Question 1

Why do we use hubiera arruinado (past perfect subjunctive) here instead of just the past subjunctive like arruinara?

Accepted Answer

The phrase como si (as if) always triggers a past subjunctive form for hypothetical situations. We use the past perfect subjunctive (hubiera arruinado) because the hypothetical action (ruining the gala) happened before the main action (chatting). If we used arruinara, it would mean he was ruining the gala at the exact same time he was chatting.

Question 2

Could I use hubiese arruinado instead of hubiera arruinado?

Accepted Answer

Yes! Both hubiera and hubiese are perfectly valid forms of the imperfect subjunctive of haber. Hubiera is generally more common in everyday spoken Latin American Spanish, but you will absolutely hear and read hubiese as well, especially in literature or slightly more formal contexts.

Question 3

Why use aquel señor instead of ese señor to mean 'that gentleman'?

Accepted Answer

Both mean 'that', but aquel implies a greater distance in space or time than ese. Since the sentence is recalling a past event (using the imperfect charlaba), aquel adds a storytelling feel, emphasizing that the gentleman and the gala are distant memories.

Question 4

Why is charlaba in the imperfect tense rather than the preterite (charló)?

Accepted Answer

The imperfect is used here to describe an ongoing, continuous action in the past, setting the background scene. He 'was chatting' without a defined beginning or end in this context. If we used the preterite charló, it would sound like a single, completed action ('he chatted').

Aquel señor charlaba, como si su hipocresía no hubiera arruinado la gala.

Breakdown of Aquel señor charlaba, como si su hipocresía no hubiera arruinado la gala.

Questions & Answers about Aquel señor charlaba, como si su hipocresía no hubiera arruinado la gala.

Learn Aquel señor charlaba, como si su hipocresía no hubiera arruinado la gala and more in Spanish