if I were, would..... (now? or in the future?)

Question

Hi

Does "would" have a present meaning or does it have a future meaning in the following sentences?
1) If I were rich, I would buy a big house. (now? or in the future? What does 'would' refer here? 'the present"? or "the future"?)
2) If I were rich, I would have a big house. (now? or in the future?)

Would there be any change in the meanings of the above sentences if I put "were to" in place of "were" ?

Thank you

GPY · Accepted Answer

In both cases, "would" refers to a hypothetical time which may be imagined as either present or future, perhaps as suggested by the wider context.

"If I were to rich" is ungrammatical. You can say "If I were to be rich", which has a future sense of "if things happen that way" but is a less common thing to say.

Laborious · Answer

Thank you dear for your reply,

So basically you are saying that "would", in the second conditional can refer to both the future and the present and
it will be clear form the context which meaning (present or future) the speaker or the writer has in his/ her mind.

And does 'were to' always have a future meaning/ sense? Can 'were' also have a future sense (without any context)?

With context, I think it will be clear what the speaker has in mind.

Here is an example:

A: Do you have your own house?
B: No, I don't; because I don't have enough money to buy one.
But If I were rich, I would buy one/ I would have one. (Does it(would) have a future sense here? Can it have? Also, Does the use of have instead of buy make any difference?)

I'd like to hear more from you on this, please.

Thank you.

GPY · Answer

Hmmm.

I wouldn't like to generalise about the meaning of "would" in all sentences of this type. Things may change depending on context.

As far as I can think, "were to" (in the relevant conditional sense) always has a feel of events potentially or hypothetically happening in the future.

"were" (in the relevant conditional sense) may be imagining that things were different now, or the speaker might be thinking that it could potentially be that way in the future, or thinking of some indeterminate (non-past) imaginary time.

In your example conversation with "buy", I think it's the same again: the speaker might be imagining what he would do if he were rich now, or what he would do if he were rich in the future, or making some indeterminate reference to non-past imaginary time. Of course, in practice you would need a little time to buy a house even if you were instantly rich now.

There are two slightly different interepretations with "have". The first works essentially the same, temporally, as "buy". The second refers only to present ownership, and the conditional has the sense "If I were rich I would (already) have (= own) a house, but because I'm not rich I do not."

AlpheccaStars · Answer

If I were rich, I would have (or buy or build or live in) a big house. - It refers to any time between immediately and the distant future
If I had been rich, I would have had ( or bought or built or lived in) a big house. - This is the version that applies to past time.

Laborious · Answer

Thanks to both of you dear GPY and Alpstars,

What do you say about the following?

I think by adding time-words, we could be more clear about the meaning of such sentences.

Here are some examples with Time-words.

If I say, If I were rich(now), I would have (or buy or build or live in) a big house (now). [with time time-words NOW(in the if-clause and the result-clause), It's clear that the speaker is talking about the present or now.

Now, if I say the same sentence without any future word(s), the meaning of the sentence will be ambiguous to the listener (at least to a non-native).

I think this ambiguity arises form the word "were" in the "if-clause". Because if I said the same sentence with another verb for instance "to become", then I think, I could make it clearer to the listener.

Here's an example;
If I became rich, I would buy [or have or build or live in] a new house. [with the word 'became" in the if-clause, it's clear that I (the speaker) am talking about the future (by "future", I mean "at any point after the point/ moment/ time of speaking)] --
If I became rich (at any point after the utterance), I would buy [or have or build or live in] a big house.

So, I think by using a Time-word or another verb(in the If-clause), we can be more clear about the meaning. But my question is -- is it a good idea to always use a Time-word in "If-clauses" which contain "WERE" ?

Thank you so much once again, learning a lot form you people.

LB

AlpheccaStars · Answer

LaboriousIf I became rich, I would buy [or have or build or live in] a new house. [with the word 'became" in the if-clause, it's clear that I (the speaker) am talking about the future (by "future", I mean "at any point after the point/ moment/ time of speaking)] --

Why would that be clearer? The word "became" is the past tense of "become." so why would that mean that you are speaking of the future?

What you have here is not the past tense, but the present tense, subjunctive mood.
English has three moods: indicative, imperative, and subjunctive. The subjunctive present tense looks a lot like the indicative past tense.

"Be" is irregular in the subjunctive, because it is "were" for all persons, instead of the ordinary past tense with "was" in the first and third person singular, and "were" for the others.

If I were rich ,.... If he were rich (subjunctive mood, present tense)
I was rich..... He was rich (indicative mood, past tense)
I am rich .................. (indicative mood, present tense)

If he became rich ... (subjunctive mood, present tense)
When he becomes rich (indicative mood, present tense)

Here is a lesson on the subjunctive mood.
http://www.learnamericanenglishonline.com/Orange%20Level/O23_Subjunctive_Mood.html

Laborious · Answer

AlpheccaStarsWhy would that be clearer? The word "became" is the past tense of "become." so why would that mean that you are speaking of the future?

Dear madam,

I think that would be clear because the word "became" in my sentence [which was "if I became rich, I would buy (or have or build or live in) a new house] is not indicating the PAST TENSE, I've used "became" in the If-clause(of a second conditional sentence). And we use the second conditional to talk about things that are hypothetical or imaginary either in the present or in the future, don't we?.

But by using the "became" in place of "were" in my example, I want to make it clear that I'm talking about the future; because one of the meanings of because is "to get".

So, to become rich = to get rich (isn't it?)

Isn't there any difference between the following sentences?
- If I were rich, I would have [or buy or build or live in] a new house.

- If I became (or got) rich, I would have [or live or build or live in] a new house.

Thank you.

GPY · Answer

In my opinion "If I became rich, I would..." is correct English even though you are talking about a (hypothetical) non-past time. In this case "became" is a subjunctive form and, as you say, not an ordinary past tense.

Unlike "If I were rich, ...", "If I became rich, ...." cannot be used to imagine that things were different at the present moment. "If I became rich, ..." also (fairly obviously) makes reference to the process of becoming rich, while "If I were rich, ...." is just talking about the state of being rich.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

LaboriousI think that would be clear because the word "became" in my sentence [which was "if I became rich, I would buy (or have or build or live in) a new house] is not indicating the PAST TENSE,

You are exactly correct. It is not the past tense, it is present tense, subjunctive mood.
The present tense, subjunctive mood uses the past form of the main verb.
The verb "be" is irregular for the present tense, subjunctive mood. (Be is the most irregular verb in English.)

If I were rich = This is present tense, subjunctive mood, and means right now, suppose my bank account has 10 million dollars in it.

If I became rich = This is present tense, subjunctive mood, and means I am not rich right now, my bank account has only 100 dollars in it. But suppose I win the lottery tomorrow, and then my bank account will have 10 million dollars in it. If I win the lottery today, I will become rich tomorrow.

The present tense, subjunctive mood, is the correct form to use in the if-clause of the second conditional.

Become is about the future, be is about the present.

GPY · Answer

AlpheccaStarsYou are exactly correct. It is not the past tense, it is present tense, subjunctive mood.

Are you sure it is termed present tense subjunctive? I thought that was something different.

if I were, would..... (now? or in the future?)

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions