confusion with (haber)

Question

Sometimes “había” means was…other times “había” means had.

For exampleor ejemplo: Había tres libros en la mesa. There were three books on the desk.

For example; Por ejemplo: Había ido con Juan. She had gone with Juan.

The “había” that means “was” is one conjugation from the third person impersonal of “hay” (haber)

The “había” that means “had” is “pluscuamperfecto de indicativo” which is a conjugation of (haber)+ past participle.

How can two conjugations from the same verb (haber) have the same spelling but different meanings? Please explain

Answer 1

I think the differences are relative to the simple spelling change in the 3rd person present indicative.

Both fall into the same 3rd person singular category in the present (of course with different spellings and meanings). A spelling change here indicates a change in meaning, why this only applies to the present tense- I have no idea.

Hay 3 tazas aquí. Ella ha comido.

The imperftect/preterit tense of haber in the 3rd person singular simply does not account for the separate spellings the way the present does. Usually they are separated by context, as one forms the perfect tense and one acts as an auxilary verb.

Había muchas personas a la fiesta.

Ya había comido cuando entraste.

The same is true in the future, conditional:

Habrá muchas personas.

Habrá terminado su tarea.

And in the subjunctive as well:

Dudo que haya muchas personas allí.

Espero que haya completado su tarea.

I guess the answer to your question is, don't ask why the grammar is like that, but rather accustom yourself to the fact that although they both look the same, they have a different meaning behind them.

Just rememeber your differences:

Haber + participle= perfect tense

Haber + noun= auxilary form (there is, there was, there will be etc.)