Search results for 'tag:Indirect questions' matching tag 'Indirect questions'

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: what

CalifJim — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 02:23:49 GMT

This one leans much more toward that which.

I work this out by substituting other indirect questions like whether It is permitted. If a large range of indirect questions doesn't work, I suspect that only that which is the correct interpretation.

a description of whether it is permitted doesn't work for my ear, so I think that which is probably a better characterization in that case.

learn whether it is permitted does work for me, as well as learn that which is permitted, so there I see a greater possibility for ambiguity.

The verbs of knowing, finding out, and learning tend to be followed by indirect questions, so when these are followed by what, where, whether, how, etc., I am suspicious that an indirect question is a possible interpretation, along with the that which interpretation, thereby creating the ambiguity you called attention to in your original post.

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: Let's see who finishes/will finish first.

CalifJim — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:03:49 GMT

Only one s in present!!!

You can't use will with the stative verbs in this construction: [Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] plus an indirect question. I would not call these relative clauses.

to finish first - an action.

how you are - a state - not an action.

get there first - same as arrive first - an action.

you think - an internal activity; having an opinion - not an action.

_______

Thus, with the indirect question in brackets { }, ungrammatical choices prefixed with asterisk *:

[Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] {who [finishes / will finish / gets there / will get there] first}.

[Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] {how [you are / *you will be / what you think / *what you will think]}

_______

Your example with make sure does not belong to the pattern above. There's no indirect question.

Make sure (that) you come back soon.

A make sure that pattern is not followed by a future (will).

______

You can save yourself a lot of headaches by using the present tense for all of these. Even in cases where will is possible, it's almost always the inferior choice.

Re: when to?

CalifJim — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:28:55 GMT

Taka
I think what the author is trying to say is 'when you change trains',

Yes, that's most likely the intent.

Taka
but is that 'when to' grammatically acceptable?

Not here. No. when to clauses are indirect questions, hence, they function as noun phrases:

I didn't know when to change trains.

Be sure to tell him when to change trains.

They don't function as adverbs:

*You have to walk when to change trains.

*Be sure to read the posted signs when to change trains.

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: when was the last time....

CalifJim — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:27:41 GMT

I'd just say,

I don't remember the last time I went to the movies.

The when was just confuses the issue.

But if the question is really about word order in an indirect question, then here's a shorter example.

Wrong: I don't remember when was it.

Right: I don't remember when it was.

Re: How many people there are/are there in Malaysia ?

Mister Micawber — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 04:46:16 GMT

.
Yes and no; more sentence is needed. Here is an indirect question:

He asked me how many people there are in Indonesia.

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

Re: "depends on" usage

CalifJim — Sat, 03 May 2008 17:51:26 GMT

You can always use on. depends on.

But when the subject is it and an indirect question follows, you can omit on, but you don't have to. It depends (whether / what / who / where / when / how) ...

Note: It depends on the first person to arrive. (You can't leave out on here. There's no indirect question.)

Personally, I always use on.