Conditional statement

Question

I found the following sentence in my TOEIC book.

If she had invested in some of those stocks five years ago, Ms. Patton would be a billionaire now.

Since the sentence above involves something happened both in the past and now, it looks more different and inconsistent in tense than those we learned from grammar books. I wonder if the following one also works.

If she had invested in some of those stocks five years ago, Ms. Patton would have been a billionaire now.

Please advise.

LCChang

Kooyeen · Accepted Answer

Hi,
good question. I think both are ok. You can use "would have + past participle" to talk about the future too:

If I hadn't broken my leg last week, I would have played the game tomorrow. But my darn leg is in a cast! Grrr...
If I hadn't broken my leg last week, I would play the game tomorrow. But my darn leg is in a cast! Grrr...

Not 100% sure though. We better wait for the others

Marius Hancu · Answer

OP:
Both fine. Mixed conditional.
However, "would have been" is more leading towards now, as opposed to "would be" which is more instantaneous (stative).

BBC NEWS | Health | 'Why I back the surgeons'

"There isn't a day when I don't wonder what she would have been like if she had survived - she would have been nearly 14 now." ...

CNN.com - Transcripts

And she said, if she had had an abortion, she would be employed right now. She wouldn't have been fired. DONAHUE: If she had had an abortion, ...

Goodman · Answer

KooyeenHi,
good question. I think both are ok. You can use "would have + past participle" to talk about the future too:

Not 100% sure though. We better wait for the others

My take is this:

This is definitely not a past tense construction but conditional of the 3rd kind. If I hadn't broken my leg last week, (but in fact you have therefore you can't play) I would have played the game tomorrow.The "I would have played" context carries an implication that the game had already been played which does not go with the time "tomorrow".

If I said "had I not broken my leg and been physically able to play, we would have won the game". From the listeners persepctive, the game was over and our team lost and I am not happy.

For the intended meaning, I would say the one below (I believe it's called 2nd conditional) makes more sense.

If I hadn't broken my leg last week, I would play the game tomorrow.

Yankee · Answer

Hi LCChang

If she had invested in some of those stocks five years ago, Ms. Patton would be a billionaire now.
Fine. This is appropriate as a mixed conditional.

In your second sentence, you might add the word 'by':
If she had invested in some of those stocks five years ago, Ms. Patton would have been a billionaire by now.
In other words, Ms Patton would have become a billionaire / would have achieved billionaire status some time before now.

Kooyeen · Answer

GoodmanThis is definitely not a past tense construction but conditional of the 3rd kind. If I hadn't broken my leg last week, (but in fact you have therefore you can't play) I would have played the game tomorrow.The "I would have played" context carries an implication that the game had already been played which does not go with the time "tomorrow".

Hi,
what's wrong with
If I hadn't broken my leg last week, I would have played the game tomorrow. But my darn leg is in a cast! Grrr...
I think I was told that kind of structure was ok... It's more or less like "She told me she would play the game tomorrow" instead of "She told me she will play the game tomorrow".

Bokeh · Answer

Goodmanof the 3rd kind.

Where did those terms come from? Close Encounters?

Bokeh · Answer

In the indicative:
"Patton would be a billionaire now." translates to "Patton is a billionaire now."
and
"Patton would have been a billionaire now." translates to "Patton has been a billionaire now."

The second sentence is not good because "has been" and "now" do not go together. You could say, though: "Patton would have been a billionaire by now.".

Goodman · Answer

Bokeh,

I didn't know you have a sense of humor. Sorry, a bit dry for my taste

Forgive me, I can't help but ask.....Doesn't BrE have the same grammar book?

Term: Third Conditional (3rd Conditional)

Definition:

1/ For imaginary past actions, where the conditions for the action WERE NOT satisfied.

eg: If you'd been there, you would've seen it. (The conditions were not met because the person was not there and as a result did not see it.)

Formation:

If + Past Perfect, + Would have + Past Participle

Bokeh · Answer

Goodman

Doesn't BrE have the same grammar book?

Is there only one?

I've only got three books on English grammar with me at the moment (my main library is back in England) but none of them mention those terms.

MrPedantic · Answer

I would vote with the "Fine" lobby.

1. If she had done X (in an imaginary past), she would have been Y (in an imaginary more recent past).

2. If she had done X (in an imaginary past), she would be Y (in an imaginary present).

#1 is a standard type III conditional.

#2 takes the if-clause from a type III conditional, and the main clause from a type II conditional. (That's why it's called "mixed"; which doesn't mean "incorrect".)

MrP

Conditional statement

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

BBC NEWS | Health | 'Why I back the surgeons'

Related Questions