Short answer. No. In an alternative obligation you promise to perform one of several possible things, but you must perform one of them completely. Article 1199 does not let you cobble together a part of one option and a part of another. The creditor cannot be forced to accept part goods and part cash in place of one full performance.
What the law says
A person alternatively bound by different prestations shall completely perform one of them. The creditor cannot be compelled to receive part of one and part of the other undertaking.
Civil Code, Article 1199 — Alternative Obligations Need One Complete Performance. Read the full provision →
What an alternative obligation is
An alternative obligation is one where the debtor is bound to perform any one of two or more different prestations — for example, to deliver a specific item or, instead, to pay a sum of money. The debtor generally has the right to choose which one to perform. That flexibility, however, is a choice among whole options, not a licence to mix them. Once the choice is made, that single undertaking must be carried out in full. Keeping each option whole is what makes the obligation certain and preserves the creditor's expectation of a complete performance. The right to choose which prestation to perform normally belongs to the debtor, though the parties may agree to give that choice to the creditor instead; either way, the chosen option must still be carried out in full.
One option, performed completely
Article 1199 states the rule directly: a person alternatively bound by different prestations shall completely perform one of them. The creditor cannot be compelled to receive part of one and part of the other undertaking. So a debtor who owes either the goods or the cash cannot deliver half the goods and half the cash and call the obligation satisfied. The creditor bargained for one complete performance and is entitled to insist on it. A partial performance spread across two options is simply not what the contract promised, and the creditor is free to refuse it.
Why the law insists on a complete performance
The point of the rule is to protect the creditor from being handed a patchwork that serves neither purpose fully. Each option in an alternative obligation was meant to stand on its own as a complete satisfaction of the debt; splitting them can leave the creditor with two half-measures worth less than either whole. If you are the debtor, decide which option you will perform and deliver it entirely. If you are the creditor, you are not obliged to accept a blended, partial tender, and you may hold out for one option done in full. If a debtor tenders such a split, the creditor may reject it and treat the obligation as unperformed, leaving the debtor in delay until one option is delivered whole.