In this older post, I got an answer from Kyrio, which may be summarized as
Principle: Imparfait indicatif and présent conditionnel used for an irreal situation backshifts to plus-que-parfait indicatif and passé conditionnel when the "mental state" verb introducing the situation goes from présent to one of the past tenses.
I seem to have found a sentence in L'Étranger that contradicts the above principle, and therefore want to ask: whether that principle should be modified to accommodate the example.
Below, I will recap the relevant portion of the older post, present the example from Camus, and re-state the question.
The principle from the older post
The older post concerned a young man feeling he would have enjoyed a walk if not for his mother. If narrated in the present tense, it might go:
(A) Je sens{0} quel plaisir je prendrais{0} à me promener s'il n'y avait{0} pas maman.
Sens is a present-tense mental state verb introducing an irreal situation expressed in imparfait indicatif and présent conditionnel. The {0} is there to indicate that the verbs so marked indicate, or concern, the present (or the very near future in case of prendrais).
Ten days later, if we were to narrate again the same state of affairs (which is now in the past), the older post told us that it must be done using plus-que-parfait indicatif and passé conditionnel, as follows:
(A1') Je sentais{-1} quel plaisir j’aurais pris{-1} à me promener s’il n’y avait pas{-1} eu maman.
The time code {-1} indicates a past.
We were told two further things. One, the sentence just above may also express a "sensing" that took place in the past concerning, however, a state of irreal affairs at an even more remote past. For example, "Je" sensing yesterday something about a walk that hadn't occurred the day before. Time coding would go:
(A2') Je sentais{-1} quel plaisir j’aurais pris{-2} à me promener s’il n’y avait pas{-2} eu maman.
In other words, the sentence is ambiguous, and disambiguation depends on context.
The second additional thing we learned was that a past-tense mental state verb cannot introduce an irreal in imparfait indicatif and présent conditionnel. For example, the following is ungrammatical and cannot be used to express a past sensing concerning a coeval state of irreal affairs. See comments to Kyrio's answer in the older post.
(A0') Je sentais{-1} quel plaisir je prendrais{-1} à me promener s'il n'y avait{-1} pas maman.
The example from Camus
Please see the highlighted:
En me réveillant, j’ai compris pourquoi mon patron avait l’air mécontent quand je lui ai demandé mes deux jours de congé : c’est aujourd’hui samedi. Je l’avais pour ainsi dire oublié, mais en me levant, cette idée m’est venue. Mon patron, tout naturellement, a pensé que j’aurais ainsi quatre jours de vacances avec mon dimanche et cela ne pouvait pas lui faire plaisir. Mais d’une part, ce n’est pas de ma faute si on a enterré maman hier au lieu d’aujourd’hui et d’autre part, j’aurais eu mon samedi et mon dimanche de toute façon. Bien entendu, cela ne m’empêche pas de comprendre tout de même mon patron.
Question
(Q1) Is the Camus sentence a counterexample to the principle?
(Q2) If so, how should the principle be modified?
On (Q1), we do seem to have a counterexample. The boss's "thinking" and the narrator's "having" (or "being about to have" or, if you prefer, "getting") a four days' leave is all in the past (including the immediate future relative to the past, in case of j’aurais). In terms of time code:
(B0') Mon patron, tout naturellement, a pensé{-1} que j’aurais{-1} ainsi quatre jours de vacances avec mon dimanche
On (Q2), one possibility that occurs to me is that passé composé may introduce an irreal in présent conditionnel. The idea may be that passé composé is "present" on the surface although "past" in meaning. But this would seem highly unsatisfying to me. It would require that, if a pensé is changed to pensait or pensa, j’aurais must become j'aurais eu. Is that what would happen? I would much rather see a modification of the principle that allows all past-tense mental state verbs to introduce irreals in imparfait indicatif and présent conditionnel, if circumstances permit.
Question supplemented
[Site Moderator has told me to post a separate question for what used to be here.]
