Subjunctive in both phrases....

Subjunctive in both phrases....
 

The English sentence: I would not like other people to hear me.

My translation: No quisiera que otra gente me escucha.

The book's answer: No quisiera que otra gente me oyera.

Now, we don't need to rehash the "escuchar" vs. "oír" discussion (I assume that the book's answer would be equivalent to "No quisiera que otra gente me escuche.")

My question is about the use of the subjunctive in BOTH phrases in this sentence. I get the first ("quisiera"), but not the second (oyera/escuche).

Thanks for any explanation you can offer.

No quiero que otra gente me oiga
No quisiera que otra gente me oyera.

the whole sentence is turned into past.

No quisiera que la gente me oiga.

is acceptable (see "Nueva Gramática ...") but it forces to make sense why it has two time settings

About the verb:

No quisiera que la gente oyera esta voz chillona que tengo.
No quisiera que la gente me oyera hablarle a esa persona.
No quisiera que la gente me escuchara cuando le digo que lo nuestro ha terminado.
No quisiera que la gente me escuchara hablando mál de él.

That's odd, because I understand the second subjunctive more than the first one, where I would expect a conditional. :thinking:

:):):)

In "No quiero que XYZ" the XYZ is hypothetical. If it had happened, or were certain to happen, the sentence would be pretty pointless.

My question is not about the use of present vs. past (I get that part ... if it were indicative, it should have been "me escuchó..."), but about indicative vs. subjunctive. ???

The section in the book was about using querer, poder, or deber to make polite requests, so it was assumed that the "querer" would be subjunctive.

That was my question. WHY is it "escuchara" (WHY is it subjunctive?)

I thought that subjunctive would be used only in dependent clauses. How can both clauses in a sentence be dependent....?

It isn't in English? :eek:

So everything that isn't English should be the subjunctive???

What I meant is to ask if in English " I would not like other people to hear me." is it in subjuntive?

Then, why should it be otherwise in Spanish?

I am sorry for being thick/sick. :) (I have lisp)

I know, that's why I wrote that. Turning into the past is a formality that has to do with grammar because the meaning of both sentences stays "now and into the future":

No quiero que la gente me oiga (now and into the future)
No quisiera que la gente me oyera (now and into the future / turned both verbs into past)
No quería que la gente me oyera (past event)

I thought that "to hear" in English is the infinitive. I never ever recognize subjunctive in English because it is never taught to the general population, and it doesn't have a unique conjugation. I am completely incapable of seeing subjunctive in English and applying it to when subjunctive is used in Spanish. Remember how thick-headed I am by nature.

I'm slowly (very slowly) getting there.... SOOOooo, you're saying that there is no "dependent" clause vs. "main" clause? And the oír/escuchar would be subjunctive whether the querer is or isn't........?

No problem. You'll get there. :)

The verb in the secondary clause is subjunctive because the main verb is one of volition. Using quisiera as a main verb is considered a more polite sounding way to say "I'd like." By casting it in the subjunctive, you leave some possibility open that what you'd like isn't available or offered. You could, of course, use querría instead. Perhaps it would then be more clear why the subjunctive is used in the secondary clause. The imperfect subjunctive was used because a conditional appeared in the main clause.

Sooooo ... the reasons why the subjunctive is used in the first phrase and in the second phrase are rather independent (first phrase subjunctive used for politeness, second phrase subjunctive used for uncertainty), therefore there does not need to be a verb in the indicative in this sentence? THAT makes sense.....

Correct. If the main verb, after converting the "polite" form into its conditional mood "equivalent," requires the subjunctive, the verb in the secondary clause must be cast in the imperfect subjunctive.

When Rusty explains, even I understand. :)

That's for sure! Thanks, both of you!

"Quisiera" for politeness (and setting temporal aspect)
"oyera/escuchara" because as a secondary clause it should follow the main clause temporal aspect.

Sometimes subjunctive conjugation has an indicative function:

Lo hubiera comprado si no lo hubiese pensado mejor primero.

That's why Perikles found a bit odd that you had doubts about the subordinate clause and not the main one.

Okay - that makes sense (mostly), too. I'm getting there. Slowly but surely. Paso a paso....

Because, in English, it is a conditional and an infinitve.