is there a better way to put it? or some specific grammar rule governing this use?
I'm talking about examples like ...
¡Nadie lo creyera!
Nobody would believe it.
Temíamos todos que se precipitara al río.
We all feared that he would fall into the river.
and this one where the governing verb isn't in a past tense
No es sorpresa que Breeanna viniera aquí.
It's no surprise that Breeanna would come here.
Also would these sentences work just as well and be gramatically correct using the conditional?
Thanks in advance for any insight or suggestions.
|
It's a matter of case by case.
"¡Nadie lo creyera!" is unusual in actual language in present or future situation, whether it works as a conditional or not. Talking about past contexts it can be used with a basic meaning of "nobody believed it!" where subjunctive mood reinforces the "didn't happened" component.
Anyway, actual speakers seldom choose these ways unless there's a need in the speech to defocus that part, as in:
Les dijo que le habían asaltado unos gitanos, y como nadie le creyera, cambió su versión por una que los sustituía por unos cazadores furtivos vestidos de manera inusual.
Temíamos todos que se precipitara al río.
(Wouldn't it be "We all feared that he might/could/would fall in the river", with might or could for an involuntary fall, and would for an intentional action? Spanish doesn't distinguish by merely using subjunctive if context doesn't help)
No es sorpresa que Breeanna viniera aquí
(It's no surprise that Breeana came here -?-. It clearly refers to an action in the past: Breeanna came indeed)