ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: Conditional

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:29:24 GMT

I would like to find a real text which contains lots of examples of if clauses (1, 2 and especially 3), or could be used to learn (teach) if clauses

Thanks,

Melissa

Re: Conditional

paco2004 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:03:26 GMT

The supposition we can make about such past events that we know they actually happned is only counterfactual.

As to the past event of "the car often broke down", one of the counterfactual suppositions we can make about it would be "the car never broke down". So it would be possibe to make a sentence like;

If the car had never broken down, I could have driven her to the station every morning.

paco

Re: Conditional

jack112 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:21:58 GMT

I don't think you have to use any conditional.

Let's say I do need to use it. What would I use and why? Can you give me some exmaples too?

Thanks.

Re: Conditional

paco2004 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:24:59 GMT

Hello Jack again

I would go this way:

Usually I drove her to the station in the morning. But when the car broke down, she had to take a bus.

I don't think you have to use any conditional.

paco

Re: Conditional

jack112 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:08:52 GMT

I don't think the question you are raising is related to the usage of if-conditionals. It is rather a problem how to describe a past event that happened intermittently. Do you apply a conditional construction to such a past event in your language? In the Japanese language we use a construct such as "Usually Y. But when X happened, Z" or "When X didn't happen, Y. And/But when X happened, Z". I believe this way of description would be common to almost all the languages.

So what I'm telling stories in the past, it doesn't matter what type of conditional I use? Why is that? Or do I just use type 2 conditional? I don't understand how to use conditionals when I'm telling stories.

Do you guys have some links? Or something I can read?

Thanks.

Re: Conditional

paco2004 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:40:23 GMT

Hello Jack

I don't think the question you are raising is related to the usage of if-conditionals. It is rather a problem how to describe a past event that happened intermittently. Do you apply a conditional construction to such a past event in your language? In the Japanese language we use a construct such as "Usually Y. But when X happened, Z" or "When X didn't happen, Y. And/But when X happened, Z". I believe this way of description would be common to almost all the languages.

paco

Re: Conditional

Hela — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:32:17 GMT

Thanks Paco, but I have suddenly realized that I misunderstood Mr P's words. I thought that he said that the sentence meant that the speaker IS STILL LIVING there and not WAS LIVING there THEN. [what an awful sentence this is, but I don't know how to improve it ]

My apologies to Mr P, I must have spent too much time on the conditional yesterday!

I'm eager to read the answer to Jack112's post though.

All the best,
Hela

Re: Conditional

jack112 — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:44:10 GMT

"When we lived in the same appartment last year, my car broke down almost every week. If my car WAS (or HAD BEEN ?) working, I could drive (or COULD HAVE DRIVEN ?) you to the station in the morning. If not, you had to take a bus".

Yes, I'm confused like Hela too. I don't get it. When I'm telling a story, what kind of conditional do I need to use? How do I know? Second, third, first, and so forth?

So I'm telling a story, how do I know which conditional to use? What do they mean? Can you give me some examples of when to use what?

1. When we lived in the same appartment last year, my car broke down almost every week. If my car was working, I could drive her to the station in the morning. If it was not possible, she had to take a bus.

2. When we lived in the same appartment last year, my car broke down almost every week. If my car had been working, I could have driven her to the station in the morning. If it hadn't been possible, she had taken the bus.

Thanks.

Re: Conditional

MrPedantic — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:33:30 GMT

I like your analysis of Hela's question 1, Paco!

MrP

Re: Conditional

MrPedantic — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:32:22 GMT

Hello Hela

For question #2, this is one possibility:

"When we lived in the same apartment last year, my car broke down almost every week. When my car was working, I was able to drive you to the station in the morning. When it wasn't, you had to take a bus".

MrP

Re: Conditional

MrPedantic — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:28:34 GMT

Hello Jack

If so, why can't I use this mixed conditional?
1. If I am still living round here, I would have bought a guard dog too.

This has a very strange meaning, as it stands. It's an inferential if-statement, rather than a conditional: the main clause draws a conclusion from the if-clause.

It requires a context like this:

MrP has forgotten where he lives.
He wanders into Jack's neighbourhood.
It seems familiar. He knows he's lived there before. Does he still live there?
Then he notices that in Jack's neighbourhood, everyone walks along with a guard dog.
MrP looks down. He has no guard dog.
He utters the immortal words:

'If I am still living round here, I would have bought a guard dog too. But I don't have a guard dog. So I'm not still living here.'

(Though it would be more idiomatic to say: 'if I still live round here'.)

But if (as you suggest) you match an 'imaginary' verb with 'would have', you get:

'If I were still living round here/If I still lived round here, I would have bought a guard dog too.'

Which is much more usual.

2.

But this is correct right?
'If I don't live round here, (then that means that) I wouldn't have done that'. It has a slightly amnesiac quality.

Again, it's inferential, rather than conditional: 'If I don't live round here, I wouldn't have done that. (But I did do that, so I must live round here.)'

You can switch the clauses, which shows it's not a true conditional:

'If I wouldn't have done that, [it must mean] I don't live round here.'

Mixing conditionals has odd results.

MrP

Re: Conditional

paco2004 — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:28:52 GMT

Hello Hela

Because I was living in the neighborhood, I bought a dog.

I was living in the neighborhood
Negation :
If I was not living in the neighborhood
But caution! The negation occurs ony in unreal world
And a grammar rule [one-step-more-past rule] demands
[REAL PAST] (indicative past)
-> [UNREAL PAST] (subjunctive past perfect)
If I had not been living in the neighborhood

I bought a dog
Predict the change of possibly to occur in the unreal world:
I did not buy a dog
But a grammar rule demands -
[PAST] (indicative past)
-> [Predicted PAST] (would have+past p.)
I would not have bought a dog

If I had not been living in the neighborhood, I would not have bought a dog.

paco

Re: Conditional

Hela — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:59:34 GMT

Now I'm getting even more confused!

Please, do help me out!

3. I wouldn't have done that if I hadn't lived round here. (I know this is correct but this makes the listen feel that you don't live around here anymore.)
â yes; if the speaker were still living there, he would say 'I wouldn't have done that if I hadn't still been living round here'; or 'I wouldn't have done that if I weren't still living round here'.

1) If I say:

I wouldn't have bought a guard dog if I hadn't still been living in that seedy neighbourhood.
(What does this sentence mean exactly? Is the speaker still living in the place he's talking about ???)

2) To talk about a possibility in the past could we say:

"When we lived in the same appartment last year, my car broke down almost every week. If my car WAS (or HAD BEEN ?) working, I could drive (or COULD HAVE DRIVEN ?) you to the station in the morning. If not, you had to take a bus".

Many thanks,
Hela

Re: Conditional

jack112 — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:17:38 GMT

Okay, so this is a mixed conditonal right?

3a. If I were still living round here, I would have bought a guard dog too.

If so, why can't I use this mixed conditional?
1. If I am still living round here, I would have bought a guard dog too.

Or is it, imaginary verbs (would, didn't, could, weren't, etc.) should go with imaginary verbs? And Present (as will, can, is, etc) should go with present.

But this is correct right?

'If I don't live round here, (then that means that) I wouldn't have done that'. It has a slightly amnesiac quality.

There are two separate clauses?

Thanks.

Re: Conditional

MrPedantic — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:43:54 GMT

Sorry, Jack, you're right: my mistake.

1. I wouldn't have done that if I didn't live around here = If I didn't live round here, I wouldn't have done that.

With a single action, you would use a type 3:

1a. If I hadn't kicked him, he wouldn't have squealed.

But where the 'if' verb relates to a continuous state or action, rather than a single action, it's sometimes possible to use a type 2 in your if-clause, and a type 3 in your main clause. So in #1, the imagined 'not living round here' isn't an action: it's a continuous state that stretches back from the present to the time of the 'doing that' referred to in the main clause.

Compare this with:

1b. ??If I didn't kick him, he wouldn't have squealed.

which doesn't have meaning as it stands (the 'kicking' here is a single action).

The structure is easier to put into context if we delete the negatives, e.g.

1c. I would have bought a guard dog too, if I lived round here.

2. If I were you, I would drive more carefully in the rain.
â Yes, type 2.

3. I wouldn't have done that if I weren't still living round here = If I weren't still living round here, I wouldn't have done that.

This is the same as #1: continuous state verb in a type 2 if-clause + type 3 main clause, e.g. (deleting the negatives again):

3a. If I were still living round here, I would have bought a guard dog too.

MrP