Conditional sentence in a past tense with generalized subject

Question

Hello everyone,

In working with my own people, still I am not an exception allowing myself to judge what is right or what is not right in English grammar and idiomatic expression, I felt this sentence bit awkward or strange - but it's rather my perception wrong?

The sentence reads:
When a study subject developed an adverse event, the investigator took appropriate and necessary measures to for the subject of the concerned AE...

My question mark hangs over "when 'a' study patient 'developed' 'an' adverse event. Do you say like this? Yet, I can't think of another expression to describe the past case in a nonspecific object in conditional sentense. Knowing the intention of this general guideline, I still can't let it go over my head, wondering why it can be written in generalized manner. I find 'if' would do bit more natural (I am not a native though). If the given sentence will apply to a future case, it sounds (perfectly?) alright to me, saying like when a patient develops an adverse event, the investigator will institute...
Does 'In any events of adverse events in patients, the investigator insituted...' sound more awkward?

Anybody read this, thank you for your time stopping by and reading through my lengthy message.

Regards,
Souroin

Souroin · Accepted Answer

I should have thought carefully before posting that message, but does plural sentense ur using 'any' solve the issue I see as the problem?

CalifJim · Answer

When a study subject developed an adverse event, the investigator took appropriate and necessary measures

The quoted material above is ambiguous, but the context in which it occurs might well resolve the ambiguity.

It could mean either of the two paraphrases shown below.

1. (a = a particular known subject = a certain person who was a study subject, say "George")
A (certain) study subject (George) developed an adverse event. When this happened, the investigator took appropriate and necessary measures.
(Something happened. When it happened, the necessary countermeasures were taken.)

2. (when = whenever; if. a = any (not any particular person; some hypothetical person; it could have been George or Henry or Louis or ...) ) Whenever (if) any study subject (might have) developed an adverse event, the investigator [took/ would take] appropriate and necessary measures.
(In any case of a certain kind of event happening, the necessary countermeasures were taken.)

From the point of view of Italian, (and I'm not completely sure of this), 1. is indicative, 2. is subjunctive.

Even if this does not answer your question completely, it may help. I hope so!

CJ

Paco2004 · Answer

JC wrote;
From the point of view of Italian, (and I'm not completely sure of this), 2. is subjunctive.

I too wondered why the sentence is as it is.
It is quite probable it is mechanically translated from some Romance language.

Pieanne! we need your help!

paco

Souroin · Answer

Hello Paco, first

I think Jim mentioned that part because I sometimes write back saying 'il mio maestro' - actually am not an italian though, I very much like the sound of it. I did studied. I am now rather embarrased with the fact that I gave him my profile incorrectly by saying something in Italian. I just liked it and although not conveying at all obviously but for me 'il mio maestro' carries bit august sounding. I might change it to 'my Lord' then.

and... Hello Jim, my Lord

Thanks for your effort to understand what my question was. I found your explanation as difference of subjunctive and indicative understandable. So, ambigious it sounds but you say the quoted phrase can include two meanings.

The phrase was in a study report referring to what the concerning part of the code of conduct set out in the study protocol. I thought the person wrote the translation just switched the tense from present to past, and then wondered if that quote may sound 'indicative'. The rule were to apply any study subjects when any of these subjects would develop an adverse event(s), so if the sentense has to be in clear language, the 'subjunctive' paraphrase should be the choice, but again as you suggested the original quote can say both, I will just leave the sentence as it is then.

I thought the quote in present tense sounds alright for the protocol language but in report language just merely shifting the tense to past may sound bit awkward as it may say like referring to a certain but nonspecific subject even the study completed and it must have been already known by then if there were so I'd rather say in 'subjunctive' phrase... but it was just my lack of English sense.

And... sorry if I have been unintentionally 'deceiving' you about my nationality but your comparisons to italian language as examples in the past were also helpful.

Best regards,
Souroin

Paco2004 · Answer

Hello Souroin

Lord Jim is the hero in the novel by Joseph Conrad. When I was a college student, our English textbook was "Lord Jim". It's a kind of miraculous coincidence I can meet Lord Jim again here.

paco

Souroin · Answer

Hello Paco,

I'm glad that my lengthy message became of a help for you to see Load Jim again. You're right, he is a hero here. Also it may say I should go back to the college. I wish I could.

Have a nice day, and for Load Jim, too.

Souroin,

CalifJim · Answer

I assure you, just "Hi, CJ" is sufficient -- and preferable to any talk of "lords".

Anonymous · Answer

0 01blockquote

01cite10Souroin12cite10I should have thought carefully before posting that message, but does plural sentense ur using 'any' solve the issue I see as the problem?12blockquote

12br
00if i were judge02br
02br
00« 0-

Conditional sentence in a past tense with generalized subject

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions