Habría que decir

[bobjenkins]

O más bien habría que decir

Hola, ¿cómo traducirías la frase?

Or better yet I would say.

No entiendo la construcción de "haber que + infinitivo"

[poli]

Habría que decir=You would have to say

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

I agree with Poli, and "O más bien habría que decir" in an impersonal way:

- Or one should rather/better say...
- Or it should be rather/better said/mentioned that...


Hay que + infinitive is a standard construction to say that something should be done.

[chileno]

Originally Posted by AngelicaDeAlquezar

I agree with Poli, and "O más bien habría que decir" in an impersonal way:

- Or one should rather/better say...
- Or it should be rather/better said/mentioned that...


Hay que + infinitive is a standard construction to say that something should be done.

Should have to say?
Should say?

[bobjenkins]

gracias

Ya yo he visto..

tener que
haber de
hay que

[CrOtALiTo]

Originally Posted by bobjenkins

O más bien habría que decir

Hola, ¿cómo traducirías la frase?

Or better yet I would say.

No entiendo la construcción de "haber que + infinitivo"

I'm not very sure, but I believe that my example can be of helpful for you.

How I should to say it.

Like Poli's example is more correct in all the examples gave here.

[xchic]

Originally Posted by bobjenkins

O más bien habría que decir

Hola, ¿cómo traducirías la frase?

Or better yet I would say.

No entiendo la construcción de "haber que + infinitivo"

I tend to think of 'hay que + infinitive' as meaning 'one should ...............'

[bobjenkins]

Originally Posted by xchic

I tend to think of 'hay que + infinitive' as meaning 'one should ...............'

De mi leyendo, que está limitada, noto que "tener que" es usado lo más, entonces "hay que", casi nunca vi "haber de" (una vez)

[irmamar]

Originally Posted by bobjenkins

De mi leyendo, que está limitada, noto que "tener que" es usado lo más, entonces "hay que", casi nunca vi "haber de" (una vez)

La diferencia entre "haber de" y "haber que" es que la segunda es impersonal, pero la primera no:

Hay que estudiar.
Hay de estudiar.

Has de estudiar.
Has que estudiar.

[laepelba]

Originally Posted by irmamar

La diferencia entre "haber de" y "haber que" es que la segunda es impersonal, pero la primera no:

Hay que estudiar.
Hay de estudiar.

Has de estudiar.
Has que estudiar.

I'm currently going back through some threads that I've marked to re-read (had a busy week, not much time to go through new threads....)

I find this thread very interesting. (Thanks, Bob!) I have just one quick question in regards to this final post by Irmamar.... Well, actually more a clarification....

When you say that "haber que" is used in an impersonal sense, then are you saying that it is ALWAYS conjugated as "hay que"?

Thus, when you say that "haber de" is not used in an impersonal sense, then you are saying that "haber" should be translated in regard to the person/thing that ought to be doing what ought to be done? Así:
"Has de estudiar" = You should study.
"He de estudiar" = I should study.
"Ha de estudiar" = He/she/it should study.

???

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by laepelba

When you say that "haber que" is used in an impersonal sense, then are you saying that it is ALWAYS conjugated as "hay que"?

Thus, when you say that "haber de" is not used in an impersonal sense, then you are saying that "haber" should be translated in regard to the person/thing that ought to be doing what ought to be done? Así:
"Has de estudiar" = You should study.
"He de estudiar" = I should study.
"Ha de estudiar" = He/she/it should study.

???

For what it's worth, I think you are correct. Instead of "you should study" isn't the exact literal "you have to study" more correct? The "should" is not strong enough.