Why subjunctive is not used here?
A little game for those learning Spanish and not fully confident about how to use the subjunctive. The aim is to try to explain why subjunctive is not used... quoting a rule from a book or Internet site to backup your explanation. I am going to write a few sentences, so it is fine if you want to tackle just one of them.
(1) Mi madre no cree que soy el jefe del equipo de fútbol
(2) Tengo mis dudas, pero probablemente tienes razón.
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota.
(4) Recuérdame que te debo 10 euros.
(5) ¿No recuerdas que te presté 10 euros?
(6) El médico me ha recomendado que necesito descansar.
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien.
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea.
Good luck!
14 Answers
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien. This one and #8 have me totally stumped... the only clue I can find is the verb alegrar and how it interacts with "saber", in this sentence the knowing makes me happy, rather than saying me alegro de que estés bien.", *you being well makes me happy... ¿Tiene algo que ver?
Infinitives and verbs in subjunctive are both virtual forms: they mention things, they don'are there just to aid other verbs to complete others declarations, but they don't declare anything themselves. We cannot know whether those actions are true or not, and often, not even whether the person believe them or not.
"Saber" is used if we can easily deduce who are we talking about. That "Me alegra que" gives us the clue with that "me", so we assume that "saber" refers to me: I know. However, you are not informing that you know something, but simply mentioning it to clarify what are you happy about. Imagine if someone said to you "Estoy bien" and then you answered "Me alegra..." and then you declared in indicative that the other person is well. Why on Earth would you want to inform that person that she is well, if she has just told you? It would sound so weird! You simply don't use subjunctive "Me alegra que...".
On the other hand, if you were happy that someone else knew about it, you wouldn't be able to use infinitive, like before, because having "me" as our only clue, we wouldn't know that you are referring to someone else. Here you use a subjunctive clause instead, which serves the same purpose, but it selects a new subject.
Anyway, after "saber" you can either declare what follows or not, but since all declarations are done according to what I think or believe or guess, I can declare that "you are well". "Saber" is still virtual, it is just like "the knowledge of...", but what follows something I communicated, regardless of the beginning of the sentence. This is a case of "nested" clauses, which not easy unless you have an intuitive grasp of the subjunctive and infinitive, which is not what most books aim at.
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota. In my mind "to know" or "to believe" sort of constitutes "fact" (although not always literally of course, but within the debate of whether to use subjunctive or indicative)... Is there more to this?
As you probably know, I only use one rule: if you declare (i.e. inform others about what you know, think, suspect, guess, imagine...) something, you use indicative. Applying this rule, I am declaring that your brother doesn't know something and I am declaring that you've bursted his ball. Both must be indicative.
A different thing would be "No sé que me le has reventado la pelota" (wrong!), because you are declaring that you don't know something (the ball has been bursted), and then you are declaring in indicative what you know about the ball being bursted. How can you know and not know?
(5) ¿No recuerdas que te presté 10 euros? Again, this is a declaration of fact, even if you didn't remember that I gave you the ten dollars... (Follow up question... could the subjunctive be used here at all?)
Yes, you could use it if you wants to know whether the other person remembers it or not, but maybe because you are not sure yourself, you prefer not to declare it in indicative, just in case. If the other person doesn't owe you money and you use indicative, she might think that you are trying to take advantage of her asking for money that she no longer owes you. If you ask in subjunctive, she doesn't have the right to get angry, because you could argue that you never said that she owes you money: you never declared such a thing.
(6) El médico me ha recomendado que necesito descansar. It is difficult for me to articulte why, but for some reason this would sound weird in subjuntive to me, (El médico me ha recomendado que necesita descansar... technically seems like it would be right, am I just imagining that it sounds weird? It goes against all of my training to use indicative here... ) but "El médico me ha recomendado que descanse" sounds right to me...
This one is quite tricky. A different sentence like "Me recomendó que descansara" can onyl accept subjunctive, because "recomendar" is the main verb (which always declares), but "to rest" is just mentioned here because it was the recommendation -there is no logic in declaring that you rest (or you are resting). It would sound even worse if it was "Me recomendo que tomo menos sal", because if you declare that you take less salt (less salt than whom anyway), why recommending that you do it if you are already doing it? Anyway, in my example it works because you can declare that you need that, you need to rest, because that applied to you even before you went to see the doctor. It is a statement that can be made about you regardless of what the doctor said, but "descanso" is not.
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea. I suppose that they already know, but I have no idea.... this seems like a classic construction calling for subjunctive... although it sounds fine to me as it is, in indicative form. I suppose it is a statement, I'm saying that I know I don't know... Does the meaning change dramatically with the use of subjunctive? Very tricky! If so, I´m going for a long shot here... would it have something to do with the double negative?
Suppositions are declarations: you inform about your suppositions or guesses in your first sentence, and "pero" separates two coordinating (and therefore indipendent) sentences, and the second one has just one verb, so there is no room for subjunctive anywhere, you simply can't use it here. The reason why I put this clause is because that "classic" comes from the fact that you are bombarded with the idea that doubt implies subjunctive, and it is not necessarily true: the future indicative implies doubt, many declarations in indicative following verbs like "Imagino..." or "Supongo..." are in indicative, and "Quizá..." also has an element of doubt.
(1) Mi madre no cree que soy el jefe del equipo de fútbol
El autor de esta frase quiere decir que sí, es el jefe del equipo pero su madre no lo cree. Se usa el modo indicativo porque expresa la nocion de certeza, es decir que el autor de esta frase está seguro de que es el jefe y está acentuando el valor informativo de la subordinada.
(2) Tengo mis dudas, pero probablemente tienes razón.
Cuando un adverbio de duda precede al verbo y no está separado de él por una pausa se puede usar o el subjuntivo o el indicativo, la elección depende en gran medida de la manera en que se interprete la estructura informativa de la oración. En este caso, se usa el indicativo porque la información introducida es focal es decir que se presenta como nueva. En este caso el autor admite que la otra persona tiene razón, o sea, la otra persona tiene razón, probablemente.
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota.
Eso quiere decir que—Le reventaste la pelota pero tu hermano aún no lo sabe o no se ha dado cuenta de eso. En este caso ambos inerlocutores entienden que sí, ya lo ha ocurrido. En este caso se usa el modo indicativo porque acentúa el valor informativa de un acaecimiento
(4) Recuérdame que te debo 10 euros.
En este caso se usa el indicativo porque la subordinada acentúa una aserción en lugar de una justificación. Es como—Te debo 10 euros, no me deje olvidarlo
(5) ¿No recuerdas que te presté 10 euros?
También, en esta frase se acentúa la aserción «te presté 10 euros»
(6) El médico me ha recomendado que necesito descansar.
En este caso el verbo recomendar tiene aspecto comunicativa y no de influencia o sea el uso del modo indicativo en la subordinada acentúa el aspecto comunicativo del verbo «recomendar».
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien.
Aquí el uso del indicativa señala la intención del hablante de destacar el contenido informativo de la subordinada. Es decir que ya lo sabe que la otra persona «está bien».
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea.
En este caso, el verbo supongo expresa recelo o convencimiento. El hablante ha aceptado como obvio que el dicho individuo «ya lo sabe».
1) Mi madre no cree que soy el jefe del equipo de fútbol
Your mother doesn't believe it, but you really are. (rule = declaration)
(2) Tengo mis dudas, pero probablemente tienes razón.
You are right. (declration)
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota.
He doesn't know, but it's true. (declaration)
(4) Recuérdame que te debo 10 euros.
You do owe him. (declaration)
(5) ¿No recuerdas que te presté 10 euros?
He does owe you (declaration)
(6) El médico me ha recomendado que necesito descansar.
You do need to rest (declaration)
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien.
You do know (declaration)
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea.
You know you don't know. (declaration)
I have a question, actually 2. hehe. Is that example correct? (No sé que me le has reventado la pelota) I don't mean the meaning but the structure.
The sentence has not one, but several problems. First, that "me le" doesn't seem to make sense, and talking about what you don't know is a problem, because as soon as someone mentions it, you already know it, so the only thing you can talk about is your ignorance about whether it is true or not. In English is pretty much the same: you don't say "I don't know that they are coming", but "...if / whether they are coming": No sé si le has reventado la pelota.
Or should it be "No sé que se me has reventado la pelota" (para que sea lógicamente incorrecta pero gramaticalmente correcta)
Still wrong, I'm afraid. "Se me ha reventado" is fine, because you are using "reventarse" as something that happens to the ball, and "me" to indicate your involvement in it, but that "has" makes no sense. Alternatively, drop that "se" and say "...que me has reventado", where someone else has done it instead. But the problem is that you are using indicative to declare something that you don't know (No sé...), which makes no sense, because only you declare things you know (regardless of your certainty).
And the same sentence, to make it correct and to declare that you don't know it, you say : "No sé si me has reventado la pelota o no.", don't you?
Now it is perfect, but that "si" is interpreted like "whether" in English, so that "o no" is implicitly understood, and therefore it can be omitted.
I took one look at this and groaned... I have no idea how silly I am about to sound, but it's a great practice! Especially the importance of forgetting the "rules" we so desperately cling to and rather "feeling" the language as a living thing, not a textbook! As to whether I can articulate these "feelings" of mine, and whether or not they are correct or completely off base, is yet to be seen... But mistakes are our friends and it is incredibly important to have a good sense of humor regarding them, so I am about to make a whole lot more! Here we go! 
(1) Mi madre no cree que soy el jefe del equipo de fútbol This one initially had me stumped, until some other (braver) folks deduced that the son indeed is el jefe.
(2) Tengo mis dudas, pero probablemente tienes razón. It is much more likely that you are right than I. (? So the doubt has more to do with me than with your being right? This would be a way of expressing faith in the other persons convictions? So, if I used subjunctive here, I would be perhaps leaving more to doubt than if I used indicative... oh the hidden meanings!)
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota. In my mind "to know" or "to believe" sort of constitutes "fact" (although not always literally of course, but within the debate of whether to use subjunctive or indicative)... Is there more to this?
(4) Recuérdame que te debo 10 euros. As far as I know, the subjunctive is always used in a subordinate clause (recuérdame) and never in the main clause of a sentence. Whether this figures into the thinking of a native when they are speaking (I do not consider this when I speak English) is unlikely. But the fact that "te debo 10 euros" is just that, fact, and not a perception of reality according to the speaker, leads me to this reasoning. (As stated by others on this thread, it is a declaration).
(5) ¿No recuerdas que te presté 10 euros? Again, this is a declaration of fact, even if you didn't remember that I gave you the ten dollars... (Follow up question... could the subjunctive be used here at all?)
(6) El médico me ha recomendado que necesito descansar. It is difficult for me to articulte why, but for some reason this would sound weird in subjuntive to me, (El médico me ha recomendado que necesita descansar... technically seems like it would be right, am I just imagining that it sounds weird? It goes against all of my training to use indicative here... ) but "El médico me ha recomendado que descanse" sounds right to me...
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien. This one and #8 have me totally stumped... the only clue I can find is the verb alegrar and how it interacts with "saber", in this sentence the knowing makes me happy, rather than saying me alegro de que estés bien.", *you being well makes me happy... ¿Tiene algo que ver?
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea. I suppose that they already know, but I have no idea.... this seems like a classic construction calling for subjunctive... although it sounds fine to me as it is, in indicative form. I suppose it is a statement, I'm saying that I know I don't know... Does the meaning change dramatically with the use of subjunctive? Very tricky! If so, I´m going for a long shot here... would it have something to do with the double negative?
For those who are curious, this is the answer to the first one (which Lorenzo got spot on):
(1) Mi madre no cree que soy el jefe del equipo de fútbol
My mother does not believe, but I do, and since I am the one who is doing the talking, I chose to declare my belief.
I'll post the rest of the answers later, to give people time to think about them.
Good exercise! I'll try my best on these ones from what I know:
1) You're declaring (explicitly) that you are head of the football team, but your mother doesn't believe that. The indicative tells everyone that you you in fact are.
2) You're saying that it's pretty likely that he's right, and you're almost ready to believe him.It's a concession that you're marking clearly.
3) It's a fact that your listener burst the football, though your brother doesn't belive it to be. I'm not sure about this one, could you also use the subjunctive, since the listener knows he was the one to burst the football? You're underlining the fact, though, I think.
4) Recordar is a verb of perception, from the book I'm basing most of this on, and you know which one that is. So the indicative is natural here.
5) You're reminding him, and therefore declaring it again, to make sure.
6) Modal verb. You could say "que descanse", and it would be valid. But again, you're declaring to your listener what he doesn't already know.
7) Dunno, really. Geografical differences? You tell me. Although, ref. the book not mentioned (ok, It's Borrego et al, "el subjuntivo: valores y usos, go buy), it's about the verb "saber", which is about perception. So the indicative may be natural here.
8) You're declaring that you don't have a clue. Totally fine.
Thanks for the exercise 
BTW, "why isn't subjunctive used here?"
I can see only pesta, culé, lorenzo and vikingo (publicly) tried the test. I guess people fear me, hehe. Truth is, the test was designed to challenge advanced students about rules that are taken for granted in most grammars, and to privately mock those typical pseudo-rules often offered to learners. Well... this is real Spanish, not a classroom exercise designed to match rules created to ensure that enough exercises can be created to comply with those rules. If you find these sentences contradictory, according to the rules you've learnt, your rules are against native speakers' intuitions, so you better drop them ASAP.
(2) Tengo mis dudas, pero probablemente tienes razón.
I have my doubts but you're probably right.
None of the rules about subjunctive really apply in this case, because there is no dependent clause. It's just two sentences connected by the conjunction pero.
Therefore, indicative is needed for both verbs.
(7) Me alegra saber que estás bien.
I think that, the speaker has already got the information that the other person is fine.
(3) Tu hermano no sabe que le has reventado la pelota.
It really is the truth, but 'the brother' is the one who doesn't know that.
(8) Supongo que ya lo sabe, pero no tengo ni idea.
I think it's not a guess, it's what it normally needs to be, but the speaker doesn't know if it has come true or not.
Vaya, que ejercicio mas interesante. Si tuviera mas tiempo libre, trataria de hacerlo. Muchas gracias Lazarus.
Ok, let me get this straight. In 3), you are telling Juan, who broke his brother's (Javier) football, that Javier doesn't know that. However, Juan may know very well that he broke Javier's football, and we, as the speaker, may know that he (Juan) knows. Using "la ley", why do we need to use indicative and declare this fact to Juan again? The way I see it, we're just informing Juan that his brother Javier doesn't know, but that Juan did in fact break the football is well known by us both.
Not that the indicative is wrong, but I'm still not sure it's necessary.
A different thing would be "No sé que me le has reventado la pelota" (wrong!), because you are declaring that you don't know something (the ball has been bursted), and then you are declaring in indicative what you know about the ball being bursted. How can you know and not know?
I have a question, actually 2. hehe. Is that example correct? (No sé que me le has reventado la pelota) I don't mean the meaning but the structure. Or is there something wrong? I guess, either me or le shouldn't be there, or I'm learning something new. Or should it be "No sé que se me has reventado la pelota" (para que sea lógicamente incorrecta pero gramaticalmente correcta)
And the same sentence, to make it correct and to declare that you don't know it, you say : "No sé si me has reventado la pelota o no.", don't you?
