Search results for 'tag:Direct questions tag:Conditionals' matching tags 'Direct questions' and 'Conditionals'

Re: If you (will)

CalifJim — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:13:12 GMT

Mr Wordy
I realised later that this is a rubbish explanation for why "will" is natural here.

OK. So let's move on and tell the real reason why will is natural here!

see who is there.

see what can be done

see how it's done

see where they put the keys

see whether they will give me a refund

see if they'll give me a refund

When an if-clause is an indirect question (and therefore if is replaceable by whether), it's nominal in nature, and can easily take will, or not, as desired.

I don't know [if / whether] George will be on time. / I wonder [if / whether] they will remember to bring the salads. / ...

In the conditional patterns, the if-clause has a different (adverbial) nature, and doesn't take will

If they (*will) give me a refund, I'll spend it on a new shirt. (* = ungrammatical)

-- unless there is emphasis on some benefit to the speaker or listener or both, as in bargaining. In other words, the idea of willingness is usually present in these odd-ball if ... will ... clauses.

If you will cook the meal, I will wash the dishes.

Re: functionality of would and could in the present and past

CalifJim — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:00:01 GMT

Anonymous
but don't have the same level of understanding as to the use of 'could' as conditional.

That's fairly easy to explain. The conditional meaning of could includes would:

I could go to the movie if I had enough money. = I would be able to go to the movie if I had enough money.

Could you do me a favor? = Would you be able to do me a favor?

Cheat on an exam? I could never do that! = Cheat on an exam? I would never be able to do that!

_______

to wonder introduces an indirect question, so these are not if ..., (then) ... structures:

I wonder [if / whether] I [can / could / would be able to] go to see a movie.

I wonder what I [can / could / would be able to] do to get the promotion.

I wonder what I [will / would] have to do to get the promotion.

However, you can add an if-clause within the scope of the indirect question:

I wonder what I {will / would} have to do if I {want / wanted} the promotion.

I wonder what I {can / could} do if I {want / wanted} the promotion.

I wonder [if / whether] I {can / could} buy a house like that if I {save / saved} my money for a few years.

{ } indicates correlated choices. (The first choice goes with the first choice; the second choice goes with the second choice.)

Re: Conditional or not?

CalifJim — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:13:15 GMT

1, They began asking us several months ago if we would stay. Not a conditional at all. if/whether we would stay is an indirect question.
2. I said I would stay if I could do two shows a night.-- looks to be a type 2 conditional (unreal) Yes. Type 2.
3. If there would be a church in this neighborhood, it would be ideal. -- looks to be a type 2 conditional (unreal) If there were a church ... Type 2.
4. If there were a Burnham wood in ***, they probably would have shipped it. -- looks to be a type 2 conditional (unreal) Mixed conditional. 2 and 3.

Re: Tense in conditional sentence

Tanit — Sun, 04 May 2008 10:56:28 GMT

Hi, N2G,

Besides in indirect questions (the examples previously given), if + will works also to indicate volition (or refusal in its negative form, "if + won't" ) or insistence, and, yes, it can be used at the beginning of a sentence. Here are the links to some other threads where these kinds of if + will were discussed. Hope you'll find them useful.

http://www.englishforums.com/English/IfAdjectiveClauses/zjqbg/post.htm
http://www.englishforums.com/English/NoCondition/vrcvh/post.htm
http://www.englishforums.com/English/IfClauseFuture/2/cwgxp/Post.htm

confused about 'would'

New2grammar — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:10:33 GMT

I know 'would' carries many meanings. My problem is sometimes I find it difficult to tell which meaning the speaker uses. I think I understand its hypothetical usage, and in some contexts, its politeness usage. Below is a post that has several woulds I have trouble interpreting. I also copied a post on would by CalifJim for reference.

Your analysis is good. Context will determine if you're using the expression as an excuse to break off what you're doing. If you're calling the people you expect to meet, then you would (1)tell them the truth. You can say, "I'll be about five minutes late," or "I may be a little late." If you're speaking to someone who is about to make you late for an appointment, the expression would(2) mean, "Hey, I'm gonna be late if I don't split right now!" If you just say, "I'm gonna be late," you probably would(3) have already tipped the person off that you would(4) need to end the conversation soon, and as you suggest, you would(5) still expect to be on time if you left immediately.

1) I don't thing politeness is the intended meaning here. To my ear, it carries the meaning of preference.

2) would here means possible? I have zero confidence in this one.

3) it doesn't look like hypothetical usage to me because the if clause is in present tense

4) and 5) should follow the same reasoning for #3, whatever that is.

Please help! Thanks in advance!

CalifJim's explanation on would
Yes. I thought maybe that's what you were referring to.
would in an if clause is possible when the would or the entire if-clause is part of a formula of politeness. if you would be so kind is a typical example of if with would in a "politeness phrase". This formula is equivalent to please. This sort of if-clause does not even have to be classified as a true conditional even though it contains the word if.

The phrase would like as a polite way of saying want, and it too can appear in an if-clause. Note that the idiom would like counts as a present tense for purposes of tense combinations. That is, it may combine with the imperative or the future. The idiom would rather has the same property.

If you would like to have dinner with us tomorrow, please call and let us know before noon.
I'm sure that if he'd like to go with us, he'll tell us. (If he would like to go, he will tell us.)
If you'd rather wait until tomorrow, [just say so / I'll understand].

if-clauses that are part of an indirect question structure are also exempt from the rule about combining if and would:

I wonder if he would object to this procedure.
I don't know if I would agree.
We had not decided if we would go along with the plan.

With the exception of the indirect question structure, which is quite common, these are just a very, very small number of situations where if and would occur in the same clause. The main rule for 99.99% of cases is 'never' to place if and would together!

Re: did I / can I/ have I in affirmative clauses

giuseppe80 — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:42:15 GMT

Thank you very much for your aswer, Tanit, expecially for the first list you provide.

I had not included these cases:

In formal/emphatic conditional sentences: "Should you need further information, please call ..."
When expressing wishes starting with may: "May you find what you're searching for."

because they are not strictly affirmative sentences. They express a possibility or a wish.

Neither:

In short tags. "I like it!" "So do I"
Sometimes (quite literary) after as, so, than: "She was very pretty, as were her sisters."

because I think that here the reason of the inversion is the opposition topic-comment. ("I like it" is about like it or not, the new information provided by the other speaker is not a new verb, is the new subject 'I'. And the same goes with the sisters: they are not talking about the sisters, the topic is 'her' beauty, then the beauty remains the topic and the new information is that also her sisters are beautiful)

As for the indirect questions:

Sometimes in indirect questions, especially when the subject is too long (cannot think of an example right now, sorry!)

I think it is a simplier way to say them (they become just like direct questions. I noticed that lots of people -- in all languages -- are not very good in using subordinate clauses. They start as if they were introducing a subordinate clause, then put a main clause instead. When I was younger I was hosted by a British family in the summertime. One day my guest-father told me: "What I'll do tomorrow is: I prepare your packed lunch and leave it in the refrigerator")

Re: did I / can I/ have I in affirmative clauses

Tanit — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:08:35 GMT

Hi Giuseppe, and welcome!

The structure you're referring to is called "inversion."

Your examples fall into a singular category (that of negative/restrictive expression) which includes other expressions, such as barely, scarcely, hardly, seldom, little, never, under no circumstances, at no time, etc (there are many more!)

Besides in direct questions, inversion is also used:

In short tags. "I like it!" "So do I"
In formal/emphatic conditional sentences: "Should you need further information, please call ..."
When expressing wishes starting with may: "May you find what you're searching for."
Sometimes in indirect questions, especially when the subject is too long (cannot think of an example right now, sorry!)
Sometimes (quite literary) after as, so, than: "She was very pretty, as were her sisters."

There can be other circumstances in which inversion occurs; these are the ones that came to my mind.

As for your examples, I think the first one needs a past simple because you've got a time reference (Only yesterday did I realise...). I also would put an object (it) after repeat.

I'm not a native either, so you'd probably better wait for one of them.

Re: 'if' ~ adjective clauses

Tanit — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 09:45:32 GMT

Hi,

"I shall be glad to go, if you will accompany me." => This use of if + will is common in polite requests. Will does not express conditional meaning, but volition. Think of "If you will" here as "If you are kind enough to," "If you are willing to," "If you want to."
Opposite to that, if +won't expresses refusal: If you won't be in your office tomorrow, you'll get fired.

Some other examples in which you can use if+will.

to show insistence-bad habits-stubborness ...: If she will eat so many sweets, she'll get fat ==> If she keeps eating so many sweets ... (see this thread)
in indirect questions ...: I don't know if she will be ready. She's always late. (I might be wrong, but it seems to me that "if" here should be considered linked to "know" and not to "will")

There are also other circumstances in which you can use "if + will" and "if + won't" (to express that something happens as a result of a future action, or as a paraphrase of "if it is true that ... then"). For a thourough discussion, have a look at CJ's post here (you'll also find many examples!).

PS: I probably shouldn't have answered, but I also wanted to check my understanding of "if + will". I'll be glad if somebody points out any mistakes I've made!

Re: wish clauses

Yankee — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:22:29 GMT

Goodman wrote:
Yankee wrote:
Did you read the rest of my post, MrC? I attempted to make it clear why YL's sentence works.

The danger in stating absolute rules in prescriptive grammar is that doing so doesn't allow for legitimate exceptions.
For example, many grammar books state that the word 'would' may not be used in an IF-clause. That is incorrect. While that rule is usually true, there are times when using 'would' is perfectly acceptable and grammatical in an IF-clause.

Hi Amy,

We donât always agree on everything but I do respect your credentials in English. If you donât mind, I would like to hear your opinions. The correct usage of âwereâ and âwasâ with the âI wishâ construction definitely has become a heated debate. According to traditional English (the kind I have learned), the âI wish I wereâ or âifâ and several other conditional constructions are called âsubjunctiveâ which most native and learners are very familiar with. There are few of those who believe âI wish I was â¦â is also correct. Itâs true that many people use it this way, however, it doesnât mean itâs a changing trend, and therefore itâs correct to use. True, the user may say whatever he prefers. But when we are on this forum to discuss English, don't you think we all need to conform to the rules of the traditional English? Do you agree? Many respected grammar books now accept 'was' in addition to 'were' in Type 2 IF-sentences as well as in 'wish' sentences. Personally, I would still make it a point to use 'were' in a formal context, but the use of 'was' does seem to be on the rise -- especially in informal contexts.

Having said that, based on the principle of subjunctive, this âwas " usage is incorrect in my opinion, whether itâs accepted as mainstream English or otherwise. If something is accepted in mainstream English, why would you want to reject it completely? Obviously, even the English Authorities have varying degrees of opinions, some said itâs incorrect while some said itâs acceptable. My argument is not so much to find out who is right, rather, what the believersâ argument is based on. Clearly the âI wish I â¦..â is a conditional sentence, which is âsubjunctiveâ. So if one insists on using this âI wish I wasâ construction and to have the twisted attitude to ask why I keep insisting on the rules of subjunctive, I feel the warped discussion is over. If you donât mind, would shed some light on the subject? And would you call ithe "was" usage a changing trend and therefore itâs acceptable? Language is a living, breathing animal. It changes and grows with time. Parts of it sometimes die, new usages sprout. It changes because of actual usage, often in spite of what grammarians would have us do. If yo ufeel uncomfortable answering these direct questions, I do understand.

Thanks

Re: wish clauses

Goodman — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:04:13 GMT

Yankee wrote:
Did you read the rest of my post, MrC? I attempted to make it clear why YL's sentence works.

The danger in stating absolute rules in prescriptive grammar is that doing so doesn't allow for legitimate exceptions.
For example, many grammar books state that the word 'would' may not be used in an IF-clause. That is incorrect. While that rule is usually true, there are times when using 'would' is perfectly acceptable and grammatical in an IF-clause.

Hi Amy,

We donât always agree on everything but I do respect your credentials in English. If you donât mind, I would like to hear your opinions. The correct usage of âwereâ and âwasâ with the âI wishâ construction definitely has become a heated debate. According to traditional English (the kind I have learned), the âI wish I wereâ or âifâ and several other conditional constructions are called âsubjunctiveâ which most native and learners are very familiar with. There are few of those who believe âI wish I was â¦â is also correct. Itâs true that many people use it this way, however, it doesnât mean itâs a changing trend, and therefore itâs correct to use. True, the user may say whatever he prefers. But when we are on this forum to discuss English, don't you think we all need to conform to the rules of the traditional English? Do you agree?

Having said that, based on the principle of subjunctive, this âwas " usage is incorrect in my opinion, whether itâs accepted as mainstream English or otherwise. Obviously, even the English Authorities have varying degrees of opinions, some said itâs incorrect while some said itâs acceptable. My argument is not so much to find out who is right, rather, what the believersâ argument is based on. Clearly the âI wish I â¦..â is a conditional sentence, which is âsubjunctiveâ. So if one insists on using this âI wish I wasâ construction and to have the twisted attitude to ask why I keep insisting on the rules of subjunctive, I feel the warped discussion is over. If you donât mind, would shed some light on the subject? And would you call ithe "was" usage a changing trend and therefore itâs acceptable? If yo ufeel uncomfortable answering these direct questions, I do understand.

Thanks