Anonymous:If there weren't anything...
If there wasn't anything...
Which phrase is right? Does the subjunctive nature mean it's "weren't?
Thanks a lot!
Doll:"If there weren't".. is what your grammar teacher will want from you but in speech you can use "if there wasn't..."
Looking for ESL work?: Try our EFL / TOEFL / ESL Jobs Section!
Anonymous:Ok. Thank you!
AnonymousIf there weren't anything...There is no context here so both are correct. "Wasn't" is past reality whereas "weren't" is hypothesis.
A: I went to the fridge and there wasn't anything in it. B: If there wasn't anything in it someone must have eaten it all. This is reality, not hypothesis.
A: The fridge is full. B: That's good. If there weren't anything in it I would have to go shopping. This is hypothesis, and contrary to reality.
Anonymous:If there wasn't by... ?
If there wasn't for... ?
AnonymousIf there wasn't by... ?Neither of these is correct. Try to ask again in a different way if this was not your question.
Anonymous:i have the same problem but i still am not sure. because there wern't many or because there wasn't many ???? please help. thanks
AnonymousNo, I don't think you have the same problem. This thread is about the choice between was and were in an if clause. You don't have if. You have because.
You are left with the simpler problem of agreement in a there construction. Here the verb agrees with the following noun phrase, which is the plural many in your sentence. So you need weren't.
People are waiting to help.
Related forum topics: