An interesting question, one that I had never considered, since the paradigms always use 'will' (to contrast with 'would', I suppose). Let's see: If I visit you, I will bring a gift. If I visit you, I'm going to bring a gift.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
Mister MicawberWell anyway, for Conditional I, the meanings seem to vary slightly just as they do with will vs be going to elsewhere. We have discussed the overlap elsewhere here, too. Yes, we have. Good memory!Hi Mister Micawber,
Mister MicawberYes, I'd say so—just as these are:Hi Mister Micawber,
If I visit you, I'll have to bring a gift.
If I visit you, I can't bring a gift.
If I visit you, I may bring a gift.
Thinking SpainAre 'will' and 'be going to' interchangeable without any change in its meaning for the First Conditional?I'd say no. In my opinion the statements with going to make the consequent action more imminent somehow than the same statements with will, and they seem to be much more frequent as warnings.
Thinking Spain but those ones have a very different meaning, don't they?Yes, of course. Sorry, my mind drifted. I thought you were concerned with Conditional I formation.
CalifJim(Or maybe those were the only kinds of examples that came to mind.)Hi Jim,
Thinking Spain“We aren’t going to hear the opera singers if she keeps on talking,”"I'm going to get very wet if that bus doesn't come soon!"These are fine. In both cases there are already signs of what might happen next in the situation described. That makes 'going to' seem like a natural choice.