"Debió estar aquí"
Yesterday, in a thread about the phrase "should have", Heidita said "Debió estar aqui". Obviously, there are always different ways to say the same thing but if I can figure this out, it seems ALOT easier to understand.
I spent a little time with my grammar books yesterday. Now I need some verification. Please tell me if I have this right.
Some of the ways to say "should have":
In the recent past, you can use the present perfect of DEBER or TENER QUE. Has debido hacerlo antes. Has tenido que hacerlo antes.
In the recent or the remote past, you can use the preterite. Debiste estar aquí. Tuviste que estar aquí. (I think this is a variation on Heidita's example)
Or, you can use the conditional of DEBER + HABER + past participle. Lo deberías haber hecho.
Am I on the right track or am I all mixed up? Are there usages that would be more common than others?
3 Answers
In the recent or the remote past, you can use the preterite. Debiste estar aquí. Tuviste que estar aquí.
"Debiste estar aquí" is okay, although in my opinion it's much more common to say: "debiste haber estado aquí", but the form "tuviste que estar aquí" does not express the same idea; it sounds certainly odd. I think that should read "tenías que haber estado aquí".
I think this is because both "tener que" and "deber+ infinitivo" express obligation, and the use of the preterit suggests that the action have been performed and finished. (It doesn't make too much sense to say that you must do something that is done)
About "lo deberías haber hecho", the pronoun is usually placed after the infinitive: "Deberías haberlo hecho"
Hi lucie, can you add the context (link)?
The poster is asking about the forms
Should - deber Must - Deber/tener Have - Haber/tener
And one has to be careful with those, although, Spanish grammar states many things the people continue to use phrases that have been discontinued (!?) by the RAE.
