sentence questions

Share on Facebook

Anonymous

#525147 Mon, 09 Jun 08 11:19 PM

Hi, I was looking at the article titled "U.S. chides Seoul for beef backslide" on its Saturday, May 17th, 2008 edition of the JoongAng Daily and have these questions on some sentences it had: Washington , on the other hand, is demanding that Korea fully open its markets t U.S. beef before it considers the trade deal. The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA is ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices. Rewriting those again: Washington , on the other hand, is demanding that Korea fully open its markets t U.S. beef before it considers the trade deal. -- I feel "before it starts to consider" is better. Wrong? The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA is ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices. -- Is this the right first conditional?? Also, if I put 'then' before the main clause, what, if any, difference would (will??) it make? Would your anaswer it apply to all conditioanl sentences? .. If the FTA is ratified, (then??) it would create jobs in Korea and ...

Anonymous

Articles, Clauses, Conditionals

Avangi

#525180 Tue, 10 Jun 08 01:27 AM

I believe "considers" is understood to be a process of some duration, having a beginning and an end. (Of course, we may say they are still considering.) If on Monday they are not considering it, and on Tuesday they are, then Tuesday is when it started.

You'll have to copy this messy paper over again before I read it. It's not necessary to say "before I start reading it."

Re. your second question, In my opinion, "then" is understood, and it's presence would not help to clarify the sentence, nor would it make any difference in the meaning or the sense. It is therefore better omitted. As far as first- and second-class conditionals are concerned, I'm like GG.

- A.

Edit. Re. "considering," sometimes in formal talks we say an item for consideration is "still on the table," meaning it may not be currently under discussion, but it's still an "open" topic. In you example, Washington is refusing to "put the FTA on the table," or "bring it to the table." i.e., consideration itself becomes a bargaining chip. "We may never ratify FTA, but if you don't let our beef come in without restrictions, we won't even consider FTA."

Avangi

Joined on Mon, Nov 19 2007

Senior Member (3,289)

". . . le plaisir delicieux et toujours nouveau d'une occupation inutile." - Henri de Regnier

Conditionals

CalifJim

#525184 Tue, 10 Jun 08 02:02 AM

Anonymous
I feel "before it starts to consider" is better.

No. It's not better. It's possible, but has more words than necessary.

Anonymous
Is this the right first conditional?

It's not any of the named conditionals. It's mixed. Here is the sentence twice, once in the first conditional, once in the second.

The U.S. commerce secretary says that if the FTA is ratified, (then) it will create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers ...

The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA were ratified, (then) it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers ...

The word then, in parentheses, can be included, but it is normally omitted.

CalifJim

Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004

California

Veteran Member (16,975)

"There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche

Conditionals

Marius Hancu

#525204 Tue, 10 Jun 08 02:40 AM

See these links on conditionals:

http://www.englishpage.com/conditional/mixedconditional.html
http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs-conditional_3.htm

Marius Hancu

Joined on Wed, Apr 26 2006

Montreal, Canada

Veteran Member (11,673)

Grammar, Verbs, Conditionals

New2grammar

#525213 Tue, 10 Jun 08 03:42 AM

The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA is ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices.

I couldn't find this mixed conditional in any of the classical conditionals provided by MH.

What's the different between the original and if the FTA WERE ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices?

For some reason this special mixed conditional doesn't always work, for example

If I'm rich, I would donate a million to CJ (To me, this is very wrong!)

New2grammar

Joined on Tue, Nov 21 2006

Veteran Member (7,670)

Who wants to go sailing around the world with me?

Conditionals, Mixed conditionals

CalifJim

#525215 Tue, 10 Jun 08 03:47 AM

New2grammar
If I'm rich, I would donate a million to CJ

In this case, the grammar doesn't matter. Please send the money immediately!!! Smile

CalifJim

Grammar

CalifJim

#525217 Tue, 10 Jun 08 03:50 AM

New2grammar
What's the ~~different~~ difference between the original and if the FTA WERE ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices?

No difference in meaning. Our native speaker brains can be quite impervious to such differences.

New2grammar
For some reason this special mixed conditional doesn't always work, for example

If I'm rich, I would donate a million to CJ (To me, this is very wrong!)

There is always more trouble with the verb to be in conditional structures, in my opinion, so yes, it is very wrong.