+0
Hi,

I was brushing on my knowledge of the modal "would" with the help of the Englishpage website and got stuck on what it is saying here on its tutorial on "would".

REMEMBER No Future in Time Clauses

Like all future forms, Future in the Past cannot be used in clauses beginning with time expressions such as: when, while, before, after, by the time, as soon as, if, unless, etc. In stead of suing Future in the Past, you must use Simple Past.

Then it went on to give this example as Incorrect with another one following it.

I already told Mark that when he would arrive, we would go out for dinner.
Comments  
This seems consistent. "Already" is an example of a time expression, so simple past is required. "I already told Mark that when he arrived, we would go out for dinner.

Perhaps you're concerned about the final clause. (They probably shouldn't have used that example.) "I already told Mark that when he arrived we went out for dinner." That's a separate deal. Obviously it makes no sense.

Best wishes, A.
AnonymousI already told Mark that when he would arrive, we would go out for dinner.
Let us recast the sentence in direct speech, that is, you are speaking to Mark, "When you arrive (simple present tense is most suitable here - I wonder you can use any other tense), we shall/will go out for dinner."

When you turn that into an indirect speech, the sentence will become, " I already told Mark that when he arrived, we would go out for dinner."
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
What I neglected to point out is that the instructions from your web site specify the use of simple past within the clause which starts with a time expression. "We would go out for dinner" is a separate clause. So I still see no inconsistency.

It would clarify matters if you would say exactly what it is that you're objecting to.

- A.
REMEMBER No Future in Time Clauses
will is the mark of the Future of the Present.
would is the mark of the Future of the Past.
This reminder applies to both "Futures". It means: No will or would in subordinate clauses introduced by conjunctions such as when, before, after, etc.

Like all future forms (will), Future in the Past (would) cannot be used in (subordinate) clauses beginning with time expressions such as: when, while, before, after, by the time, as soon as, if, unless, etc. In stead of using Future in the Past (would), you must use Simple Past (---ed).
Then it went on to give this example as Incorrect with another one following it.

I already told Mark that when he would arrive, we would go out for dinner. (The incorrect clause is shown in red. The explanation above says when and would do not go together. The clause in red has when and would together, so it's wrong.)
The explanation says a simple past ( --- ed) must be used instead of the pattern with would, so the correct version is:
I already told Mark that when he arrived, we would go out for dinner.
CJ
CalifJimLike all future forms (will), Future in the Past (would) cannot be used in (subordinate) clauses beginning with time expressions such as: when, while, before, after, by the time, as soon as, if, unless, etc. In stead of using Future in the Past (would), you must use Simple Past (---ed).
In other words, "I wanted to know if the train would arrive on time" is wrong? I consider it correct because if does not denote condition in the sentence.
CB
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Cool Breeze"I wanted to know if the train would arrive on time" is wrong?
No. It's not wrong at all. The case simply doesn't come up within the quoted material.

The text (or "rule") which our original poster quoted and wanted paraphrased has remained silent on the case of embedded indirect questions. Perhaps the text goes on further to explain, in passages not quoted here, that particular refinement of the "rule". The "rule" quoted above applies only to clauses introduced by adverbial conjunctions -- not to nominal clauses which begin with interrogative elements.
(Another strange inconsistency is that the "rule" is about "time expressions", and yet the non-temporal conjunctions if and unless are included as examples. All in all, this is not the best model of how to write a clear grammatical "rule". Pedagogically, however, if we were to follow the method presented at that web site, we might find it a sound practice to introduce the student to smaller portions of a complicated rule such as this, with time to practice each aspect of it, before moving on to other portions.)
Of the examples given in the quoted material, only when and if present problems. These are the only ones which can function both as adverbial subordinating conjunctions and as interrogative items to introduce embedded indirect questions.
I prefer to speak in terms of embedded indirect questions, because (unlike the concept of a "non-conditional" if) this covers not only if, but also whether, when, who, what, where, and how -- all of which allow will or would.

CJ
PS. Actually, "embedded indirect" (questions) is redundant. Emotion: smile
CalifJim Pedagogically, however, if we were to follow the method presented at that web site, we might find it a sound practice to introduce the student to smaller portions of a complicated rule such as this, with time to practice each aspect of it, before moving on to other portions.)
I feel that the above is the most logical explanation.
> got stuck on what it is saying here on its tutorial on "would".
would be nice to always post the links involved
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.