ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Marius Hancu — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 09:02:54 GMT

If that is the case, wouldn't it make more sense to bring him along too?

Mind you, there are grammarians out there that see the above as a mixed conditional only in form, but not in substance, as being in their view just softer/more polite form of:

If that is the case, won't it make more sense to bring him along too?

which is a 1st conditional:

http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs-conditional_2.htm

It's up to you which view you adopt for your comfort.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Marius Hancu — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:11:51 GMT

The above site is very good.

Also:

MIXED CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

http://www.edufind.com/english/grammar/IF8.cfm

Start reading English-language novels and watch for conditionals:-)

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:52:53 GMT

Thank you so much, Marius

You said:

Use your imagination, there are many possibilities out there for the mixed variety. You just need to read more authors:-), don't just learn grammar.

I think, if I am not mistaken, I saw an grammar help website listing (noting) its section on mixed conditionals as a "complete" list of conditionals. What do you make of that?

Can I freely use my imagination in forming mixed conditionals. I don't think I am quite erudite or well-read as you. How can I get to know the varieties of mixed conditionals available?

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Marius Hancu — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:49:04 GMT

> I didn't see anything in the present tense though.

Use your imagination, there are many possibilities out there for the mixed variety. You just need to read more authors:-), don't just learn grammar.

If that is the case, wouldn't it make more sense to bring him along too?

Yes, mixed: real condition, unreal/hypothetical conclusion. The unreal/unreal combination is:

If that were the case, wouldn't it make more sense to bring him along too?

http://www.englishpage.com/conditional/presentconditional.html

Also, "is" are considered less formal than "were/was."

Learn this site in the last link. You'll make much faster progress.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:45:54 GMT

Thank you so much, Marius and Mr. Wordy. I think I checked out the mixed conditional section of the website you gave but I didn't see anything in the present tense though.

Also I came up with this. Is this a mixed conditional too?

If that is the case, wouldn't it make more sense to bring him along too?

Sorry to ask many questions but after studying conditionals for a long time, the questons are still pilling up.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Marius Hancu — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:32:20 GMT

>In fact, in real life, I would in this context usually say "If you have any money...".)

That's a good obs, Mr. Wordy.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Marius Hancu — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:48:15 GMT

>I thihk the modal 'could' and possibly 'would' have some differing uses.

could: about ability, would: about willingness

Anonymous
Thank you.

Would you say these are examples of any of traditional (?) first, or second, or third conditional or any of the acceptable variants thereof? I have been rubbing my eyes for any clues as to their relevance or relationship to the traditional (?) first, or second, or third conditional but they seem to be fleeting from me at best.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

The first is a mixed conditional, similar to what you can find on this page:

http://www.englishpage.com/conditional/mixedconditional.html

This is one of the best sites, learn whatever you find there. Forget about strict classifications (1st, 2nd), I don't remember them.

The 2nd is a replacement using should.

If you want one of the "classical patterns," you could use:

If you happenED to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

which is also NOT about the past, but about present/future and is a 2nd conditional as in:

http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs-conditional_3.htm

and would be more doubtful, more formal and more polite (use of the past tense for a present time condition, which is called distancing) than

If you happen to have

but I wanted to correct/use the original pattern of tenses, which are to be found in the original thread.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 03:10:11 GMT

Thank you.

Would you say these are examples of any of traditional (?) first, or second, or third conditional or any of the acceptable variants thereof? I have been rubbing my eyes for any clues as to their relevance or relationship to the traditional (?) first, or second, or third conditional but they seem to be fleeting from me at best.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Mr Wordy — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:23:40 GMT

Anonymous

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? [this is more about present -- if the if-clause is in present tense, can we use the modals 'could' and 'would'? Does the phrase 'happen to have' make any difference here?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? ["chancy" should -- To me, 'should' here is functionally equal to "if", so the sentence could be read:

If you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

The first sentence means essentially the same as "...can/will you lend me some?", but "could/would" has the effect of "softening" the request -- making it seem less direct. The use of "happen to have" (as opposed to just "have") makes no difference to the point you're asking about.

In the second sentence there is, to me, no tangible difference in meaning between "should" and "if". However, the version with "should" is more formal (or even slightly old-fashioned), and, in my part of the world, is much less likely to be heard in ordinary conversation. (In fact, in real life, I would in this context usually say "If you have any money...".)

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:48:49 GMT

Thank you so much.

Would you say that the following sentences reflect the polite use aspect of the modal "could/would" or possibly in the case of "would" more of politeness than the conditional nature? I thihk the modal 'could' and possibly 'would' have some differing uses.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

Using politeness but contextully very impolite or not nice:

Hey, John, I am hungry. If you have some money with you, could you lend me some so I could get something to eat?

No, way. Get lost. You are not my friend.

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

CalifJim — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:35:00 GMT

Anonymous
Are these by Marius correct? I feel they should be since he is a guru but I don't understand how they could be so.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? [this is more about present -- if the if-clause is in present tense, can we use the modals 'could' and 'would'? Does the phrase 'happen to have' make any difference here?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? ["chancy" should -- To me, 'should' here is functionally equal to "if", so the sentence could be read:

If you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

They certainly seem correct to me. Perhaps it's the idiom happen to that's bothering you.

If you happen to have money = If, by chance, it turns out that you have money

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

CalifJim — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:30:20 GMT

Anonymous
since he is a guru

This is no reflection on Marius at all, but realize that titles like Guru are based entirely on the number of posts a person has contributed to the forum. When you reach the correct number of posts (I forget what it is), you too will be a Guru.

Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:58:11 GMT

Hi,

In part of the final post of the thread started by Anon named "Nagging conditional problem", Marius wrote this:

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? [this is more about present

or:

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? ["chancy" should

or:

On the chance that you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some

Are these by Marius correct? I feel they should be since he is a guru but I don't understand how they could be so.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? [this is more about present -- if the if-clause is in present tense, can we use the modals 'could' and 'would'? Does the phrase 'happen to have' make any difference here?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? ["chancy" should -- To me, 'should' here is functionally equal to "if", so the sentence could be read:

If you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?