Hola Karbora: Yes! Thank you for mentioning it. The rule is: If the primary clause is in the past tense and is a trigger for subjunctive, the past subjunctive must be used in the secondary clause.
Here are some links for anyone who would like more details:
"If the primary clause is in the past tense and is a trigger for subjunctive, the past subjunctive must be used in the secondary clause."
No, that is not correct. As sebastiannw2 said above, what matters is if the action anticipated in the dependent clause is in the past, present, or future. If it is in the present or future, then the present subjunctive must be used. So when you use "vaya" here, you mean "She asked (me) [at some past time] that I not go [now, or at some future time].
¿Quizás el idioma español está evolucionando? Es una idioma viviendo, ¿verdad?
El idioma español siempre está evolucionando, pero sigo insistiendo en que ese uso es meramente coloquial, muchos coloquialismos suelen convertirse en reglas, pero solo después de ser aceptados por la mayor parte de hispanoparlantes y mantengan cierto sentido, lo cual no es el caso aquí. Ya he leído lo que dice ese enlace y apoya lo que dije en mi publicación anterior.
I also put "She asked that I not go" which sounds far more natural to me and means the same thing. It also more clearly reflects the grammar pattern of the original sentence, and is the form I used in teaching English to native Spanish speakers (and across all ages, they remembered and could use that way far better than the other). Both answers should be accepted, without question.
@Barbara this is the subjunctive in English, yeah - the "that I not go" instead of "that I don't" is the biggest flag, the latter is indicative (stating how things are) and the 'not' gives the former its unreal flavour.
The other way to check (especially if it's not negative) is to use a 3rd person and see if the verb still sounds ok - "she asked that he go" vs "she knew that he go".
But yeah, while the subjunctive is more accurate, it's way less common than your original sentence (which has the same meaning to a listener) so really it's more a question of tone, and either should be fine as a translation.
I agree. (and I agree with many of the comments below). To me, the English subjunctive is natural, and the indicative that DL uses is not correct.
Either, "she asked me that I not...' or "she asked that I not..." would be correct. English often leaves out the indirect object (here: "me").
For those interested in using the English subjunctive correctly, see these sites.: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/verbs.htm
Personally, I would like DL to use/teach a correct English subjunctive, rather than use the indicative as a substitute for the subjunctive. As different "moods" , they have different connotations of meaning. One implying some hesitation or doubt (or a condition contrary to known fact), the other implying certainty.
(I, of course, have reported it.)
IMPO, your interpretation is more correct for the verb 'pedir' because it means requested or asked for. Pedir is in the past and the subordinate clause does not match.
Edit to remove post about vaya vs fuera. I was mislead by reference material. I can not find a way to translate the subordinate sentence using the imperfect (past) subjunctive into English. Edit to remove: post about preguntar.
Hey there! As a native speaker I can tell you "vaya" is correct. It all depends on if the event she asked you not to go has already taken place or not. So, if you're talking about something that happened last year, you should say "Ella me pidió que no fuera". But if she just asked you this morning not to go somewhere later today, you could say either in my opinion: "Ella me pidió que no vaya/fuera".
I am a native speaker as well and what you said does not make any sense, the sentence is definitely wrong, the correct subjuntive is "fuera/fuese". I understand that sentences like the one Duolingo provided here might sound fine to you, but that is possibly because such constructions are part of colloquial speech in your region.
I have to agree with you, from the point of view of standard Mexican Spanish and also from grammar rules, the sentence as given by Duolingo is incorrect and sounds awful to this native-speaker ear. I agree with the native-speaker from Venezuela who says that "vaya" sounds "ugly". Needs to be "fuera" or "fuese". The preterite "pidió que" triggers and necessitates the past subjunctive "fuera". The only place I have ever heard a sentence like the one Duolingo has given us is in Texas. BTW, we love our Duolingo in Texas!
Haha I don't know about that, you probably know more about the grammar intricacies than I do. I guess the thing to remember is that una pregunta means 'a question', so preguntar is about posing a question. Pedir is like 'to petition', asking another person to give or do something
It's always worth reporting it if you don't think you made a mistake!
I was going to agree with you, and then I remembered the whole irse thing - basically ir is 'go' (in the general sense), but irse specifically means 'leave', or 'quit' or 'depart', that kind of sense. I think that would be ella me pidió que no me vaya.
(yeah! http://www.wordreference.com/conj/EsVerbs.aspx?v=irse )
The whole ir / irse distinction definitely comes up later in Duo, and you get marked down for using the wrong one, so maybe that's what happened here? I know what you mean, in English we use 'go' in both senses, and we don't have this little reflexive tweak that Spanish puts on ir to change the meaning - it just might be one of those things Duo's strict about, so you learn that there is a difference in Spanish
In English, you may be able to always replace "leave" with "go", but not the other way around. If you use leave in this case, it basically means: she asked me to stay. This is not what the Spanish sentence is saying. In the Spanish sentence she is asking you not to go somewhere in particular (which is not mentioned explicitly), e. g., to her place. With this meaning of "go" in mind, you cannot replace it with "leave".
Yeah it's awkward! I think Duo's trying to strike a balance between allowing natural translations, and making sure people definitely learn the differences that exist. Knowing the rules so you can relax them, y'know?
But definitely report it - there are a lot of translations that are still too rigid, and the worst that can happen is a person looks at your report and goes 'nah it's fine as it is', so it's worth a go
The Spanish Imperative Mood carries the conjugations of the "Present" tense of the Subjunctive Mood aka Present subjunctive, except for the Tú form. The Spanish Imperative Mood is made up of only one tense (affirmative and negative)
You most likely know this two years later, but new learners should know that it is not 'THE Subjunctive' because the Modern Spanish Subjunctive Mood uses two tenses and two compound tenses, and only the present subjunctive is used in the Spanish Imperative mood. (For informational purposes the future subjunctive and future perfect subjunctives are rarely used now).
I think "pedir" generally means "to ask for" - so "she asked me not to go" is the most natural translation given the context.
"Pedir" means "to order" in the context of ordering food at a restaurant.
Otherwise, you could use "ordenar" or "mandar" to say "she ordered me not to go"
When you have a "que" the verb that follows should be conjugated and reflect the subject of the second cause. This applies whenever the que means "that." So, the exceptions are for the two word phrasal verb tener que - have to or hay que - (one) has to.
There are few verbs in Spanish that allow you to either use either:
conj verb #1 + que + conj verb #2 in subjunvitve (w/ 2 subs) OR
conj verb #1 (NO QUE) + infinitive (with 2 subjects!)
No te permito hablarme así.
I do not permit you to talk to you like that.
No te permito que me hable así.
Note, however that the first of these did not have a "que"
This might be a stretch, but couldn't this also be translated, "She asked me that she not go," where, for example, the speaker is requesting of the listener that she be allowed to not accompany the listener somewhere, or not go somewhere, the listener otherwise wants her to go? This is how i had interpreted the statement.
Imho not, I should not think. An imperative typically goes with an exclamation mark. So "Que descanses! is an imperative, so is "Let them eat cake!" or "All aboard! - but you would have to transform your sentence to something like: ........Ella pidió: "Vete!" ..........to have a real imperative.
It's not really about the punctuation, although you can certainly ramp it up and use one! Imperatives are really about telling someone to do something, instead of describing events or situations. 'Let me know' is an imperative because you're giving an order, so is 'take care of yourself'. 'I hope you take care of yourself' isn't an imperative though, because you're just stating something about the world
Yeah, you're really asking or telling someone to act a certain way, which sometimes means not doing a specific thing. It's the difference between describing the world (including what you're up to yourself) and saying things to influence it, in a way.
Also sorry, I did a little reading around and apparently exclamation marks are used a lot more with imperatives in Spanish, without necessarily adding a !!! feel to it. I was being more general about the mood, but I learned a thing, so thanks!
I'm not 100% sure on this, but part of what calls for the subjunctive is that there is a change in the person between the first clause and the second.
SHE asked ME that I not go.
I wanted HIM to be at the party.
If the person in the sentence is the same, I'm not sure the subjunctive is needed.
Also, if you are saying "She asked me that she not go" - you are actually stating a fact, what a person said. So I think you would use the indicative?
Quote: Any reason this couldn't be "She asked me that she not go", like a daughter asking not to go to her brother's stupid baseball game?
I don't think this is a possible translation of the Spanish. For there to be a subjunctive in the second clause, the second verb, vaya - to go - should apply to a new subject, not to ella. So, I think She asked me not to go. (that I not go) is the proper translation.
If she were asking ME to allow HER to not go, which is what I think you are saying regarding the brother's baseball game you should have another verb such as permitir or dejar = allow, and then another verb after that for the going.
Ella me pidió que la dejara no ir.
She asked me to allow her not to go.
Ella me pidió que la dejar quedarse en casa.
She asked me to let her stay home.
By the way, dejar is one of the verbs that allows an alternative construction with the infinitive as I used above as long as the pronouns use make clear who it doing what in the sentence.
The hints are not always correct, and are not linked with the context of the question.
Pedir means "to order" in the context of a restaurant, like you are ordering food. Because you are 'asking for' food = ordering food. Pedir = to ask for, request
To order someone to do something (to give a command) would be ordenar.
With pedir and two subjects, "she" in the main clause and "me/I" in the second clause, the "que" separating the subjects and the conjugated verb, not the infinitive are required in Spanish. Other than to tell you "this is the rule and the way that it is done in Spanish) I can be of no further help. Certain other verbs like obligar, permitir, etc. do allow for an alternative structure with the infinitive and two subjects. Pedir and Querer are two of many that do not.