If she loved me, I would marry her. (As she does not love me, I will not marry her. )

Question

I have learned that Conditional 2 should be interpreted in a present tense like

If I were a bird, I could fly to you.
= As I am not a bird, I can't fly to you.

But we should interpret this sentence in a future tense like

If she loved me, I would marry her.
= As she does not love me, I will not marry her.

So my point is that even in Conditional 2 sentences, there is a future meaning like will not marry, right?

What do you native English speakers think? If you do not like the examples, please use your own and my question is about future meanings in Conditional 2.

Thank you so much as usual in advance.

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

Hans51So my point is that even in Conditional 2 sentences, there is a future meaning like will not marry, right?

It is possible: present and/or future, depending on the particular context.

Anonymous · Answer

I think these patterns might help you.

1) If (stative / non - action verb) + would (stative / non -action verb) = hypothetical present

= If I were a prince, I would have castles.

2) If (stative / non - action verb) + would (dynamic / action verb) = hypothetical future/present

= If I were a prince, I would ask her to marry me. (it's not clear whether I would ask her to marry me now or in the future.)

3) If (dynamic / action verb) + would (stative / non - action verb) = hypothetical future

= If I became rich, I would have my own house.

4) If (dynamic / action verb) + would (dynamic / action verb) = hypothetical future.

= If became rich, I would donate some money to the orphanages.

Philip · Answer

Here's another pattern sentence:
If I had been rich, she would have married me. hypothetical past

Fivejedjon · Answer

Anonymous3) If (dynamic / action verb) + would (stative / non - action verb) = hypothetical future= If I became rich, I would have my own house. 4) If (dynamic / action verb) + would (dynamic / action verb) = hypothetical future.= If became rich, I would donate some money to the orphanages.

These sequences can also represent a hypothetical present:
If were working in England now, I'd be earning twice as much as I earn here.

Anonymous · Answer

fivejedjonThese sequences can also represent a hypothetical present:If were working in England now, I'd be earning twice as much as I earn here.

... But here, you are using continuous forms, not simple forms. The first part of your sentence "If I were working in England now", makes it clear that the speaker is taking about the present/now.

Is it possible for the following sentences to give a present meaning (as they stand without any expression indicating time of the action or state)?

= If he won the race, his dad would be very happy. (If + an action, would + a state)

= If he won the race, his dad would buy him a new bicycle. (If + an action, would + an(other) action)

_______

You have much more knowledge of this language than I do. I will be thankful to you if you shed some more light here, please.

Thanks to you.

Fivejedjon · Answer

AnonymousBut here, you are using continuous forms, not simple forms.

They are still present tense.

AnonymousThe first part of your sentence "If I were working in England now", makes it clear that the speaker is taking about the present/now.

If there were appropriate context outside the sentence, we could drop the 'now'. We could also use the simple form:

A; Your pay seems to be very low. I do the same job as you, but earn twice as much.
B: Remember that you work in England. If I worked in England, I'd earn twice as much as I earn here, but I don't. The cost of living is much lower here, so I am happy with what I earn.

AnonymousIs it possible for the following sentences to give a present meaning (as they stand without any expression indicating time of the action or state)? = If he won the race, his dad would be very happy. (If + an action, would + a state)= If he won the race, his dad would buy him a new bicycle. (If + an action, would + an(other) action)

Not those two particular sentences, but this could refer to present time: If he worked in England, his father would be happy, and it has the same pattern of verb forms.

Remember that it's context that tells us the time of the situation being talked/written about far more often than most course books and student grammars suggest.

Mister Micawber · Answer

fivejedjonRemember that it's context that tells us the time of the situation being talked/written about far more often than most course books and student grammars suggest.

Hear, hear!

Anonymous · Answer

Thanks to you, fivejedjon, for your much helpful explanation!

So, saying that the second conditional sentences (If + past simple, would + base form of a verb) could refer to both 'present time' and 'future time' depending on the context and the structure of the sentence would not be wrong. Am I right, Fivejedjon? Besides, If we have an expression of time indicating the "present" or "now", then our sentence is 100% about the present and if it contains an expression of time indicating the "future", then it is 100% about the future.

Then, is it possible for us to use 'were to + present simple' structure if I wish to make it clear that I am talking about the future only?

For example, If he were to win the race, his dad would be happy. Or
If he were to work in England, his dad would be happy. (Are both only about the future/the time after the time of speaking? There's no ambiguity, is there, teacher?)

Mister Micawber · Answer

AnonymousThen, is it possible for us to use 'were to + present simple' structure if I wish to make it clear that I am talking about the future only? For example, If he were to win the race, his dad would be happy. Or If he were to work in England, his dad would be happy. (Are both only about the future/the time after the time of speaking? There's no ambiguity, is there, teacher?)

Right on all counts.

Fivejedjon · Answer

AnonymousSo, saying that the second conditional sentences (If + past simple, would + base form of a verb) could refer to both 'present time' and 'future time' depending on the context and the structure of the sentence would not be wrong. Am I right, Fivejedjon?

You are right.

AnonymousIf we have an expression of time indicating the "present" or "now", then our sentence is 100% about the present and if it contains an expression of time indicating the "future", then it is 100% about the future.

The clause rather than the sentence:

If John weren't on his way here now, I'd take you out to dinner this evening.

Here, the first clause is about the present moment, the second clearly about the future.

I try to avoid using expressions such as 'always', 'never' and '100%' when I am talking about English tenses. Some smart alec can always (!) come up with a context for an exception.

AnonymousThen, is it possible for us to use 'were to + present simple' structure if I wish to make it clear that I am talking about the future only?

I agree with Mr M's response.

If she loved me, I would marry her. (As she does not love me, I will not marry her. )

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions