Time references

Question

HiI am just struggling with my last 6 questions could somone please look over them and tell me if I am ok or not.Please look through the following sentences and firstly state which TENSE is being used (please concentrate on the highlighted verbs only) and secondly decide whether the time which the sentence refers to is the past present or the future.tense in redtime reference in blue1. I'm travelling to london next week.   PRESENT CONTINUOUS   -   FUTURE2. If I had run faster, I would have won the race.   PAST PERFECT     -     PAST3. We're off to the cinema later.    PRESENT SIMPLE    -      FUTURE4. Fifteen die in avalanche.   PAST SIMPLE    -   PRESENT5. I have met you beffore, havn't I?  PRESENT PERFECT  -      PAST6. If we were still together, I would be so happy.   PAST PERFECT    -    PAST

Avangi · Accepted Answer

yaggy74 1. I'm travelling to london next week. PRESENT CONTINUOUS - FUTURE okay

2. If I had run faster, I would have won the race. PAST PERFECT - PAST okay

3. We're off to the cinema later. PRESENT SIMPLE - FUTURE okay

4. Fifteen die in avalanche. PAST SIMPLE - PRESENT present simple - past

5. I have met you beffore, havn't I? PRESENT PERFECT - PAST okay

6. If we were still together, I would be so happy. PAST PERFECT - PAST past simple - past For past perfect in six, we'd say, "If we had still been together, I would have been so happy."

Number four is news jargon.

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi, I agree with all Avangi's responses, but one.

I'm uncertain if I'm right by saying this, but I'll say it anway, and anxiously await either rejection or praise.

#6 is an example of the second conditional, so doesn't it therefore refer to something in the furture, not the past? (Or are you basing your time reference only on the subordinate clause)?

Cheers

Avangi · Answer

I'm a bit unschooled in conditionals, so in that department I'm inclined to fly by the seat of my pants, as a native speaking septuagenarian. Actually, on rereading, I take it to mean that if she had done it then I would be happy now. My earlier reading was that if she had done it then, I would have been happy then.

Edit. Sorry. I was unable to see the sentence, and forgot it.

If we were still together I would be so happy. Right?

I believe both designations refer to the bold verb.
"Were" is simple past. But "still" means right now.

If I was still the boss, you would be my assistant. I should have said, "past simple - present."

Even if the sentence were "If we were still together last year, I'd be so happy next year," your choice of "future" would be out of order, because the exercise is only asking about the bold verb, unless I'm mistaken.
(a) What is its formal tense?
(b) What time period does it actually refer to?

I suspect you and I are reading the instructions differently. [:^)]

Okay. I had to post and go back to look at the original again. It says something like, "secondly, what time period does the sentence refer to?" (Dang! I should have written it down!)
That's really impossible when there are two time periods involved. I was assuming that both parts of the question referred to the bold verb.

The other messy thing about this thread is that I originally assumed by "past simple" he was referring to the basic form of the tense. Most grammars seem to recommend substituting "was" for "were" in the subjunctive of "if" clauses, but I could never figure out if that meant not using the subjunctive. If you consider this subjunctive, you can't directly tell the difference between present and past anyway. If we were then together / if we were now together

Avangi · Answer

English 1b3 #6 is an example of the second conditional, so doesn't it therefore refer to something in the furture, not the past? (Or are you basing your time reference only on the subordinate clause)?

Yes, I'm basing my original response only on the subordinate clause.
Please forgive all the garbage in the preceding post.
I think we were both wrong. The "sentence" refers neither to past nor future, but to present.

(I reiterate that I believe both clauses are describing the present time.)

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi, Avangi

I would like to put forth the following simple forumlae, so we are on the same terms:

First conditional: if it (present simple)rains, I will stay (will + base verb) home.

This refers to something in the future that is likely to happen.

Second conditional: if it rained (past simple), I would stay (would + base verb) home.

This still refers to something in the future, but which is unlikely to happen.

Third conditional (irrelevent.)

-----

If we were (past simple) still together, I would be (would + base verb) so happy.

This is therefore the second conditional. However, the adverbial, affecting temporality, of course, is what creates the slight confusion: is it really future tense?

I think the adverbial doesn't affect the sentence, and thus we are dealing with the second conditional, the future tense.

I am open for dispute, of course. To quabble amicably over semantics is my favourite.

English 1b3 · Answer

I also think that to refer to the present time, we use the present or zero conditional:

If we are (present simple) still together, I am (present simple) happy.

Avangi · Answer

Hi, English. I can't dispute your example.

But I don't see how this can apply to "being something."

I am happy. (present) If you were here, I would be happy. (present) How do you decide the tense of the subordinate clause in this case?

I make a cake. (present) If you came, I would make a cake. (future)

I am sad. (present) If you were dead, I would be sad. (present)

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi, Avangi

I would like to apologize for leading you astray (or at least attempting to).

My tenuous understanding of the conditionals created the problem, but I've re-read the conditionals and have diagnosed my problem, giving me the right answer!

You are right. It is present tense. Though I was right in saying that it was second conditional, I was wrong in saying that it referred to the future. I didn't realise, until now, that the second conditional can refer to an impossible present condition or a future unlikely condition. Hence, my confusion

Cheers

Avangi · Answer

Hi, English. Thanks for the dialogue.

I notice that your conditional examples are all in indicative mood. I'd be interested to see how you fit the subjunctive into the mix, especially as the example in hand (OP) seems to use the subjunctive.
Also, your conditional examples don't include "being verbs," which seem to be involved in the OP.

Best wishes, - A.

English 1b3 · Answer

Hi, again

Second conditional: if it rained (past simple), I would stay (would + base verb) home.

I think this here is subjunctive, actually. Sorry, I wrote past simple incorrectly.

As you probably know, the past subjunctive is no different from the past indicative, except, of course, with the verb to be, where 'were' is used alternatively to 'was.'

Time references

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions