0
Gori Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
Sequence of tenses (#3)
As mentioned before in another thread, according to many grammar books, it says that "when the verb in the main clause is a past tense, usually the verb(s) in the sub clause(s) must be a past tense as well." If it is true, should I change the following verb "rains" to "rained" in the example below? Does it sound strange if I change the verb from "rains" to "rained"?
(Example)
I would not go out if it rains tomorrow.(not following the rule of the sequence of tenses, right?)
I would not go out if it rained tomorrow. (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so should I better change the tense of the subclause's verb from present to past?)
Which is (more) grammatically correct and used in general?
(Example)
I would not go out if it rains tomorrow.(not following the rule of the sequence of tenses, right?)
I would not go out if it rained tomorrow. (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so should I better change the tense of the subclause's verb from present to past?)
Which is (more) grammatically correct and used in general?
Top answer
) I would not go out if it rained tomorrow. (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so “Would” here is used in a (if) conditional statement which contains an element of probability and has nothing to do with past tense. I would say # 1 is more correct with “ will not”.
- ) I would not go out if it rained tomorrow.
- (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so “Would” here is used in a (if) conditional statement which contains an element of probability and has nothing to do with past tense.
- I would say # 1 is more correct with “ will not”.
- # 2 is a hypothetical statement, so both “ would ” and “rained ” are used in agreement and appeared to be past tense.
- In fact, it’s a misconception.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Hi Gori,
I would not go out if it rains tomorrow.(not following the rule of the sequence of tenses, right?)
I would not go out if it rained tomorrow. (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so
“Would” here is used in a (if) conditional statement which contains an element of probability and has noth
I would not go out if it rains tomorrow.(not following the rule of the sequence of tenses, right?)
I would not go out if it rained tomorrow. (Here, the verb in the main clause is past "would," so
“Would” here is used in a (if) conditional statement which contains an element of probability and has noth
00
Does it sound strange if I change the verb from "rains" to "rained"?No, not strange. That's the right thing to do.
CJ
00
I see, the second one should be the correct way to say.
Thank you for clarifying the point!
Thank you for clarifying the point!
00
I would not go out if it rained tomorrow.
I will not go out if it rains tomorrow.
If 'would' is used, the next verb is 'rained'.
If 'will' is used, the next verb is 'rains'.
I will not go out if it rains tomorrow.
If 'would' is used, the next verb is 'rained'.
If 'will' is used, the next verb is 'rains'.
0
Related Questions