Search results for 'tag:Present tenses tag:Idioms' matching tags 'Present tenses' and 'Idioms'

Re: same conditional?

CalifJim — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:24:58 GMT

I don't really know exactly why I said "wrong" in one place and "awkward" in another!

Your question in the other thread seemed to focus on mixed conditionals, and I didn't want to leave you with the impression that all mixed conditionals are wrong. Maybe that's why I said "awkward". Here's a better example:

If you had paid attention in Japanese class when you were in college, you would be able to translate for us on our trip to Japan this coming fall.

Perhaps I should revise my opinion on your example below. The problem, I think, is lack of context. This sentence can work in the right context. It's rare for that context to come up, I think, so on first reading it sounds completely wrong as an isolated sentence.

I would be happy if no one had been there.

_______

would like is an entirely different case, because it's an idiom for want. Here the would is not necessarily taken as the would of a conditional pattern, but as a simple present tense. That's why the idiomatic combination would like can go in the if clause.

Take it if you would like to have it = Take it if you want (to have) it.

like, on its own, is somewhat different in meaning from would like.

Take it if you like it. = Take it if it pleases you.

You can use would like with the would of the conditional pattern and like of being pleasing, but that works differently, like this:

If you tried it, you would like it. = If you tried it, it would please you.

Looking for some tips and/or curriculum suggestions

mikesusangray — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:50:11 GMT

Hi all!

I've been giving English conversation lessons to a theology professor for about a year now. He's getting on in the years - a couple years from retirement - and his primary goal has been just to get his spoken English going a little stronger. His mother tongue is French but he's been teaching at a German language university for many years.

I'd like to add some more specific inputs to our lessons but I can't seem to find the right material. His passive skills are excellent - he reads widely and with perfect comprehension in his field - and he can communicate quite understandably. He is a linguistics specialist and can grasp any concept about the language immediately. I brought along Cambridge Advanced Grammar in Use and he could plow through a chapter in five minutes with perfect conceptual comprehension.

However, he also continues to make very simple errors - for example, he has trouble choosing between present simple and continuous or often uses the present tense for past events. Sentence order tends to get wander hither and yon while definite and indefinite articles come and go with the tide. (Prepositions are a problem too, but I won't beat him to hard there - prepositions are difficult in any new language.) In many cases his mistakes are typical of French or German speech patterns.

One other limitation is that he enjoys the weekly lessons (a good hour), but doesn't have much time to study in between.

Right now we spend about 15 minutes reading a chapter from Advanced Grammar in Use and about 45 minutes talking about just about anything under the sun, while I take notes and show him problems under the categories Pronunciation/Articles & Prespositions/Word Order/Other Grammar/Vocabulary/Idioms. However, I don't think the work book is a good choice - particularly since he doesn't do the homework - and it seems like he isn't making very good progress with his typical problem patterns - though he greets them like old friends when I point them out.

Any tips here?

Re: If you haven't .... I woud

CalifJim — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:24:01 GMT

Doesn't it bother you that a present perfect tense in an if clause is used with would?

Isn't the past usually used with would in that case?

It is unusual. The reason it's OK is that would like to (or would love to) is an idiom equivalent to want to (a present tense).

So it's like

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you now. ~

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I want to run it for you now.

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

CalifJim — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:37:49 GMT

Are they wrong since the modal usages lack the fundamental conditional uses of the modals 'would' and 'could'? Not sure what you're asking. The correct sequence of tenses applies to conditionals as well as to non-conditionals.

1. We are all watching in a sort of stunned silence waiting to see if we would be asked for money or if we are simply his audience.
No conditional element present, thus 'will' is correct? Right? will is correct, but not for the reason that no conditional element is present. will is correct because will goes with are.

2. While I am reading it, I could not help being concerned about young people in this country.
Same here too. No conditional element present, so 'can' is correct? Right or wrong? Same here. can is correct because it goes with the present tense I am.

So, except those modal uses like politeness for 'would', most modal uses of 'would' and 'could' involve conditional nature. Right or wrong? It depends on the text you're reading. You may find a text that uses would or could in non-conditional contexts quite often.

Could you please answer these? -- case of a modal use for politeness. True.

Generally, will and can go with the present tense; would and could go with the past tense. It doesn't matter whether they are used in a conditional pattern or not.

Henry wants to know where he can find a good restaurant. / Henry wanted to know where he could find a good restaurant.

Kate needs a dress that will make her look slim. / Kate wanted a dress that would make her look slim.

If they sign the contract, they can take possession of the car immediately. / If they signed the contract, they could take possession of the car immediately.

If he hurries, he will arrive on time. / If he hurried, he would arrive on time.

_________________

Occasionally would and could go with the present tense, but these should be regarded as special cases. For example, take the idiom would like to:

I would like to buy the coat which is on sale.

The would and could of politeness are also usually combined with the present tense.

Could you please help me move these books which are lying on the floor?

Re: Follow-up to "Nagging conditional problem"

CalifJim — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:35:00 GMT

Anonymous
Are these by Marius correct? I feel they should be since he is a guru but I don't understand how they could be so.

If you happen to have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? [this is more about present -- if the if-clause is in present tense, can we use the modals 'could' and 'would'? Does the phrase 'happen to have' make any difference here?

Should you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some? ["chancy" should -- To me, 'should' here is functionally equal to "if", so the sentence could be read:

If you have money (with/on you), could/would you lend me some?

They certainly seem correct to me. Perhaps it's the idiom happen to that's bothering you.

If you happen to have money = If, by chance, it turns out that you have money

Re: You're in luck//lucky.

Avangi — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:22:31 GMT

"You're lucky the cops didn't pick you up for drunk driving." It just occured to me that this might be considered an idiom. Perhaps someone can verify. It's really a special case. The "lucky" part is present tense, but the momentary luck applies to a (recent) past incident. In GG's "You're in luck" examples, the momentary incident is very much present tense.

It may also be expressed as "You were lucky," especially if the incident was in the more remote past. "You were lucky your father had a job during the great depression." OR You could be lucky now about a past event. "You're lucky your parents could afford to send you to college."

At any rate, these all apply to specific incidents, rather than a general trend.

- A.

Re: 3 idioms, and my sentences with them, could you take a look?

Vorpar — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 07:38:30 GMT

1. to steal the show

a) Jack Nicholson stole the show in Batman. (question: is it possible to use this idiom as far as idioms are concerned? question2: would it be better to use here the pres. perfect?)

I think this is fine, though when talking about movies (especially describing action), we usually use the present tense.
b) Slash is the one who always steals the show at Guns & Roses gigs (question: is "at" ok here?)

"at" is fine.
c) She's stolen the show (doubt: I can't come up with a situation in which we would use this idiom in the present perfect)
It could be used during the show, just after a breakthrough scene.

2. to pull sb's leg

a) Oh come off it! Stop pulling my leg and tell me the truth!

This looks fine.
b) She has pulled my leg again!
c) Hey guys, listen, why don't we pull Jim's leg (and play a joke on him) ? It's gonna be fun!

I don't think this idiom is commonly used without the gerund (in a).

3. to foam at the mouth

a) He has been foaming at the mouth for the whole evening (doubt: I'm not sure if the use of the present perfect cont. is appropriate here)
b) He foamed at the mouth when his wife told him that she had been cheating on him. (VS He was foaming at the mouth, or VS has foamed at the mouth)
c) What did your dad say to this? He was foaming at the mouth when I told him (VS He foamed at the mouth)

All of these look fine.

MAIN QUESTION: Are the above-written sentences perfectly OK, and how often do you use the above-mentioned idioms?

Stolen the show is commonly used, but I don't hear the others much at all.

Re: correct sentences 24/11

Teo — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:09:54 GMT

They won't smoke ever since they saw a film on lung cancer.

What does "won't" mean here?

Re: correct sentences 24/11

Teo — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:09:49 GMT

http://forums.eslcafe.com/student/viewtopic.php?t=22113&highlight=

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!