Subjunctive in the past.
If i want to use the subjunctive whist describing an event or person from the past how would i use this?
For example, "it is logical that he was bad".
I have been told that "es logico que" always brings about the subjunctive.
But ive never seen it used in the past other than the "si pudiera.... haceria" clause which is a completely sentence structure.
My instinct would be just to say screw the subjunctive and use the imperfect era so "Es logico que era mal" but im kind of hoping thats wrong.
Cheers
10 Answers
Yes, I had been taught that if the person believed it, even if it was crazy like "it is logical the moon is made of cheese". that this would not be subjunctive. Don't know if I was taught wrong or not.
I also agree that it is generally helpful to consider the speaker's attitude towards the information being expressed. If the speaker is placing specific emphasis by (1) declaring it as a fact (from the speaker's perspective of reality) and/or (2) presenting it as new information that could not simply be inferred from the situation or prior context, then the indicative would be required.
For example, the expression "the moon is made of cheese" when taken by itself can be considered a declaration. Moreover, the idea that the moon is made of cheese is being presented as a novel fact.
On the other hand, if you compare this with the following expressions you might be able to tell that when the full expression carries a subjunctive meaning, neither of the above criteria is met:
? It is logical that the moon be made of cheese.
? It is logical for the moon to be made of cheese.
? It is logical that the moon could/may be made of cheese.
This is somewhat analogous to saying, "the moon might be made of cheese" or "It is possible for the moon to be made of cheese." With the subjunctive, there is no commitment to or declaration of the fact that the moon is indeed made of green cheese.
Looking at it another way, you might consider the difference between the following statements which approximate the semantic difference between the indicative and subjunctive in this case:
? If the moon were made of cheese, it would be logical. [subjunctive]
? The moon is made of cheese, and it is logical that it is. [indicative]
Well ive been told that some phrases like
"antes de que..."
"Para que"
" Es importante que..." always, always require the subjunctive.
"Es logico que" is one of those.
So if "es logico es" is one of those what is the verb in the past if the verb has to be subjunctive?
Hitch said:
I have been told that "es logico que" always brings about the subjunctive.
Q said:
I think the "It is logical that...." is another of those subjective evaluations of the subordinate clause like Es bueno que, Es importante que.... that require the subjunctive.
Based on a quick review of various news articles, it seems that it would certainly be more common to follow this expression with the subjunctive. However, here are a few contextual examples where the expression is followed by the indicative:
Terra Colombia
Andalucía Información
Quenonino.com
“Es lógico que va a volver a jugar en cualquier momento, es nuestro líder, nuestro capitán”.
You might also find what Lazarus had to say on this thread useful in regards to the use of the indicative with the expression "es lógico que...."
Hey, hitch,
I don't know why they would tell you "logical" would indicate
use of the subjunctive. There is no uncertainty! The guy was bad for sure!
But for more clarity, I might rephrase it:
Es lógico que había sido mal.
It's logical that he had been bad.
Oh, cheers right back!
Qfreed said:
Glad to hear the "of course you can", because I couldn't find an example for it.
You're welcome. 
One of the many misguided rules I hear a lot regarding the subjunctive is about the sequence of tenses. I'll quote a bit from the best book ever written (hehe) on the subjunctive, J. Borrego et al, "El subjuntivo: valores y usos":
Regla 7:
v1 en (imperativo, presente, perfecto, futuro, futuro perfecto):
v2 en cualquier forma (según los casos).
And one of their examples:
No creo que Juan se bebiera ayer todo el vino de nuestra garrafa.
Use fuera or fuese if you want to use the imperfect of ser, or estuviera/estuviese if you want to use the imperfect of estar.
I guess part of the question is whether you can use a verb in a past tense of the subjunctive if the main verb is in the present? Well, yes, of course you can.
As qfreed says, the reason for the subjunctive here is the personal opinion or value judgment.
I think the "It is logical that...." is another of those subjective evaluations of the subordinate clause like Es bueno que, Es importante que.... that require the subjunctive.
You aren't really informing or declaring that he was bad, but making a personal comment/opinion about it.
As for the tenses in the main and subordinate clauses:
When to use which “present” subjunctive. The simple present subjunctive is used to indicate an action viewed as occurring at the same time or in the future when the governing verb is in the present, present perfect, future, future perfect, or a command form; the present perfect subjunctive is used to indicate an action viewed as having ocurred previously when the governing verb is in those same tenses:
Uses of the imperfect subjunctive. The imperfect subjunctive is used in the same type of situations in which the present subjunctive is used, except that the governing verb is typically in a past tense (e.g., the preterit, imperfect, past perfect, conditional, conditional perfect, or one of the past subjunctives):
The sentence seems to fit neither of these conditions so I'll await a native's input on what is correct.
Is that right?
Es logico que "fuera" ?
que fuera malo/bueno is a very common subjunctive phrase, and it just 'feels' right to use it in this context. I'm not saying it is the only way, or that it's "right", but it perfectly expresses the thought you're trying to convey.
Is that right?
Es logico que "fuera" ?
Why would you not use: "Es lógico que fuera mal"?
