Ejercicio subjuntivo 3-6

[laepelba]

This exercise consists of a list of verbs and a paragraph with fill-in-the-blanks. Every single mistake I made was between indicative/subjunctive or imperfect/preterit (and I know that I have an ongoing discussion posted earlier today about the imperfect and preterit). Here are the ones that I don't really understand. (I did not include all of the fill-in-the-blanks, only the ones about which I have questions.)

3) Yo me puse furioso cuando supe cómo, antes de solicitarme una lista de mis publicaciones y sin pedirme explicaciones, Susana se hubiera tomado el trabajo de investigarme a mis espaldas.

My question: I don't understand why this is subjunctive. I originally wrote "había". This chapter (the first in this book) is SOLELY about subordinate noun clauses that begin with "que", and I don't see that here, so I wasn't even looking for a reason to use the subjunctive. What is the reason?

4) Me enfadó que me hubiera denunciado ante los administradores, diciendo que yo había falsificado mi currículum vitae.

My question: As I am typing this, I'm also reading some things in the other thread that might help me understand this. I originally wrote "enfadaba". But now I wonder if it's supposed to be "enfadó" because "enfadar" has some sort of meaning like "enojarse" in that it is about becoming angry, and not simply about being angry.....??

7) Yo dudaba que los jefes me respaldaran porque ella les había declarado que sus sospechas eran ciertas.

My question: Same as in #4. I originally wrote "dudó", but the book has "dudaba". I would have thought that either both #4 and #7 would be preterit or both would be imperfect for the same reason. What is the difference between them?

14) En efecto, las preguntas eran ataques basados en mentiras y motivados por su rencor contra mí.

My question: Why not "fueron"? Uyyy ... I'm getting more wrong with the preterit and imperfect than I did with the subjunctive.......

Thank you for any suggestions you can give me..........

[wrholt]

3. Me puse furioso describes an emotional state or a change of emotional state: this is a common situation for using subjunctive when describing the cause.

4. You wrote: But now I wonder if it's supposed to be "enfadó" because "enfadar" has some sort of meaning like "enojarse" in that it is about becoming angry, and not simply about being angry.....??": that's it exactly, they both have the sense of becoming/causing anger.

7. Dudar isn't inherently instantaneous, and dudó would suggest that the doubting has ended in some way.

14. Ser also isn't inherently instantaneous, and fueron would suggest that the state of being was limited to some specific period of time in some way.

[laepelba]

Originally Posted by wrholt

3. Me puse furioso describes an emotional state or a change of emotional state: this is a common situation for using subjunctive when describing the cause.

Thank you! I understand everything you said except for #3....

Without a "que", how was I supposed to know that? Can it be any random linking word? I have to look for a main clause and a subordinate clause connected by ... anything ... and use the same rules for determining subjunctive?

[aleCcowaN]

You are completely right about #3. Even that "como" seems to be wrong as the sentence is pretty artificial :

Yo me puse furioso cuando supe que, antes de solicitarme una lista de mis publicaciones y sin pedirme explicaciones, Susana se había tomado el trabajo de investigarme a mis espaldas.

The problem here is just (known information vs new information). To us, all the content is new information. We have no previous knowledge of she having done a full research -we don't even know it is a "she" and she's called Susana-.

But with known information the sentence would have probably been other one:

Me puso furioso que Susana se hubiera tomado el trabajo de investigarme a mis espaldas en lugar de solicitarme una lista de mis publicaciones y pedirme explicaciones.

#4 - "enfadarse", is to be taken as a short action there. "Estar enfadado" can last longer.

#7 - Both are OK, it depends on how the story goes on.

#14 - The "underlying lies and the attacks" ---> "fueron" if you only want to say what they were; "eran" if you want to say what they were and state that those poisoned questions arose one by one and they gave the tone to all what happened that moment, that day, those times, etc.

[wrholt]

Originally Posted by laepelba

Thank you! I understand everything you said except for #3....

Without a "que", how was I supposed to know that? Can it be any random linking word? I have to look for a main clause and a subordinate clause connected by ... anything ... and use the same rules for determining subjunctive?

Ah, I see your point!

It seems not to be particularly fair on the part of the author of the chapter and the exercise to including this item when every example in the chapter presents examples that link the main and subordinate clauses uses "que" to connect them.

And yes, "que" is not the only way that Spanish connects main clauses and subordinate clauses, and #3 is particularly complex: the linking phrase is "cuando supe cómo", with a lot of extra information before getting to the subordinate phrase "Susana hubiera tomado..."

Edit: and I'm glad Alec thinks this one is a bit odd.

[laepelba]

As I continue to work through the book, I am finding that this is not the only shortcoming that I see ... I have to admit that their instruction is lacking (in my humble opinion) and leaving me wanting to find some other way to research/learn the subjunctive.....