Can you explain when to use imperfect vs preterite vs perfect past tense? I struggle knowing when to use which.
So this is going to be just a quick overview of preterite and imperfect, and I'll include more links now for more in depth things that you can look at because I talk about them very often
Preterite tag
Imperfect tag
The Perfect Tenses w/ haber
-
In many cases preterite and imperfect are both valid choices, depending on what you're trying to express: leí "I read" vs. leía "I was reading / I used to read" as an example
Preterite in Spanish is also known as "simple past"; it's used for things that have definitely happened. By "definitely" I mean there's often a time phrase associated with it that says "this happened at this time"
It typically is action or something that did specifically happen, so it can read as very clinical and matter of fact
...
Imperfect on the other hand has more uses. The linguistic term "imperfect" means "not yet completed"
Imperfect is often used with narration and description, describing the weather, the time, personalities
But the big thing that I find helpful is that in general the imperfect tense seems to be narration, while the preterite seems to be an interruption or action.
Whether you choose preterite or imperfect in some cases is more about how much description you're giving, as imperfect gives you a scenario, while preterite shows an action taking place in that scenario.
Dormía y entonces sonó el teléfono. = I was sleeping and then the phone rang. Dormía mientras sonaba el teléfono. = I was sleeping while the phone was ringing. [implying "I" didn't wake up] Dormí y sonó el teléfono. = I slept, and the phone rang. [two preterites imply a list of actions, like recalling a memory
The other very important function of imperfect tense is that it can mean "used to"; this can be done with or without the verb soler "to be in the habit of"
*Quick note on soler; it can't exist in preterite, it's usually in present tense suele ir a la playa "he/she normally goes to the beach" or imperfect solía ir a la playa "he/she would go to the beach". Because the imperfect tense can mean multiple things depending on context, soler adds a special bit of emphasis on "used to" to clear up any confusion:
Iba a la playa. = I was going to the beach. [imperfect continuous/progessive] Iba a la playa. = I used to go the beach. [imperfect, marking habitual] Solía ir a la playa. = I used to go to the beach. [habitual; soler being a clear marker of habitual]
Another common one is vivir. You could say vivía en la ciudad to mean "I lived in the city" OR "I used to live in the city", but if you wanted to be very clear - solía vivir en la ciudad "I used to live in the city"
Additional Notes:
You can only tell time in the past with imperfect - era la una, eran las dos, eran las tres etc
You can do the passive voice with preterite + past participle, and it only works with preterite here
-
The perfect tenses are a bit of a special case. I never know quite how to classify them because they can be in pretty much any tense, and they exist in indicative and subjunctive
Essentially though, "perfect" means "thoroughly done"; the same linguistic root as "imperfect" being "not yet completed"
Perfect tenses use a conjugation of haber + a past participle, and some past participles are irregular... as an example hacer "to done" turns into hecho "done"
Past participles are useful to know because they're also frequently the adjectival forms of verbs... like haber roto "to have broken", but then as an adjective roto/a is "broken"
Perfect puts things a little into the past, but it still has an effect on the present. So it is technically like a past tense, but it can be used alongside other tenses when things still have an impact
English has this same function - it's the difference between "did" and "have done"
Note: Many people use present perfect in place of preterite [simple past]. I wouldn't recommend it if you're just starting out because you shouldn't use it as a crutch, and preterite has many irregular forms you do need to know for later on
¿La viste? = Did you see her/it? ¿La has visto? = Have you seen her/it?
In that example, pretty much nothing has changed. If you use the preterite you typically would expect an answer in preterite, describing the past, la vi ayer "I saw her/it yesterday" or no la vi "I didn't see it/her" for example
If you get asked "have you seen her?" you're asking about something that still has an impact on the present... no la he visto aún "I haven't seen her yet" for example has an implication that you might see her later. Or la he visto "I have seen her" kind of invites a follow-up question; it's almost as if you know someone is going to ask you where you saw her or when, or where she is now
~
Next we have pluperfect [el pluscuamperfecto] which is an imperfect conjugation of haber + past participle
"Pluperfect" or "pluscuamperfect" is more or less "past-er than past", or "more than past"
It's talking about something that happened further in the past but still has an impact on the present situation. You see this a lot with recounting memories so it comes up a lot in first-person stories, diaries, memories, witness statements etc.
No la había visto. = I hadn't seen her. La había visto antes. = I had seen her before. Nunca habíamos viajado en avión. = We had never flown (before). [lit. "we had never traveled by plane"] Se habían hecho ricos. = They'd gotten rich. / They'd become rich. Se habían hecho ricas. = They [f] had gotten rich. / They [f] had become rich.
But if you compare present perfect and pluperfect you really see the "more past than past"
No se conocen. = They don't know each other. [present] No se conocían. = They didn't know each other. [imperfect] No se conocieron. = They didn't meet each other. [preterite] No se conocerán. = They shall not know each other. / They will not meet each other. [future] No se conocerían. = They wouldn't know/meet each other. [conditional] No se han conocido. = They haven't met each other. [present perfect] No se habían conocido. = They hadn't met each other. [pluperfect] No se habrán conocido. = They won't have met each other. [future perfect] No se habrían conocido. = They wouldn't have met each other. [conditional]
*Note: no se habrán conocido is not a super common expression but it is grammatically possible... you're more likely to see that used passively like "they shall not be known" or "you would never have known" as in "they would not have been discovered"... but that's neither here nor there
And like I said, perfect can exist in subjunctive so:
Es curioso que no se hayan conocido antes. = It's strange that they haven't met before. Es curioso que no se hubieran conocido antes. = It's strange that they haven't met before. Era curioso que no se hubieran conocido antes. = It was strange that they hadn't met before. [which sounds more narrative]
