Search results for 'tag:Present simple tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Present simple' and 'Clauses'

Re: zero or first conditional

Ant_222 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:50:29 GMT

They are all zeroÂ conditionals, because both clauses are expressed in the Present Simple. They need not concern general truths to be zero conditionals. It's timeless-ness that makes them such: any of them can be rewritten using "whenever" instead of "if"!

WOULD

shehan1212 — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:37:12 GMT

In formal writing pepole use past simple tense.But i have seen many times books and other articles includes sentenceswhich have been made of "would"...I know that "would" is used in conditional clauses.Where as i realy want to know what are the situations where i can use "wolud" and please explain me whats the difference between "would" and "will".Can i use these two terms as the same meaning in formal writting?

what i want to know is this.please help me to find out this,iv beendying to get a answer which i expect,,
here,this is a sentence which i found in my text book.

"Under this method materials in concern WOULD BE stored in two different places in th company's storeroom"

so my question is this is a general fact.this is tru.so cant i use present simple tense?
"Under this method material in concern ARE STORED.."

Re: this would be/contact

Huevos — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:16:40 GMT

Newguest
So, "were" in the present simple tense refers to a hypothetical situation.

Yes, or one that is contrary to reality.

I see four options in the suborbinate clause if the main clause is present tense, although there may be more.

I think it depends on whether it would be a high salary or a low salary.
I think it depends on whether it will be a high salary or a low salary.
I think it depends on whether it were a high salary or a low salary.
I think it depends on whether it is a high salary or a low salary.

about tense simplification

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:08:18 GMT

Hi.

Could you explain why there are two different times in subordinate clauses (present simple vs future simple)?
"He says he'll give five pounds to anybody who finds his pen."
"I'll hide it somewhere he'll never find it."

Re: So that + Present Simple or + Will ?

Goodman — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:31:49 GMT

When we make mistakes, we have to reflect on what we did wrong so that we can avoid making the same mistake again.

We need to learn to be financially responsible so that we donât get caught up in the credit debt trap.

I want to learn English so that I can find a better job.

Whenever we have a situation where we have to achieve plan A to get to plan B, or we have to do something in order to achieve something more significant, we can use the âso thatâ, clause.

Re: So that + Present Simple or + Will ?

Ant_222 — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:58:58 GMT

Can you provide some sentences wherein you're not sure which tense to use?

As a general rule, use Past Simple when referring to the present and future simple â to the future. But since the former extends naturally into the latter, these tenses are sometimes interchaneable.
"Lock the door so that nobody can bother us."
"Lock the door so that nobody bothers us."
"Lock the door so that nobody will bother us."
"I have re-bound the book so that it opens flat easily."
"I have re-bound the book so that it won't fall apart when opened flat"

This is only my humble opinion that may need serious correction.

EDIT:Are they both ok?:
1. "Enable coockies so that you don't have to log in every time",
2. "Enable coockies so that you won't have to log in every time"

Looks like it makes a difference whether it's a clause of purpose or of consequence...

So that + Present Simple or + Will ?

Jesusengland — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:30:29 GMT

Hello.

I can't understand when we have to use The present simple and when Will in a purpose or result clause (So that) if the main clause refers to the present.

Thanks.

Re: First conditional

Anonymous — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 02:12:50 GMT

First conditional: When you're gone, I'll miss you. Not correct. Try "If you (are to) go, Iâll miss you."
Zero conditional: When you're gone, I miss you. OK

Is ARE present simple in both phrases? It is. See bracketed version.

Because in the first conditional, it's strange to think that ARE is talking about the present when it's giving us the idea of future. If it is present simple, are there any other verb tense options when you want to give this idea of future from first conditional? Present continuous or perfect. You can even use âwillâ in the if-clause in this conditional if itâs not an auxiliary and it means determination as in âIf you will(~determine to) go, Iâll miss you.â

Re: Tenses

Philip — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:34:40 GMT

Newguest wrote:

Hi everyone!

1. Once the warrior has completed his task, he makes no further comment.

What if I wrote "Once the warrior completed his task, he ..." Does it change anything? Why has this sentence been written in the present perfect tense? I would write "Once the warrior completes his task, he makes no further comment." Is the present simple OK?
Thank You

1. The first action was completed before the second one took place. This is standard for the two tenses together.

It is also correct to use present tense in both clauses. This gives the idea of repeated or customary action.

Re: without 'will' ?

Mister Micawber — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:21:56 GMT

We welcome your opinions, Marcelinx, but it is dangerous to try to compare your native language so closely with English-- they do not work the same way. Nor is your logic very careful.

Well, I certainly hope he helps you.

There is nothing subjunctive about this. The form of the subjunctive verb-- as you said-- is the same for all persons: I help, you help, he help.

Hope (and it may have been my comments that Kooyeen refers to) indeed is among the verbs that commonly take the present simple indicative for future reference in preference to the 'will' future. Other verbs are see, assume, suppose and a few more (I suppose the train is on time). In addition, there are many more verbs for which the future can be cast as simple present indicative in the subordinate clause.

The use of the subjunctive in true unreal clauses (I wish I were King) is slowly being superseded by the indicative equivalent (I wish I was King), to the extent that the subjunctive form is needed only on language examinations and English class essays. It is not a matter of who you are speaking to, certainly.