0
BlackBlitz Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
Conditionals?
"If he invited you, then you should go."
This sounds as if it's "real".
But I can't find any examples of real conditionals with
if clause = simple past, result = present.
Is there something wrong with the sentence?
This sounds as if it's "real".
But I can't find any examples of real conditionals with
if clause = simple past, result = present.
Is there something wrong with the sentence?
Top answer
It is not a conditional at all ) If = "Because": Because he invited you, you should go. You should go because he invited you.
- It is not a conditional at all ) If = "Because": Because he invited you, you should go.
- You should go because he invited you.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
It is not a conditional at all )
If = "Because":
Because he invited you, you should go.
You should go because he invited you.
If = "Because":
Because he invited you, you should go.
You should go because he invited you.
00
It's probably a typo. It's easy to make because the "d" is next to the "s" on a keyboard and would not be caught by a spell-checker.
If he invites you, then you should go.
If he invites you, then you should go.
00
The sentence seems fine to me. It would fit any of the following scenarios, with the first probably the most likely in practice.
Person was invited, speaker knows this.
Person was invited, speaker doesn't know this.
Person wasn't invited, speaker doesn't know this.
Person was invited, speaker knows this.
Person was invited, speaker doesn't know this.
Person wasn't invited, speaker doesn't know this.
00
1. If he invited you, you should go.
The speaker here assumes the truth of the statement in the if-clause: the purpose is not to present a hypothesis, but to draw an inference from an accepted fact.
"If" therefore has a meaning that is close to "since", as Ant suggests. If-statements of this kind can involve almost any combination of tenses.
Cf. if-state
The speaker here assumes the truth of the statement in the if-clause: the purpose is not to present a hypothesis, but to draw an inference from an accepted fact.
"If" therefore has a meaning that is close to "since", as Ant suggests. If-statements of this kind can involve almost any combination of tenses.
Cf. if-state
00
MrPedantic1. If he invited you, you should go.
The speaker here assumes the truth of the statement in the if-clause: the purpose is not to present a hypothesis, but to draw an inference from an accepted fact.
"If" therefore has a meaning that is close to "since", as Ant suggests.
In this sentence, "if" may very well have the meaning
00
That's a good point. I also overlooked in my previous answer the fact that modal verbs may in any case disguise the structure of a genuine conditional sentence:
1. If he invited me, I couldn't go anyway =
2. If he were to invite me, I couldn't go anyway.
— which may well be the case here.
(I appreciate from similar questions elsewhere that the structure in #1 m
1. If he invited me, I couldn't go anyway =
2. If he were to invite me, I couldn't go anyway.
— which may well be the case here.
(I appreciate from similar questions elsewhere that the structure in #1 m
00
I have some doubts, on reviewing the thread:
1. Did he invite you then? If he invited you, you should go.
— at this point, the speaker assumes the truth of the statement.
2. Otherwise, there's no need to worry.
— at this point, the speaker assumes the truth of a different statement ("If he didn't, there's no need to worry").
Taken together, the two inc
1. Did he invite you then? If he invited you, you should go.
— at this point, the speaker assumes the truth of the statement.
2. Otherwise, there's no need to worry.
— at this point, the speaker assumes the truth of a different statement ("If he didn't, there's no need to worry").
Taken together, the two inc
00
MrPedanticIn cases like #3, it seems to me, "should" is not entirely comfortable.
"If he invited you, you would go" is looking to an unknown event in the future. In the context we're discussing, "If he invited you, you should go" is, as you say, indicating absence of knowledge of the true situation. The person may or may not have been invited, but the spe
00
I don't think there's any real disagreement, in that case. Though the forms are the same, "invited" in #1 is indicative (past simple); in #3, subjunctive.
MrP
MrP
00
MrPedanticThough the forms are the same, "invited" in #1 is indicative (past simple); in #3, subjunctive.Right. I always get a bit confused about what is and isn't a subjunctive, but that makes sense.
0
Related Questions