"Adelantó su coche para que yo pudiera aparcar."
This was a sentence I saw on this website. So why is the subjunctive used here?
Adelantó su coche para que yo pudiera aparcar.
I know there is a"que" but que doesn't always activate the Subjunctive
8 Answers
Can I have more examples? I'm starting to understand it more.
So, when you say: "Los chichos no pueden hacer nada sin que sus padres se enteren de ello," how would the declaration/two clauses thing work?
When you say "without", clearly what follows should not be, right? Well... how are we go to declare something that it is not going to be?
Your sentence has double negatives (no pueden + sin), which tends to confuse everybody. Let me give you a simpler sentence with "sin que":
Lo hice sin que lo supieran.
Here it is obvious: "Lo hice" is the declaration (what I want others to know), and "lo supieran" (they knew about it) is the subordinate clause. Are we trying to say that they knew about it? Obviously not; otherwise we would not have starting by saying "sin"! In any case, they didn't know, so we can't declare it (or use indicative).
The same rule goes for your sentence. As soon as you say "sin", whatever follows either didn't exist, doesn't exist, or we don't know whether it will exist, so the rest can't be declared. End of the story.
Can I have more examples? I'm starting to understand it more.
So, when you say: "Los chichos no pueden hacer nada sin que sus padres se enteren de ello," how would the declaration/two clauses thing work'
I added some more declaration stuff here: http://www.spanishdict.com/answers/show/9298/ (post #5)
Let me know if you need more examples.
Lazarus could you talk more on this "declaration" stuff it is starting to make sense
I was having a lot of problems following the logic of the thread which included <
>. I could not follow the reason why you could not declare that there was no one that ... You are mistaking the concepts of whole sentence and clause. If you say:
There is no one who can do it
The subordinate clause is only "(someone) can do it". If you declare this, it would be the same as:
*Someone can do it. There is no such person. *(!'''')
which makes no sense, of course. The only thing that you are declaring here is that there is no such person, which is why the main sentence is a declaration, and it is in indicative.
However, if you say
There is someone who can do it
since there are two declarations (two verbs in indicative), you can also say:
Someone can do it. There is such a person.
which makes perfect sense. More examples:
Creo que va a llover.
You have two declarations, so you could also say:
Va a llover. Eso es lo que creo.
Since they are both declarations, both can be declared separately. Another one:
No creo que va a llover. (Wrong sentence!!)
Split it and you have:
Va a llover. Eso no lo creo.
Are you contradicting yourself, or what? (Notice that you are not saying "¿Va a llover'"; otherwise it could be regarded as a non-declaration).
Notice that I have illustrated my concept of declaration using both English and Spanish, and it still makes sense.
Does it make sense to you, or you need more examples?
How do you do it? como lo ¿hazes'[color=red][/color]Tienes las repuestas a la mano? Yo tengo que encoontrar mi diccionario, hijole para mi es mucho trabajo hacer esto,y el diccionario falla muchas veces. Espero que sigas con tus instrucciones- gracias
I was having a lot of problems following the logic of the thread which included <
>. I could not follow the reason why you could not declare that there was no one that ...
You are mistaking the concepts of whole sentence and clause. If you say:
There is no one who can do it
The subordinate clause is only "(someone) can do it". If you declare this, it would be the same as:
*Someone can do it. There is no such person. *(!'''')
which makes no sense, of course. The only thing that you are declaring here is that there is no such person, which is why the main sentence is a declaration, and it is in indicative.
However, if you say
There is someone who can do it
since there are two declarations (two verbs in indicative), you can also say:
Someone can do it. There is such a person.
which makes perfect sense. More examples:
Creo que va a llover.
You have two declarations, so you could also say:
Va a llover. Eso es lo que creo.
Since they are both declarations, both can be declared separately. Another one:
No creo que va a llover. (Wrong sentence!!)
Split it and you have:
Va a llover. Eso no lo creo.
Are you contradicting yourself, or what? (Notice that you are not saying "¿Va a llover'"; otherwise it could be regarded as a non-declaration).
Notice that I have illustrated my concept of declaration using both English and Spanish, and it still makes sense.
Does it make sense to you, or you need more examples'
This was a sentence I saw on this website. So why is the subjunctive used here?
If you "declare" the clause, you use indicative; if you don't, subjunctive. That's the rule.
You don't know how much that small addition helps to understand this concept.
I was having a lot of problems following the logic of the thread which included
<
Then the light bulb clicked on and I saw that it was the "hay" that is being declared one way or the other and that the clause was what could not be declared so that it required the subjunctive.
I think most students tend to think of the meaning of the entire sentence when consider whether we are declaring something or not.
Thank you again.
This was a sentence I saw on this website. So why is the subjunctive used here?
Adelantó su coche para que yo pudiera aparcar.
I know there is a"que" but que doesn't always activate the Subjunctive
Because if you use indicative (yo pude aparcar), you'd be declaring that you could park, but what you are really saying if that you wanted to park, not that the other guy moved the park since you could park, so if you don't declare, you can't use indicative.
No special words "activate" the subjunctive. If you "declare" the clause, you use indicative; if you don't, subjunctive. That's the rule.
