He should have called me

S

Sheppy

Member
English - US
Debería haberme llamado o Debió haberme llamado

Yo miraba unas frases similares y parece que estas dos construcciones ocurren con una frecuencia similar. Supongo que hay de verdad una diferencia en sentido.
 
    • En el primer caso (debería...) se plantea como una sugerencia; en el segundo, como una obligación palmaria.
     
    Mister Draken said:
    ¿Y no habría sido mejor usar "debería de haberme llamado"? ¿O la distinción con y sin preposición cae en desuso y ya no se emplea?
    Click to expand...
    Sí, para este verbo modal, deber de es la manifestación de una probabilidad inferida. PEEEEERO, este uso de deber + infinitivo para expresar conjetura está sumamente extendido incluso entre escritores de prestigio, sobre todo en América. Copio de NGLE: Este uso [de deber a secas, para indicar la probabilidad] se registra también en textos antiguos. Como perífrasis de obligación se recomienda la variante sin preposición, esto es «deber + infinitivo». Aun así, «deber de + infinitivo» también se documenta en textos, clásicos y contemporáneos, con este valor.
    Es verdad que nadie ha estado en ese cuarto por lo menos en un siglo —dijo el oficial a los soldados—. Ahí debe haber hasta culebras (García Márquez, Cien años); Debe hacer mucho frío en la calle, entonces un coñac doble (Cortázar, Rayuela); No debes haber llegado hace mucho, imagino (Guelbenzu, Río).​
     
    I'm confused (as usual). How are all of you interpreting the original statement ("He should have called me.")? To me, it's not a supposition or speculation (which as I understand it would traditionally be expressed with a form of "deber de.") I read it as what might be called an "unfulfilled obligation": something that someone should have done, but didn't:

    I am John's lawyer. When he was arrested, he should have called me. But he didn't, and how he's in a lot of trouble.
     
    Hello. You may be used to the present tense, as in esta gente debe haber tenido mucho dinero (28.6j), 'these people must have had a lot of money.' In 28.7g, 'this contrast fades, with other tenses': Debiste haber llegado antes, 'you should have arrived sooner.'

    El ruido debía haber despertado a medio mundo (Cortázar, Rayuela)
    "The noise must have woken everybody up"

    Allí donde debería haber una despedida hay un dibujo en la pared (~)
    "where there should be a leave-taking, there is a sketch on the wall"

    —No, no ha hecho nada; debió hacer, y por eso digo que debería estar en la cárcel (Unamuno, Abel Sánchez)
    "No, he didn't do anything; he should have done, and that's why I say he should be in jail"

    [] se consolaba con la idea de que él debía tener el mismo olor, sólo que cuatro años más viejo, y que ella debió haberlo sentido con la misma emoción (García Márquez): "he consoled himself with the thought that he must give off the same odor, except his was four years older, and she must have detected it on him, with the same emotion."

    The imperfecto sounds almost as common as the present, for 'probably, likely.' Deber 'always' needing de for this is a modern fiction.
     
    Last edited:
    Mister Draken said:
    ¿Y no habría sido mejor usar "debería de haberme llamado"? ¿O la distinción con y sin preposición cae en desuso y ya no se emplea?
    Click to expand...
    En una de mis clases universitarias, la profesora argentina, una favorita, nos dijo que los latinos suelen confundir el uso correcto de las perífrasis deber de + infinitivo  contra deber + infinitivo. Nos dijo que deber de + infinitivo indicaba probabilidad o posibilidad mientras deber + infinitivo indicaba obligación. Por lo tanto, siempre me he atendido a lo que nos dijo, y en efecto he notado que hasta los mejores autores de novelas las usan al revés. Si mal no recuerdo, la RAE apoya lo que dijo esa profesora, pero también señala que esa distinción ya está cayendo en desuso.
     
    Hola:

    Así como están, y ciñéndonos a la consulta original, las oraciones significan lo mismo, yo no complicaría el tema innecesariamente. Por estos lados Debería haberme llamado es más común.

    G.
     
    And I suppose the thread may be deleted, if Sheppy does not add a context. For ex. in CORPES you will find some.

    Algo muy grave debió haber ocurrido (debería); Ya te deberías haber ido (debiste).
     
    User With No Name said:
    To me, it's not a supposition or speculation (which as I understand it would traditionally be expressed with a form of "deber de.") I read it as what might be called an "unfulfilled obligation": something that someone should have done, but didn't:

    I am John's lawyer. When he was arrested, he should have called me. But he didn't, and how he's in a lot of trouble.
    Click to expand...

    Exactly. And I think Circunflejo's translation is probably the closest in terms of reflecting that nuance.

    If the meaning were that of probability, we would say "he must have called me." That means "I'm not sure, but it seems very probable that he called me."

    However, I don't think there is a clear, one-to-one translation of "should" in many cases, and depending on the exact context, deber could also be used correctly, although I don't think deber de would fit in this meaning of obligation.
     
    En el caso consultado la forma “deber + de” no se aplica, olvidémonos de ella.

    -Debería…
    Potencial, expresa posibilidad.
    Usted tenía la posibilidad de llamarme ¿porqué no lo hizo?
    Se usa como fórmula de cortesía.

    -Debía…
    Acción durativa.
    Debía haberme llamado mientras estaba en esa situación.

    -Debió…
    Acción puntual.
    Debió haberme llamado cuando ocurrió aquello.
     
    Tener que... y deber... son formas alternativas. Según en qué zonas se usa una más que la otra.
    La diferencia entre debería y debió en esta oración es muy sutil, en la práctica pueden llegar a ser equivalentes, aunque uno indica una obligación más "imperativa" que la otra, o quizá un consejo frente a una obligación absoluta, como en should frente a ought to.
     
    Como creo que ya he dicho en otros hilos, a mí una frase con "debió haber ..." me suena literaria y no recuerdo habérsela oído a nadie en una conversación. Lo que yo oigo es "debería haber" o "tendría/tenía que haber", antes también "habría/había de haber".

    EDIT: Rectifico en parte porque quizá sí he oído "debió haber ...", pero solo con sentido de probabilidad, no de obligación.
     
    Last edited:
    Yo me refería a "mi entorno", básicamente algunas zonas de España. No dudo que sí se diga en otras partes.
     
    What I'm gathering is:
    Debía haber llamado. He was obligated to call. He musted* call. (imperfective aspect)
    Debió haber llamado He was obligated to call. He musted* call (perfective aspect)
    Debería haber llamado He should have called.
    Tendría que haber llamado He should have called. (looking at some sentences this is definitely the right sense, not sure what the difference between it and debería is though)

    (sidenote: apparently the preterite form of must is must, which explains why it is never used in the preterite, which is complicating this discussion)
     
    Sheppy said:
    What I'm gathering is:
    Debía haber llamado. He was obligated to call. He musted* call. (imperfective aspect)
    Debió haber llamado He was obligated to call. He musted* call (perfective aspect)
    Debería haber llamado He should have called.
    Tendría que haber llamado He should have called. (looking at some sentences this is definitely the right sense, not sure what the difference between it and debería is though)

    (sidenote: apparently the preterite form of must is must, which explains why it is never used in the preterite, which is complicating this discussion)
    Click to expand...
    You never provided context, the initial question dealt with debería haber versus debió haber, while in your last publication there is debía haber and tendría que haber on top. Debió haber, which is part of the original question, can have at least two interpretations (He must have called me or He should have called me), which is why providing context is necessary. I reiterate that without it both sentences in post number 01 mean pretty much the same, and differences between them will depend on how you contextualize them.
     
    So He should have called me is Debería haberme llamado assuming it was one incident. I don't know if there was confusion but should have never expresses probability unlike must have where it depends on context. And debió could also be used but it could also mean he had to call so the meaning could be somewhere between should have called and had to call. And debía is the same just differing in aspect.
     
    Sheppy said:
    So He should have called me is Debería haberme llamado assuming it was one incident. I don't know if there was confusion but should have never expresses probability unlike must have where it depends on context. And debió could also be used but it could also mean he had to call so the meaning could be somewhere between should have called and had to call. And debía is the same just differing in aspect.
    Click to expand...
    I'm not sure if the original title was the sentence in English, but Spanish natives were trying to explain that the sentence you posted in Spanish has two possible interpretations (at least in LatAm, see "deber de" vs "deber"), one of obligation, and one of probability. Apologies if you did provide the English title when you first opened the thread.

    Answering your question, I would say both are used and interchangeable in terms of semantic meaning. As you can see from answers, there is regional variation. From personal observation, the preterite is used often in Mexico, and not so much in other places. The conditional is used fairly often throughout. Even rarer, but I do believe some speakers/regions use "debía haberme llamado" to express obligation.
     
    Last edited:
    Nomenclature said:
    Answering your question, I would say both are used and interchangeable in terms of semantic meaning. As you can see from answers, there is regional variation. From personal observation, the preterite is used often in Mexico, and not so much in other places. The conditional is used fairly often throughout. Even rarer, but I do believe some speakers/regions use "debía haberme llamado" to express obligation.
    Click to expand...
    No creo que esto dependa de las variaciones regionales, es igual para todo el mundo, pero sin contexto todo son divagaciones.
    No tengo claro que “debía haberme llamado” indique obligación porque no se puede obligar si ya ha pasado.
     
    El Caobo said:
    En una de mis clases universitarias, la profesora argentina, una favorita, nos dijo que los latinos suelen confundir el uso correcto de las perífrasis deber de + infinitivo  contra deber + infinitivo. Nos dijo que deber de + infinitivo indicaba probabilidad o posibilidad mientras deber + infinitivo indicaba obligación. Por lo tanto, siempre me he atendido a lo que nos dijo, y en efecto he notado que hasta los mejores autores de novelas las usan al revés. Si mal no recuerdo, la RAE apoya lo que dijo esa profesora, pero también señala que esa distinción ya está cayendo en desuso.
    Click to expand...
    Su profesora argentina habrá sido una persona muy conservadora. Hace muchísimos años que tal diferenciación pasa olímpicamente inadvertida en nuestra variedad. Y no se trata de ninguna "confusión", sino de una readecuación de las formas en uso de una lengua, que varían según las áreas geográficas. En #6 he copiado la expresión de RAE con respecto a una y otra forma.
     
    No quiero confundir las cosas aún más (y a la mejor estoy totalmente equivocado), pero ¿no es posible usar el pluscuamperfecto de subjuntivo para expresar algo similar?

    --¿Por qué no fuiste a la fiesta?
    --Mi coche estaba en el taller.
    --Ay, me hubieras llamado. Habría pasado por ti.
     
    Ballenero said:
    No tengo claro que “debía haberme llamado” indique obligación porque no se puede obligar si ya ha pasado.
    Click to expand...

    The word "obligation" has been used a lot in this thread, but I don't think it is appropriate here. "He should have called me" is basically the same as "It would have been better if he had called me." That does not really involve any obligation in the sense of "have to do" or "be required to do." It simply presents a preferable option.

    He should have called me = things would have turned out better for him if he had called me
    He must have called me = the evidence suggests that he called me (although we can't be completely certain)
     
    User With No Name said:
    No quiero confundir las cosas aún más (y a la mejor estoy totalmente equivocado), pero ¿no es posible usar el pluscuamperfecto de subjuntivo para expresar algo similar?

    --¿Por qué no fuiste a la fiesta?
    --Mi coche estaba en el taller.
    --Ay, me hubieras llamado. Habría pasado por ti.
    Click to expand...
    En lenguaje oral informal puede darse. En formal realmente es un Ay, [si] me hubieras llamado, habría pasado a por ti.
     
    No solo se da en el registro conversacional; de hecho, esa opción, me hubieras llamado (una construcción contrafáctica, pues da por hecho que tuvo lugar en el pasado el estado de cosas contrario al que se expresa en el momento del habla), aparece en muchos textos del español europeo y es la que se usaba en la lengua clásica (NGLE § 24.1.2g).
     
    Me debería haber llamado is what I would probably say, having learnt Spanish in Spain, but in Mexico it would much more likely be Me hubiera llamado.
     
    Doraemon- said:
    En lenguaje oral informal puede darse. En formal realmente es un Ay, [si] me hubieras llamado, habría pasado a por ti.
    Click to expand...
    And that's the way I learnt it. Si hubieras hecho tal cosa, yo habría hecho tal cosa. Nice and simple, had and would have. But in Mexico, that sentence would almost certainly be Si hubieras hecho tal cosa, yo hubiera hecho tal cosa (they're not big fans of habría, for some reason). And on top of that, in Mexico, you should have called me would almost certainly be me hubieras llamado. I don't know how grammatically correct or not that is. I'm just reporting what I've heard over many years.
     
    AmideLanval said:
    ¿Y debió llamarme?
    Click to expand...
    Es posible, pero de todas las opciones, la menos usada.

    “Me hubieras llamado” y “haberme llamado”, me suenan más ligeras, van bien para casos como el de ir a la fiesta, pero para casos más serios, como: “metieron en la cárcel a mi hijo”, un abogado diría: debería… o tendría que… haberme llamado.
     
    gengo said:
    He should have called me = things would have turned out better for him if he had called me
    Click to expand...
    Doesn't this imply there was an unfulfilled task that led to consequences in the present?
    Most of us like to avoid consequences in life and for that we have a list of must-do during the day.
    Must-dos may not be obligations in English, but in Spanish we call them "obligaciones".
     
    Galván said:
    Doesn't this imply there was an unfulfilled task that led to consequences in the present?
    Most of us like to avoid consequences in life and for that we have a list of must-do during the day.
    Must-dos may not be obligations in English, but in Spanish we call them "obligaciones".
    Click to expand...

    All I can say is that I don't see any "obligation" in "he should have called me." Obligation is defined as "a moral or legal requirement; duty."

    Ex.
    - My friend just sold his 2022 car for $15,000 less than he paid for it.
    - He should have called me. I would have paid him a lot more.

    There is no obligation on the part of the seller to call. It simply would have been better for him if he had called.
     
    gengo said:
    All I can say is that I don't see any "obligation" in "he should have called me." Obligation is defined as "a moral or legal requirement; duty."

    Ex.
    - My friend just sold his 2022 car for $15,000 less than he paid for it.
    - He should have called me. I would have paid him a lot more.

    There is no obligation on the part of the seller to call. It simply would have been better for him if he had called.
    Click to expand...
    En español, las obligaciones te las puedes dar tu mismo.
    RAE
    3. f. Vínculo que sujeta a hacer o abstenerse de hacer algo, establecido por precepto de ley, por voluntario otorgamiento o por derivación recta de ciertos actos.
     
    Smitch18 said:
    And that's the way I learnt it. Si hubieras hecho tal cosa, yo habría hecho tal cosa. Nice and simple, had and would have. But in Mexico, that sentence would almost certainly be Si hubieras hecho tal cosa, yo hubiera hecho tal cosa (they're not big fans of habría, for some reason). And on top of that, in Mexico, you should have called me would almost certainly be me hubieras llamado. I don't know how grammatically correct or not that is. I'm just reporting what I've heard over many years.
    Click to expand...
    That's a common trend in Spanish, it happens almost everywhere, although maybe more in Mexico, the substitution of the proper form habría by hubiera.
    It is seen as correct by Spanish speakers. It's already as if the conditional tense of haber was habría/hubiera, just like the subjunctive past is hubiera/hubiese.
    That happens too for a few more verbs (querer, deber...); I don't like it but...
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top