When can an infinitive follow the conditional or imperfect sub.?

Question

This just occured to me at work.

I wanted to say I would have let the shirt just stay on the chair.

So I said "Yo la habría dejado en la silla".

But then I thought about "yo la hubiera dejado en la silla" would be better.

But then I thought about the song "Ojala pudiera borrarla" and how it uses the infinitve rather than the past participle. Of course with ojala it is saying "I hope I can" but I wonder if that has anything to do with it.

So what if I said "Yo la hubiera dejar que......." or just "Yo la hubiera dejarla". Why would it work with poder and not haber?

I think I ran into a curious area.

Answer 1

I would have let the shirt just stay on the chair.

La habría dejado en la silla. = I would have left it on the chair.

La habría dejado nomás en la silla. = I would have just left it on the chair.

The latter is probably more Mexican/Latin American, but I learned to use nomás for the 'emphatic just' when I was in Mexico.

You want the conditional, not the imperfect subjunctive. Sometimes people use the conditional when they should use the imperfect subjunctive, but not the other way around (I think I have that right).

That's my take on it. Los que se atrevan, se cayan.

If you want to stick ojala in there, that's a different story. But also a different sentence from the one you started out with.

Answer 2

Jeezzle:

you said "So what if I said "Yo la hubiera dejar que......." or just "Yo la hubiera dejarla". Why would it work with poder and not haber?"

And I am saying it is impossible to say that....

yo la pudiera dejar que or yo la pudiera dejarla

That's what I am trying to point at, and wanted you to make some example phrases.

Ojalá pudiera dejarla

Ojalá que pudiera dejarla

Ojalá la pudiera dejar

Ojalá que la puediera dejar

Ojalá la hubiera dejado

Ojala que la hubiera dejado

Sigo?

Pues sería mejor hablar cara a cara, te invito un cafe. - jeezzle, Dec 21, 2011

Saturday is xmas eve so I will be busy, but after the new year I will be avilable for the skype chat, thank you for the coffee invite. :) - chileno, Dec 21, 2011

Answer 3

Tendría que haberla dejado en la silla.

No entiendo amigo. "Tener que" para mi es una frase hecha que significa que no hay más remedio que hacerlo. Con "tendría" parece significar otra cosa. ¿En este caso no es un comando? No sé lo que es.

Answer 4

Tendría que haberla dejado en la silla.

Del verbo tener: (conjugar) tendría es: 1ª persona singular (yo) condicional indicativo...First person. singular (yo) conditional indicative 3ª persona singular (él/ella/usted) condicional indicativo...Third person, singular (he / she / it) indicative conditional

Answer 5

So what if I said "Yo la hubiera dejar que......." or just "Yo la hubiera dejarla". Why would it work with poder and not haber?

Those are wrong... how about telling us how it would work with poder?

I did. Ojala pudiera borrarla is a famous song by Mana. See how it uses the infinitve? with borrarla? - jeezzle, Dec 21, 2011

Answer 6

Apples and oranges.

The complement for "poder" can always be any infinitive (that makes sense). "puedo hablar"/"pude hablar"/"podría hablar"/"podré hablar"/"pudiera hablar"/"pudiese hablar/etc. The subjunctive has nothing to do with it. Nor has the presence/absence of "ojalá" ("ojalá pudiera hablar"). Of course, "poder" is in no way unique in this respect.

I suspect that you are confusing this topic with constructions that avoid using the subjunctive in a subordinate clause by using the infinitive (when there is no change of subject) between the clauses.

Answer 7

¿En este caso no es un comando?

Jeezzle, look up comando, it's a false friend.

"Tendría que haber + participio" means "I should have + participle"

Uh oh. What word is better there? - jeezzle, Dec 21, 2011

Mando. I should have known that right off, brain uh, brain freeze. - jeezzle, Dec 21, 2011

But wait, mando, comando, orden are the same. Context will always play a factor though. - chileno, Dec 21, 2011

Answer 8

Well (Jeremias) my understanding is that:

Te habría llamado si hubiera sabido

and

Te hubiera llamado si hubiera sabido

are the same thing.

Though I have in my head some differences between them, to me in most cases they can be interchanged at least in the first clause if there are two.

And it seems like

La habría dejado en la silla

and

La hubiera dejado en la silla

are saying the same thing except that the second sentence feels incomplete because it needs or wants something else. La hubiera dejado en la silla si..........no me había dicho que yo no debería hacerlo. And I can imagine another "hubiera" going where the había is too.