I've found following sentence in a book. I can understand what is the writer want to state. But I can not understand the structure of the sentence.
If not for lifts, the towering landmarks which feature so prominently in today's architecture would have been impossible and character of out cities would be entirely different.
This sentence is talking about past expected result of a past past hypothetical situation (If there were not lifts). The only way which I knew to talk about this type of situation is by using Third Conditionals. Please someone assist me to understand the structure of the sentence. What are the other ways to talk about situations like (Third Conditionals).
dileepa If not for lifts, the towering landmarks which feature so prominently in today's architecture would have been impossible and character of out cities would be entirely different. "If not for lifts" is another way of saying "If it had not been for lifts", which is another way of saying "If lifts had not been invented/available". That should help you to see the third conditional.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
dileepaIf not for lifts, the towering landmarks which feature so prominently in today's architecture would have been impossible and character of out cities would be entirely different.
"If not for lifts" is another way of saying "If it had not been for lifts", which is another way of saying "If lifts had not been invented/available". That sho