0
Lcchang Posted 18 years ago
Grammar

Real Condition in the past

"Real condition in the past" is rarely discussed in grammar books. I just happened to find one book that mentioned a bit of it. Here is the sentence given in the book.

If they were waiting for a counteroffer, they were wise.

Looking at the sentence, I am not sure what exactly the structure of such conditional sentence should be like. Can someone help? Thanks.
  

Top answer

Well, the structure of such a sentence should be rather like the structure of the example sentence you quote, I guess. What else did you want to know? A couple more examples: If they got away with it, they were lucky.

— Mr Wordy

  • Well, the structure of such a sentence should be rather like the structure of the example sentence you quote, I guess.
  • What else did you want to know?
  • A couple more examples: If they got away with it, they were lucky.
  • If he didn't see that car coming, he can't have been paying attention.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

10 Answers
0
Well, the structure of such a sentence should be rather like the structure of the example sentence you quote, I guess. What else did you want to know?

A couple more examples:

If they got away with it, they were lucky.

If he didn't see that car coming, he can't have been paying attention.
0
0
Sorry to interrupt.

Mr WordyIf he didn't see that car coming, he can't have been paying attention
Mr. Wordy, your example captured my attention.

Can I say "He couldn't have been paying attention" instead?
Mr WordyA couple more examples:
I was told a couple usually takes the preposition of though it is
0
0
I'm not sure that these are actually "real conditions in the past", even though that terminology is used.
Usually, these have the past in both clauses -- no would clause. Is that what you wanted to know?
CJ
0
0
New2grammarCan I say "He couldn't have been paying attention" instead?
To me, yes, with not a great deal of difference in meaning. "Couldn't" just makes it seem a bit more in doubt that he wasn't paying attention.
New2grammarI was told a couple usually takes the preposition of though it is also correct without. If I wan tto include a 'of
0
0
Mr WordyA couple of more examples -- definitely not
However, there are a surprising number of Google book hits for this. Weird -- to me it sounds completely wrong. I'm wondering if it might be a US usage.

Anyone else?
0
0
Maybe GG could comment on this. If I remember correctly, I learned that a couple is followed by of in formal writing. Maybe couple more is an exception.
0
0
Mr Wordyto me it sounds completely wrong. I'm wondering if it might be a US usage.
I'm from the U.S. and it sounds wrong to me, too.
I'd say that a couple more is an informal way of saying a few more, and is subject to the same rules of grammar, namely:
Just as we can't say a few of more things or a few more of things, we c
0
0
New2grammar If I remember correctly, I learned that a couple is followed by of in formal writing. Maybe couple more is an exception
Yep, it's possible that you're thinking of phrases without "more", such as "I got off work a couple hours early" (rather than "I got off work a couple of hours early"). To me the former sounds distinctly American. It might b
0
0
CalifJimI don't know about the rest of you, but I'm going to pretend that those Google results don't exist.
Good plan!
0
0
Mr Wordy
Mr WordyA couple of more examples -- definitely not
However, there are a surprising number of Google book hits for this. Weird -- to me it sounds completely wrong. I'm wondering if it might be a US usage.

Anyone else?

A couple of more? A couplamore?
0

Related Questions