Why is the subjunctive used here please?

Question

From a book I'm currently reading - 'Viajes a traves de los majestuosos Andes del Ecuador'.

"Llegamos a Guachalá sin haber podido obtener ni una sola visión del Cayambe y como estuviera ausente el arrendatario, seguimos viaje a la mañana siguiente, al pueblo de Cayanbe en busca de información."

My translation attempt:

We came to Guachalá without having seen Cayambe at all, and as the tenant wasn't there, we continued travelling the next morning, to the village of Cayambe, in search of information.

My guess at why it's estuviera and not estaba:

Is it because they weren't absolutely sure that the tenant wasn't there, only that he didn't appear to be there?

Would he have used indicative if they were certain that the tenant wasn't there?

Gracias de nuevo.

Answer 1

A veces encontramos la forma -ra, no ya como pluscuamperfecto de indicativo, sino como un pretérito cualquiera de indicativo. Se comenta el discurso que anoche pronunciara el Presidente (en vez de pronunció). Esta construcción no está justificada en modo alguno por la tradición del idioma.

Some think these kind of subjunctives are not justified, as you can see.

However:

Esta restauración literaria, ajena a la lengua hablada, persiste más o menos debilitada hasta nuestros días:

No es ya Montevideo la ciudad humilde que él dejara al partir. (J. E. Rodó)

Clarín, el buen maestro, fracasó también en la ayuda que me prestara.

(Azorín)

A San Fracisco de Asís le habrá dado un vuelco el corazón en el pecho;

aquel pecho abierto al amor de los animales, que en verso piadoso cantara el pagano Rubén. (C. J. Cela

Please read more [here][1], very interesting question sally, enhorabuena

[1]: http://culturitalia.uibk.ac.at/hispanoteca/Gram

So, basically, I don't need to worry hehe, thank you Heidi! I'll read some more. :D - galsally, Feb 25, 2011

Ahhhh! Entonces puede funcionar como pluscuamperfecto o no! Lo había interpretado como pluscuamperfecto. Tienes razón!!!!! - cogumela, Feb 25, 2011

Answer 2

y como estuviera ausente el arrendatario

...and as the tenant had not been there...

And as the tenant wasn't in.....

Answer 3

Sally, this is a very advanced question!

Here, estuviera would not be used in speech. Both, estuviera and estaba refer to a true fact, so the difference here is not the certainty of the fact.

You couldn't replace it by "estuviese" in this case.

Edited after reading Heidi's post:

I think you can interpretate this in two ways:

Pluscuamperfect, where "estuviera" would mean "había estado", a past inside another past:

...y como estuviera ausente el arrendatario

...and as the tenant had not been there...

Or like a plain imperfect indicative, where "estuviera" means "estaba". I feel more likely this option in your text!

.... y como el arrendatario estaba ausente... ...and as the tenant was not there...

This last use is limited just to literature.

I honestly think you should change your profile to advanced.

That's a relief! Also interesting that one cannot use 'estuviese' in its place. Thank you. :D - galsally, Feb 25, 2011

One minute error - the 'certainty' of the fact. Beautifully explained, once again. Who's talking about advanced???? ;) - galsally, Feb 25, 2011