Tense question

Question

Which of these sentences are correct?If your tooth filling 'falls', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'would have' to visit the dentist.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

If your tooth filling falls, you will have to visit the dentist.
If your tooth filling fell, you would have to visit the dentist.

CalifJim · Answer

Anonymous Which of these sentences are correct?If your tooth filling 'falls', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'would have' to visit the dentist.

The verb is 'fail', 'failed', '(has) failed'. Or maybe you meant 'fall out', 'fell out', '(has) fallen out'. The latter is more idiomatic.

AnonymousIf your tooth filling 'falls', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'would have' to visit the dentist.

Your second sentence is wrong. It should be written as you wrote your third sentence. The conditionals you may be trying to write are the first, second, and third, thus:

If your tooth filling falls out, you will have to visit the dentist.
If your tooth filling fell out, you would have to visit the dentist.
If your tooth filling had fallen out, you would have had to visit the dentist.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJim Anonymous Which of these sentences are correct?If your tooth filling 'falls', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'would have' to visit the dentist.The verb is 'fail', 'failed', '(has) failed'. Or maybe you meant 'fall out', 'fell out', '(has) fallen out'. The latter is more idiomatic. AnonymousIf your tooth filling 'falls', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'have' to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling 'fell', you 'would have' to visit the dentist.Your second sentence is wrong. It should be written as you wrote your third sentence. The conditionals you may be trying to write are the first, second, and third, thus:If your tooth filling falls out, you have to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling fell out, you would have to visit the dentist.If your tooth filling had fallen out, you would have had to visit the dentist.CJ

Yes, I meant falls out, not fail.

Are these examples mixed conditionals or the normal first, second and third conditionals.

Because the second example 'if your tooth fell out, you would have to visit the dentist' does not look like a complete second conditional, specifically the second clause.

The second conditionals that I have seen use 'had' in the second clause so that is why I am wondering: if your tooth fell out, you had to visit the dentist. But this does not seem to work in what I am trying to convey with my sentences and that is why I am asking if they are mixed sentences!

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousAre these examples mixed conditionals or the normal first, second and third conditionals.

The three I gave you are the normal ones.

AnonymousThe second conditionals that I have seen use 'had' in the second clause

Not so. Auxiliary 'had' occurs in the if-clause of a third conditional. I think you may be confusing auxiliary 'have' with lexical 'have'. In I have a pencil and in I have to see the dentist, there is no auxiliary 'have'; they are both lexical 'have's.

AnonymousI am asking if they are mixed sentences!

The second one is mixed, but it doesn't work as a good sentence. Mixed conditionals are quite limited in usage, usually with an if-clause like a third conditional and a main clause like a second conditional.

The other two are not mixed.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJimNot so. Auxiliary 'had' occurs in the if-clause of a third conditional. I think you may be confusing auxiliary 'have' with lexical 'have'. In I have a pencil and in I have to see the dentist, there is no auxiliary 'have'; they are both lexical 'have's.

I think I was confused because I did not use 'will' in my original sentence in the first one. Do I have to use 'will' in the first one (if your tooth falls out, you (will) have to see the dentist)? Is 'will' required? If it is, than the three sentences you wrote would make see to me and I'll be able to realize my mistake in the sentences in which I missed out the "will' in the first two sentences!

CalifJimAnonymousI am asking if they are mixed sentences!The second one is mixed, but it doesn't work as a good sentence. Mixed conditionals are quite limited in usage, usually with an if-clause like a third conditional and a main clause like a second conditional.The other two are not mixed.

Do you mean the second one I wrote is a mixed conditional or the one you wrote. Because I think the one you wrote is not mixed and it looks like a normal second conditional to me!

If your tooth filling fell out, you would have to visit the dentist. (looks normal).

CalifJimThe second one is mixed, but it doesn't work as a good sentence. Mixed conditionals are quite limited in usage, usually with an if-clause like a third conditional and a main clause like a second conditional.

Again, which one are you referring to?

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousDo I have to use 'will' in the first one (if your tooth falls out, you (will) have to see the dentist)? Is 'will' required?

No. Without 'will' it's called a "zero conditional"; with 'will' it's called a "first conditional".

Anonymousthe three sentences you wrote

I changed the first one to include 'will' once I realized I had forgotten it.

AnonymousDo you mean the second one I wrote is a mixed conditional or the one you wrote.

The one you wrote.

AnonymousI think the one you wrote is not mixed and it looks like a normal second conditional to me!

Correct.

AnonymousAgain, which one are you referring to?

You quoted the same passage again. The answer is the same. See above.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJimAnonymousDo I have to use 'will' in the first one (if your tooth falls out, you (will) have to see the dentist)? Is 'will' required?No. Without 'will' it's called a "zero conditional"; with 'will' it's called a "first conditional".

Yes, know it makes sense to me, because I was not sure how 'will' fitted in these sentences. I was not aware of the 'zero conditional', and it has solved the problem for me.

So, either the 'zero' or 'first' conditional would be correct to use, right?

CalifJimnonymousthe three sentences you wroteI changed the first one to include 'will' once I realized I had forgotten it.

Thanks for the clarification.

CalifJimAnonymousDo you mean the second one I wrote is a mixed conditional or the one you wrote.The one you wrote.

Which is not a good sentence or plain wrong? I think it is wrong since things make sense to me now, is it?

Finally, you mentioned that sometimes we can use mixed conditionals such as the if clause of the second and main clause of the third. Is it normal to use mixed conditionals since we may be obligated to write sentences in such way or do you suggest to avoid them? What do you advice?

CalifJim · Answer

Anonymouseither the 'zero' or 'first' conditional would be correct

Right.

AnonymousWhich is not a good sentence or plain wrong?

Technically, it's grammatical, but it's just not something a native speaker would use. Being grammatical is just a minimum requirement. Even a computer can make a grammatical sentence that doesn't mean much.

AnonymousIs it normal to use mixed conditionals since we may be obligated to write sentences in such way or do you suggest to avoid them?

It's normal to use mixed conditionals when you need them to express your thoughts. There is no need to avoid them when they convey your thoughts correctly. It's just that in "real life" we don't often have thoughts that require mixed conditionals. Here's one that makes sense:

If you had studied Japanese when you were in school, you would be able to translate for us on our trip to Japan next month.

The if-clause is talking about the past; the main clause is talking about the future.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJimAnonymousWhich is not a good sentence or plain wrong?Technically, it's grammatical, but it's just not something a native speaker would use. Being grammatical is just a minimum requirement. Even a computer can make a grammatical sentence that doesn't mean much.

Yes, true.

CalifJimrmal to use mixed conditionals when you need them to express your thoughts. There is no need to avoid them when they convey your thoughts correctly. It's just that in "real life" we don't often have thoughts that require mixed conditionals. Here's one that makes sense:

Got it.

CalifJimIf you had studied Japanese when you were in school, you would be able to translate for us on our trip to Japan next month.The if-clause is talking about the past; the main clause is talking about the future.

Just curious, is the if clause considered a third conditional and the main clause a second conditional?

One more thing I would like to confirm with you. You gave me a nice link to use, Fraze.it, but I would like to know if is a reliable link in which I have been using to look at sentences and the way specific words are used to construct sentences. Do you suggest I continue doing that?

CalifJim · Answer

Anonymousis the if clause considered a third conditional and the main clause a second conditional?

Yes.

AnonymousI would like to know if is a reliable link in which I have been using to look at sentences and the way specific words are used to construct sentences. Do you suggest I continue doing that?

I have found it to be reliable, so I think it would be a good idea for you to use it to supplement your study of English.

CJ

Tense question

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions