Mixed conditional or not?

Question

Hello. I have a slightly tricky question with tenses.

1. If you had given us your notice last week, you would be able to move out next week. (But you didn't, so you can't.)

2. If you had given us your notice last week, you would have been able to move out next week. (But you didn't, so you can't.)

Which is one correct? Or are both correct? The 1st part of the sentence is in the past, the second refers to the future. Do I use the mixed conditional (#1) or the past perfect (#2)?

Very confused. Grammar experts, please help! Thank you!

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

Anonymous1. If you had given us your notice last week, you would be able to move out next week. (But you didn't, so you can't.)

Correct. If a certain condition had applied in the past, this result would be possible in the future. (Correct mixed conditional.)

Anonymous2. If you had given us your notice last week, you would have been able to move out next week. (But you didn't, so you can't.)

Not correct. "would have been able" contradicts "next week". If you change "next week" to "yesterday", it will be OK. (And the remark in parentheses will be "But you didn't, so you couldn't.")

The corrected form I described above is a third conditional, not a mixed conditional.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJim,
Thank you so much! You are always so helpful and insightful!

Let me change the situation a bit then. At 8 a.m., just before school, I helped my friend do his homework. The teacher is supposed to look over this homework at 4 p.m. We're having a conversation at noon. I say to him:
If I hadn't helped you with your homework this morning, you would be in a lot of trouble this afternoon! (I assume it's right as "would be", not "would have been in a lot of trouble").

And what if I ask (also at noon):
What if I had decided to help you at 3:55 p.m., just 5 minutes before homework control? You would/would have been in a lot of trouble!
1. Is the "had decided" okay? I helped him in the morning, but at noon I am referring to a counterfactual event in the future (3:55 p.m.)?
2. Again, I assume it's "would be in trouble", not "would have been". Right?

Is this right? Sorry if my questions are so detailed. This can be so confusing!!

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousLet me change the situation a bit then. At 8 a.m., just before school, I helped my friend do his homework. The teacher is supposed to look over this homework at 4 p.m. We're having a conversation at noon. I say to him:If I hadn't helped you with your homework this morning, you would be in a lot of trouble this afternoon! (I assume it's right as "would be", not "would have been in a lot of trouble").

If I hadn't helped correctly indicates the counterfactual past event. Nevertheless, the result clause about being in trouble has no time stamp, so the speaker may be thinking either of being in trouble even before noon or of being in trouble later, when presenting the work to the teacher. So the result clause can be phrased either way in my opinion, depending at which time the speaker thinks of the listener as "being in a lot of trouble".

AnonymousAnd what if I ask (also at noon):What if I had decided to help you at 3:55 p.m., just 5 minutes before homework control? You would/would have been in a lot of trouble! 1. Is the "had decided" okay? I helped him in the morning, but at noon I am referring to a counterfactual event in the future (3:55 p.m.)?2. Again, I assume it's "would be in trouble", not "would have been". Right?

1. If I decided fits the situation better because your imagined decision to help is after the time of your saying the sentence.
2. Yes. It's would be in trouble.
___

I think what you're trying to say here, however, is a real conditional: If I (decide to) wait until 3:55 to help you, you'll be in a lot of trouble. The situation is actively on-going, not just the musings of a philosopher in an armchair.
________________

My answers treat this second case as completely independent of the first case. However, if the first case has already happened, you have already helped, so you'd have to say "If I had decided ..." (instead of what I did decide), "you would have been in trouble" (instead of the fact that you are not in trouble because I just helped you).

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you so much, CJ!! Without your kind help, I'd be lost in this.

So just to recap (by the way, case #2 was a philosopher's musing, because the event did happen - I did help!):

At noon I say:
1. If I hadn't helped you with your homework this morning, you would be in a lot of trouble at 4 p.m.!
(I did help him that morning, and there is a time stamp, which is 4 p.m. in the future, so I use "would be" and not "would have been", which is appropriate only for the past).

Again, at noon:
2. What if I had helped you at 3:55 p.m., just 5 minutes before homework control? You would be in a lot of trouble at 4 p.m.!
(I WAS nice enough to help him in the morning and DID help at 8a.m., so I am just musing at noon that things would be different if I weren't so nice. I use "what if I had helped" for the first part of my sentence. As there is a time stamp (4 p.m.) and it is in the future, I use "would be" for my resulting sentence.)

Was I a good student and was your valuable lesson understood well?

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousAt noon I say: 1. If I hadn't helped you with your homework this morning, you would be in a lot of trouble at 4 p.m.!(I did help him that morning, and there is a time stamp, which is 4 p.m. in the future, so I use "would be" and not "would have been", which is appropriate only for the past).

Correct.

AnonymousAgain, at noon:2. What if I had helped you at 3:55 p.m., just 5 minutes before homework control? You would be in a lot of trouble at 4 p.m.!(I WAS nice enough to help him in the morning and DID help at 8a.m., so I am just musing at noon that things would be different if I weren't so nice. I use "what if I had helped" for the first part of my sentence. As there is a time stamp (4 p.m.) and it is in the future, I use "would be" for my resulting sentence.)

What if I had helped you at 3:55? only makes sense after 3:55. At noon 3:55 is not part of the past. You would have to say What if I had waited until 3:55 to help you. You would be in a lot of trouble at 4.

CJ

Fivejedjon · Answer

Anonymous. If you had given us your notice last week, you would have been able to move out next week. (But you didn't, so you can't.)

CalifJim: Not correct. "would have been able" contradicts "next week". If you change "next week" to "yesterday", it will be OK. (And the remark in parentheses will be "But you didn't, so you couldn't.")

I agree that this does not appear to fit the patterns or logic of the traditional mixed conditional, but we can perhaps analyse it as a past counterfactual ability to move out. The fact that the move is in the future is not relevant.

More problematic is If you had given us your notice last week, you would have moved out next week. This one certainly does not fit into the traditional patterns, but it seems to me to be acceptable. I certainly hear that sort of thing. There is a past counterfactual condition (the protasis) and a past counterfactual cosequence (the apodosis), that of a future move (relative to the time of the non-giving of notice, The fact that the non-moving is still in the future at the time of the utterance is happenstance.

Look at it this way:

Week one: The notice was not given.
Week three: The person addressed did not move out.

If this situation is reported in week four, we can have:

1a. If you had given us notice three weeks ago, you would have moved out two weeks later
or
1b. If you had given us notice three weeks ago, you would have moved out last week.

If the situation is reported in week two, we can have:

2a. If you had given us notice last week, you would have moved out two weeks later

2b. If you had given us notice last week, you would have moved out next week.

In 1a and 2a, the speaker is locating the time point of the counterfactual move by reference to the time of the counterfactual giving of notice. In 1b and 2b, the speaker is locating it by reference to the time of speaking.

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJim, thank you so much! This is very helpful.

Fivejedjon, that's a fabulous explanation.

fivejedjonIf the situation is reported in week two, we can have:2a. If you had given us notice last week, you would have moved out two weeks later2b. If you had given us notice last week, you would have moved out next week.

So I take to mean that for (2b), reported in week two, you'd accept:

If you had given us notice last week, you would have been able to move out next week.
and
If you had given us notice last week, you would be able to move out next week.

… unlike CalifJim, who only accepts the last version.

CalifJim · Answer

Anonymous… unlike CalifJim, who only accepts the last version.

Correct.

Apparently, my brain cannot deal with the angst of reconciling a perfect modal with "next week".

(That doesn't mean it can't be done.)

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

Well, thank you very much! I appreciate your help! <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/1.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/1.gif' alt='Emotion: smile'/>

Fivejedjon · Answer

I think it is not insignificant that CJ is more insistent on backshifting in reported speech than I. I don;t know whether this is because we speak different varieties of English (His is AmE, mine BrE), or simply because we have slightly different ideas on how tenses can be used in such situations.

I must make one thing very clear to learners: people who construct sentences following CJ's opinions will never be marked wrong by examiners or teachers. I believe that the forms I have presented as acceptable are indeed acceptable, and are fairly commonly used, However, some examiners and teachers do not agree, so stick with the safe approach in tests.

Mixed conditional or not?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions