3rd conditional

Question

What do you think 'should' means in the main clause:
If I had worked harder, I should have passed my exam.
Does it imply that the speaker thinks that it would have been really likely for him/her to pass the exam?

Sam1947 · Accepted Answer

That is something one would be much more likely to hear in Britain, rather than in the U.S., and, yes, it does mean that the speaker things he definitely would have passed his exams if he had studied harder.

In the U.S., most would say, "If I had worked harder, I would have passed my exams."

In the U.S., if we said, "I should have passed my exams," it would mean that I had a responsibility to, or it is what I was obligated to do. Therefore, most in the U.S. wouldn't use it after a beginning such as, "If I had worked harder."

CalifJim · Answer

domagoWhat do you think 'should' means in the main clause:
If I had worked harder, I should have passed my exam.

It means "would". To Americans, this looks like an older usage, in which "should" substitutes for "would" when the subject is "I" or "we".

CJ

BillJ · Answer

sam1947That is something one would be much more likely to hear in Britain, rather than in the U.S., and, yes, it does mean that the speaker things he definitely would have passed his exams if he had studied harder.

What evidence to you have to support that contention?

BillJ

Sam1947 · Answer

I live in the U.S., and travel around it quite a bit, and I never hear that used here.  I have travelled to Britain on a number of occasions, I watch British movies, and TV shows, and read British literature and I have heard it and read it there.  I don't know how commonly it is used there, or among what social sets.  I just know that it is used there and it is not used very often here, in fact, I don't believe I have ever heard it used in the U.S.

Sam1947 · Answer

I should have added that I have acquaintances from Britain who now live in the U.S. and they use that construction.  Obviously, I have many acquaintances who are native U.S. speakers and they do not use that construction.

Englishmaven · Answer

I agree. That is not American English and makes no sense. It would be

If I had worked harder, I would have passed my exam.

Sam1947 · Answer

Sorry...I see the typo.  That should have been "the speaker thinks...not things."  Another "flying fingers--frequent foibles!" <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/10.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/10.gif' alt='Emotion: embarrassed'/>

Dimsumexpress · Answer

My 2 cents....

sam1947In the U.S., most would say, "If I had worked harder, I would have passed my exams."

For the textbook 3rd conditional, "would have " is the recognized standard form in the US.

BillJ · Answer

sam1947I live in the U.S., and travel around it quite a bit, and I never hear that used here. I have travelled to Britain on a number of occasions, I watch British movies, and TV shows, and read British literature and I have heard it and read it there. I don't know how commonly it is used there, or among what social sets. I just know that it is used there and it is not used very often here, in fact, I don't believe I have ever heard it used in the U.S.

No it is not "used there", as you put it - nor are you "much more likely to hear it in Britain". There is simply no justification for saying that, or firm evidence to support it. In fact, you are extremely unlikely to hear it here. Personally, I have never encountered it, even from the least competent speaker or writer, though there may be isolated instances when a non-native speaker who hasn't yet grasped the meanings of modal auxiliaries may use it. But that doesn't mean it is, as you suggest, "used there". Please do not make posts that imply people in the UK are unable to grasp the correct meanings of modals, because that is simply untrue.

BillJ

Sam1947 · Answer

I am not in any way implying that! I don't think it is an incorrect construction, just one that isn't used much in the U.S. I am sorry you took umbrage to what I wrote. I can't speak to how common the usage is in the U.K., but I have definitely heard it both in person and in British plays, movies, and TV. It isn't a question of right or wrong, but just different evolutions of the language in different locations. I'm surprised at the affect expressed in your post, and would like to assure you that I meant no offense. And, to say one would hear it more commonly in the U.K. does not imply that it is common there, just more common than in the U.S.

To me, it is akin to the following sentences that would, in many cases, be said slightly differently in the U.S. and the U.K. Both are perfectly fine...just different.

To the question, "Why don't you go on vacation this summer?"

In the U.S., we might answer, "I would, but I have too many projects to finish."

In the U.K., one might hear, "I would do, but I have too many projects to finish."

I just heard a sentence exemplifying the above British usage last night in the entertaining British series, "Come Dine With Me." Using "would do" or "could do" where Americans would just use "would" or "could" is something I've noted over a couple of decades. It isn't wrong; it is just different.

3rd conditional

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions