Si + conociste/conocieras (conditional)

mutagenix

Senior Member
Japanese
Hola

I was just doing this exercise where you have to fill in the gap with either comprobarías or comprueba. The sentence was as follows:

Si conociste a Raúl, _____________ que es un poco prepotente.

Since comprueba did not make sense here at all, I chose comprobarías. The answer was marked as correct. HOWEVER, I am not sure why there is el pretérito in the first clause rather than el imperfecto de subjuntivo. I thought the latter should be used in el condicional.
 
  • Doraemon-

    Senior Member
    "Spanish - Spain" "Catalan - Valencia"
    Si conociste a Raúl habrás comprobado que es un poco prepotente.
    Si conocieras a Raúl comprobarías que es un poco prepotente.
     

    Peterdg

    Senior Member
    Dutch - Belgium
    It is odd, though. In my experience, or my variety of Spanish, Doraemon's alternatives are more normal.
    It is a type I conditional, but in the past.

    If you turn the following sentence to the past: "Si conoces a Raúl, comprobarás que es un poco prepotente", you get "Si conociste a Raúl, comprobarías que es un poco prepotente".

    The version with "conocieras" is a type II conditional.
     

    Amapolas

    Senior Member
    Castellano rioplatense
    If you turn the following sentence to the past: "Si conoces a Raúl, comprobarás que es un poco prepotente", you get "Si conociste a Raúl, comprobarías que es un poco prepotente".
    I see, and it makes sense. However, perhaps I'd normally say 'habrías comprobado' in these sentences, and I'd use 'comprobarías' combined with 'si conocieras'. Wouldn't you say it's more common, or is it just me?
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top