In Conditionals^x, Verbs^x, Simple past^x

Interesting! You never taught me those conditionals! Does that mean that in English (like in Italian), it is possible to use the simple past instead of the subjunctive formed with the past perfect, in informal and casual English? The only example I know it's kind of common is substituting...

Is it possible to use "provided that" for sentences in the simple past? If it is possible, do we have to use the sentence with both verbs in the same tense? I know it works as a conditional sentence but it sounds strange to me in the past. How could I complete the following...

Hi Manisha,When we would like to relate a failure in the past to an ongoing activity that is still considered unfulfilled today, we can use a mixed conditional statement in which one relates a present unreal condition (i.e. verb in the simple past - TYPE II conditional ) to a past unreal /...

MrPedantic wrote: I see what you mean; but I think the distinction between type I and type II conditionals disappears, once the statement is reported. In effect, everything becomes "detached", i.e. "remote".Your insight is amazingly deep, MrP! If anything, in my opinion, the reason why it...

This situation is a little different than your type III conditional formula is intended for. The speaker is not in Ian's position, so the phrase is a "condition contrary to fact". In that situation a formal speaker or writer would use the subjunctive mood of the verb rather than indicative or...

Lin1978 wrote:Thank you, Master Yankee. Your answer is quite clear. But I still have one small question. Last time my teacher told me that, "if I have two different subjects in a main clause and in a conditional, and I want to use the participle phrase, I have to keep both two subjects or change...

Hi Bokeh, 1. Imperfect subjunctive is OK with me if you want to use that term. Indefinite preterite is fine, too. Whatever the terminology, it seems to me that the question was whether saw in that sentence was acceptable to a traditionalist. 2. If I understand you correctly, you are...

Bokeh wrote:I think you are misunderstanding my post. The sentence is obviously subjunctive... but what I was attempting to point out was using the simple past "saw" rather than the imperfect subjunctive "were to see" is wrong when used in conjunction with the conditional. This obvious error has...

Cool Breeze wrote: Goodman wrote:I'll say "sunjunctive".I agree.Of course it's not the subjunctive (but it should be). "Saw" is the simple past (indefinite preterite). This is a common error made by native english speakers in conjunction with the conditional.The subjunctive of any verb takes...

Dear teachers, I'm a little confused. Mr Micawber suggested earlier to say: 1) I didn't know what to do: on the one hand, it was wonderful because it meant freedom and love; but on the other hand, if I left I don't know if my questions are clear, if not I'll try again. Thank you for your...