Conditionals

Question

I wouldn't have been confused if I could speak Spanish. - I still can't speak it.
I wouldn't have been confused if I had been able to speak Spanish. - I couldn't speak it then, I may be able to speak it now.

Do I get this right? Thanks.

RandomGuy · Accepted Answer

Yes, I'd say so. In fact, I do.

Whatchadoin · Answer

I wouldn't have been confused if I could speak Spanish. - I still can't speak it. This sentence is clear.
She would've killed me if she saw me doing that. - People use the third conditional this way too. But, does the second part of the sentence have the same meaning or function like the first sentence?

She would've killed(then) me if she saw me(then) doing that. - According to the first sentence the 'saw' part is still true in the present. Are sentences like this one exceptions? Will context tell me when 'saw's', 'could's' etc are still true in the present?

_____

If he was gone he wouldn't have called. - Why did the speaker use 'was' in this sentence? Is it because at the moment of the utterance he wasn't gone and he wasn't gone before that too?

Could you help me with this?

RandomGuy · Answer

whatchadoinShe would've killed me if she saw me doing that. People use the third conditional this way too.

Yes, but it's technically wrong. Just because a usage is common does not make it right.

whatchadoinBut, does the second part of the sentence have the same meaning or function like the first sentence?

In meaning? Of course not.

I wouldn't have been confused if I could speak Spanish. (No specific point in time is implied or even relevant. It's just describing the ability in a general sense.)

*She would've killed me if she saw me doing that. (Strictly speaking, this illogically refers to the present or the future, though you will hear this misuse often, even from native speakers. I think you know this by now.)

whatchadoinIf he was gone he wouldn't have called. - Why did the speaker use 'was' in this sentence?

It's an observation. The speaker is making a point that he would not have called (at a probably very recent time in the past) if he were not here at the present moment.

Whatchadoin · Answer

Aspara GusIn meaning? Of course not.

I'm not sure I understood this.

She would've killed me if she saw me doing that. - Does this mean that she still doesn't/can't see me in the present? Should I just think only about the past with such sentences?

I wouldn't have been confused if I could speak Spanish. - This is clear and logical. I still cannot speak it. That's it.

I'm sorry for the repetitive questions but I'm not sure I understand this.

Aspara GusYes, but it's technically wrong. Just because a usage is common does not make it right.

Yes. But since native speakers use it, I thought I'd use it as well. And I think I'll sound like a native speaker if I say "She would've killed me if she saw me doing that." rather than "She would've killed me if she'd seen me doing that."

RandomGuy · Answer

whatchadoinI'm not sure I understood this.

It means the two sentences have different meanings.

whatchadoinShe would've killed me if she saw me doing that. - Should I just think only about the past with such sentences?

Yes, since the actual meaning is nonsense. The sentence is strictly hypothetical, explaining what would have resulted from an unreal happening.

whatchadoinYes. But since native speakers use it, I thought I'd use it as well.

Native speakers say either one. The way you're leaning toward is more casual, and the correct construction sounds more educated.

Whatchadoin · Answer

Aspara GusYes, since the actual meaning is nonsense.

So, when a meaning is nonsense then I know that a speaker is talking only about the third conditional? I'll post a couple of sentences just to make sure that I understand this.

I wouldn't have been in pain if I didn't wax my chest.
She would've done it if she tried one more time.
I might've had a daughter if I didn't abort.
The parents would've been amazed by her performance if they were here yesterday.

RandomGuy · Answer

whatchadoinSo, when a meaning is nonsense then I know that a speaker is talking only about the third conditional?

I don't think that's the reasoning you want to go by. No.

whatchadoinI wouldn't have been in pain if I didn't wax my chest.
She would've done it if she tried one more time.
I might've had a daughter if I didn't have an abortion.
The parents would've been amazed by her performance if they were here yesterday.

Even though they need the conditional perfect to be truly grammatical, all of these sentences sound natural, and it's very clear to me that they all refer to the past.

The bottom line is that you can use these constructions without hurting anyone, but if you want to be correct, stick to standard patterns:

I wouldn't have been in pain if I hadn't waxed my chest.
She would've done it if she had tried one more time.
I might've had a daughter if I hadn't had an abortion.
The parents would've been amazed by her performance if they had been here yesterday.

I don't think I have anything else to add to this matter.

Whatchadoin · Answer

How do you know if sentences like "If she saw me doing that she would've killed me" don't make sense in the present?

If you didn't care you wouldn't have written the comment.
If you hadn't cared you wouldn't have written the comment.

Is the first one correct because I think that the other speaker still cares? Is the first one better?

Conditionals

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions